Does your journey look like mine? Do you find this argument convincing? Unconvincing? 🙃 Either way, comment and tell me about it! I'd love feedback, good or bad. 👇👇👇👇👇👇
Think the best description I can give on where I am at is in "no man's land". All that you've shared has struck a cord with me. When people leave Christianity, the majority of the time is because of so and so in the church or the church itself and also the pressures of the world can potentially lure Christians away as in the parable of the sower. There are many who've left the faith because of the old adage,"how can a loving God permit me to go thru this pain"? But it's only the minority that leave the faith due to intellectual reasons. It's also been my experience if you're enduring a tough time, moral sin or anything within that zone, one will always find the warm arm of Christian love around you EXCEPT when you're struggling to believe if the bible is true. I've seen the sweetest of Christians transform from "Dr.jekyll to Mr.hyde " if you question the bible. It's as if you've personally attacked their character. Then you get those who say, "yes it's good to ask questions....". But personally I think it's ok to ask questions provided you agree with your pastor at the end! The beliefs are only there to as "ticket" to get you into the church club. Once you're in no one after a Sunday service or even after bible studies chats about the difficulty in believing in the formation of the Canon(using this as an example) Christians understanding of Christianity centres around loving, supporting, enjoying fellowship and praying for each other is their main focus. The topic you and I struggle with belongs to theologians and nerdy Christians. Anyway it's 11am here in Perth Australia and I am falling asleep. Love to hear from you
You are still a believer. Did you ever have a conversation with Dr Bart Ehrman? I've noticed something Bible stories affect people different cjojohnny still a believer, Bart Ehrman became a agnostic still teaches the Bible leaves a open playing field,Seth Andrews turned Atheist and attacks Christianity,Matt Dillahunty gets vulgar and attacks everyone who disagrees with him. I'm a Christian I left mind controlling Fundamentalism.
It's a library of ancient texts of all different genres, articulating many different voices, written down across a long period of time. The word of God in the words of men. I"m a Catholic, and for me, the more Biblical scholarship the better. The Catholic Tradition has never been fundamentalist or literalist, because it shuts down so many approaches to the Bible, and makes it virtually impossible to read.
Hi C.J. I want to take a minute to encourage you. You're definitely not alone. Just last Sunday after church, I spoke with our pastor about why I believed that the Bible is not the inherent word of God. I am writing a book about this, but the key revelation for me, which is the driver for writing my book, is that Jesus did not believe in the inherency of Scripture either, and he was killed for it, by the fundamentalists of his day! Each miracle proves it, and when Jesus said Moses made concessions, Jesus was essentially saying that Moses added his own words to prophesy, placing God's name on Moses's own thoughts, words, and intent. The response was, "we know Moses, but who are you? ". Who are you to say that the OT isn't God breathed, inherent, and 100% accurate. So, we are in good company. Christians need the truth now, more than ever. Many thanks for the sincerity of your biblical studies and for sharing them on this channel. God Bless
Of all the people sharing their experiences on RUclips, you are absolutely the closest to my own experience is almost all regards. One difference , I did not continue higher education in this regard, as my deconstruction started happening when I had a “pre-registration interview” before I was to apply for admission to a very well-known “Southern” seminary. I mentioned that I had just purchased a fresh King James Version from Zondervan and asked what other versions would be used in study. The absolute abhorrence that I would even contemplate any other editions for any reason whatsoever settled like a pall on the room. Realizing a “mid-step” I did sort of go back to why I chose that particular book at the bookstore hoping to tie to a London UK printed version (as a sort of homage to King James.) The conversation deteriorated very quickly and almost dramatically as I basically identified my Bible as a printed book from a factory that was intended to be sold. I was almost ejected from the consternation flying through the air. They, indeed, seem to think bibles just “drop from God’s hands from the sky. “ I walked out and never looked back. I then moved on to a state university.
As a scientist, this is seriously underrated, because I remember someone critiquing me by saying, “You can’t pick and choose what you believe in the Bible, you either believe in all of it or you are a hypocrite.” We can both be empirical and skeptics, while having faith in something we find compelling.
@Rex-ye3uf Totally. I remember how many times I heard "follow the evidence where it leads" or "God wants you to use your brain," but then when I came up against serious problems it was "you need to be humble, then believe." Ironically, I was in ministry when I was 20, preaching, and fundamentalists gladly listened to me. Now I have 3 degrees in Bible and know way more, and fundamentalists think I'm a liar 😆
I like your informed synthesis of views on this topic. I left the church many years ago as I found the apologists and true believers just trying to turn a blind eye to the obvious problems. I used to call apologetics "excuseogentics" as its practitioners never addressed the issued, but tried to come up with any excuse, even an improbable excuse, to allow themselves to not have to address the real issues. I would still call myself a Christian, but there is no church I could where I could be authentic. I listen to the debates between Christian and skeptical scholars, hoping to hear something that would sway me one way or the other. I do not know how similar I am to you, but I am interested in hearing your ideas.
@charleskann886 lol "excuseogentics". That's amazing. Sounds like we are the same boat. I left evangelicalism for the same reason--ironically, my Christian upbringing gave me a desire for truth-seeking, and I couldn't stay in a place that I no longer believed had that. Your comment honestly resonates with me so much. I've struggled too, I love the tradition of Christianity and find the historical questions super interesting. But it's hard to find a community to belong with that fits this. And the all or nothing approach of Christian vs skeptic is completely unsatisfying. If you're so inclined, I'd love to chat. I'm just starting the channel and trying to get a sense of what type of conversations people are curious about here. There's an email in the video description if you're willing. No pressure though. All the best. Thanks again for your comment
Similar journey for me. Raised Evangelical and fundamentalist, attended non-fundamentalist eastern seminary, faced with a crisis resulting in a deeper plunge into fundamentalism and eventually coming out many years later to a non-fundamentalist position, though still a believer in and follower of the Son of God. Thanks for your thoughts.
I too was dragged kicking and screaming from my fundamentalism. Because of my personality, there was nothing left of Christianity for me after that. (Though I kept my life verse - "you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.")
@@be1tube that's a good one. I also had a lot more fun as a biblical scholar once I was able to follow the evidence wherever it led. I never understood people who want to devote their life to studying something in order to maintain their existing beliefs.
Here, here, well said. Honest, relatively concise for such an enormous subject. After more than 50 years of inquiry it is refreshing to hear such a brief but coherent response as this. Subbed
Alright, dude, are you me? Everything you're saying is exactly what I've been going through, down to the "I didn't want to change, I left kicking and screaming" statement. I didn't start studying with the intention of leaving the faith. Quite the opposite, actually. I started studying to affirm and reinforce my faith. But when I reached the point where the foundation was cracked, there was nothing I could do. I could be dishonest with myself and say that nothing had changed, but that would be fundamentally wrong. Everything that I thought I knew had changed.
Your experience very much reminds me of the experience of Dr. Bart Ehrman, who has been teaching Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill since 1988. Bart was a dedicated fundamentalist Christian as a teen, and he attended Bible Moody Institute. From there he went to Princeton Theological Seminary where they taught the Bible academically (called biblical criticism), and they pointed out all the flaws in the Bible. Ehrman at first was quite upset, but slowly over time he changed his belief system. He has stated that it was a difficult process. Over time he has had over 30 books published, most of them detailing the many flaws in the Bible. One of his best-selling books is titled “Misquoting Jesus.” Ehrman has stated that he no longer considers himself a Christian. He eventually became an agnostic atheist.
The thing that really clinched it for me was the story of the tower of babel. When I was a child I questioned why god said 'if they can do this, they can do anything'
@@danielsmith2447 sort of an interesting thing for an "omnipotent" God to be worried about, isn't it? especially since presumably he/they doesn't live in the clouds.
(tower of Babel) That's one of the many red flags in the bible. Others: talking animals serpent telling the truth NT seems to be written around the doctrine of salvation rather than being an historical account. Feel free to add to this list, I will collect them all!
Your fifth one got me. I went through deconstruction while my children grew up. I didn’t lead them ever in a Sinner’s Prayer. At the same time my old denomination emphasized youth ministry and having summer camps to “lead kids to Christ.” That was extremely formative for me. Harmful? Yes. Formative? Also, yes. You’re making me ponder this concept.
Wow, I'd be curious to hear your reflections. There's obviously a lot to unpack here. But if you're doing your deconstruction in front of them, I bet they learn from that too. There's an incredible humanity in questioning
@@cjohnyrun: Long story short: Ex-Salvation Army Officer (yes, pastor), who was terminated for being bisexual and going through a divorce. I began my deconstruction after returning to the United States when I was a missionary to Germany for 10 years. Nothing worse than reverse culture shock.
Similar to you, I gave up the dogma of inerrancy pretty quickly in my journey. I left evangelicalism and had shifted to Greek Orthodoxy but later left Christianity altogether. And it’s funny how much I have continued to study and examine the Bible after leaving the church. Count me in to follow along with your journey here on RUclips.
Thank you so much for these videos. These were some of the very things I grappled with in the fundamentalist/Pentecostal church I spent so many years in. Never could anyone dare question the authenticity or authority of the Bible.
my only "pushback" would be something along the lines that truth does not necessarily mean factual. Poetry often expresses truth or fiction can express truth, w/o being at all factual. all too many of our issues w/ the text often come from using a western worldview, with lists, bullet points, and outlines. "Just the facts, Ma'am". (yes, dating myself). the eastern viewpoint tends to be more about relationship and story. the Who and Why rather than the How and What. still only about 2 years into "de/reconstruction" and simply trust the Lord's character.
Very good points. I'm a lay preacher and adult Sunday School teacher in the Wesleyan tradition. I always tell people that I believe that the Bible contains absolute truths, but not necessarily absolute fact. Some of the truths: God's love of his people is steadfast. God wants his people to love their neighbors, care for the poor, love their enemies, turn the other cheek, thereby rejecting the cycle of vengeance, and more. When you study the entire Bible (as opposed to proof texting) these truths become evident.
I thank you for this video. I have long felt slightly guilty for calling myself a Christian and at the same time doubting the claim that the Bible is faultless.
As an Atheist who has recovered from a mild dose of Christianity. Good to see you thinking seriously about this, as long as you seek truth and be Intellectuality Honest. Then your deconstruction and journey to freeing your mind is well on the way. All the best and good luck.
Right. Not even in the slightest. How can it be the truth when Judaism Hinduism Buddhism and many others significantly predate it? If anything Christianity pulled a lot of information from older various religions and compile them all to create their own version of "truth"
I think there are many "mental gymnastics" to circumvent the Bible's "inerrancy". e.g. most evangelicals wear mixed fabrics and eat shellfish. They would have some creative interpretations for explaining why they don't need to follow those rules. It is impossible NOT to cherry-pick the Bible.
@brucetopping248 100% agree. There is no reading the bible without interpretation--even though people seem to be of the impression that "the Bible clearly says" things
"most evangelicals wear mixed fabrics and eat shellfish" That, with the 'eating a kid in his mother's milk", I considered that as god's 'little princess whims' even as a Christian, and had many more harsh comments about god.
I began to wonder at one point, are those peoples there because God wanted them to be? Is the Christian idea of condemnation outside of their one faith truly as 'hardcore' as some people claim it to be, or are they part of God's plan even outside of Christianity? Obviously that goes against a lot of church teachings... but still curious to wonder if the Big Man's focus on the Middle East was simply what we needed to progress as intended...
Never once occurred to you that God might reveal himself in different ways to different people in ways that are relevant to them in their own culture, did it?
Interestingly, and in line with this, the standard Christian creeds (Nicene or Apostles') make no claim about any inerrancy, authority, or preeminent theological role of the Bible. Many people seem to forget that.
There is a fundamental problem with this approach tho, and it leads to a weird situation where I as an atheist have much more respect for fundamentalists than those others seemingly more "rational" Christians. So, the problem: - bible is the only "evidence" (well, the evidence is not even good enough to put someone to prison for one hour, or to even consider any scientific position - but this is not the point now) that exists for the fundamental claims. Many of these claims (or most of these claims) are unfalsifiable (any claim that cannot be reliably independently proven or disproven, which is a bug not a feature). So, if inside the very document that makes these unfalsifiable supernatural claims are also many FALSIFIABLE claims that are easily debunked (all the problems you are talking about, or all the inconsistencies or all the denial of basic biology or physics), than there is no reason to even consider those unfalsifiable claims to be truthful. TLDR: By acknowledging the "problems" inside falsifiable claims in the bible, you are drastically lowering any chances of those unfalsifiable claims inside being truthful. Basically take it or leave it, cherry-picking is just a form of dishonesty. Very simplified example: There is a source material claiming that there is a corpse of a unicorn orbiting the sun (a currently unfalsifiable claim), and the same source is also claiming that striped goats can be bred by making two goats watching striped twigs during the intercourse (a falsifiable claim that you may recognize) - then the unfalsifiable claim loses any weight if it had any to begin with.
@milansvancara I actually completely agree. And you're right, liberal or progressive Christianity can get pretty wishy washy when it's like "yeah, X and Y are myths, but Z is 100% true!!" As a historian, I find a lot of problems with the founding moments of Christianity, including all its core claims. Most would consider me a heretic. Here's one piece of food for thought. I might make a video on this in the future. I do think that both fundamentalism and atheism have both accepted (often uncritically) a sort of modernist claim that religion needs to be a sort of scientific, rationalist set of truth propositions. It's worth exploring the idea of whether religion could have other value. I don't find any particularist religion convincing--any argument that "God belongs to us at the expense of THEM" seems ridiculous. It's worth questioning whether Christianity could have value for other reasons. I still to go church, because for me this form of religion is a part of being human. My anscestors were all Christians. I choose to stay connected to the tradition because of my humanity, not because of theology. But I'm open to metaphysical truth as well, but reject the notion that any faiuth tradition owns it. Not sure if that helps, but I do think it's worth expanding the idea of belonging to a religion beyond the simplistic ways we talk about it
@@cjohnyrun "It's worth exploring the idea of whether religion could have other value." That's called philosophy. Whether or not a philosophical position has merit has nothing to do with claims about the divinity of its source. Your suggestion dilutes both religious faith and secular philosophy. It defers resolution. It's not any kind of solution to the dilemma. IMO.
@@cjohnyrun I see where you are coming from, thanks for further clarifications. I would be completely okay with completely separating religion and science if many of those religious claims didn't include scientific topics, and as a result being heavily politicized and having vast effect on anyone living in the particular democratic country. Then we are somewhat forced to require same standards for these claims if they are interconnected and we need to have a conversation about them. Which is also a reason why I moved from "live and let live I don't care" atheist into an anti-theist atheist. Yes, religion can definitely have many positive values, but as long as scientific facts can be marked as immoral to dismiss them, we are on a territory far behind my red line. Either way, you are very kind and thanks for the conversation
@@ZymonAaronn I don't find this completely convincing. Here's a counter argument, LMK what you think. I love philosophy, and studied extensively--then did a degree in theology (and the two were basically the same discipline for at least 1,000 years). If you're talking about rationalist truth claims, then philosophy might do it as a replacement for the strictly theological parts of religion. But we don't yet have philosophical schools that meet our fundamental needs for belonging or community or ritual. Ironically, the ancient practice of philosophy was much more applied and integrated with what we'd call "religion".. They had shared meals and rituals, communal living arangements, and worshipped together in many cases (obv. not all). When I read the middle Platonists and Stocists, they look pretty similar to what eventually became Christian theology (My masters thesis was on Philo of Alexandria). And the famous "Catechetical school of Alexandria" was an adaptation of this Greek philosophical tradition with Christian trappings. Modern philosophy seems to be more about ideas than practice, although there are a few exceptions. I love philosophy, but humans need spaces to belong too. We're more than just brains on meat sticks
@@cjohnyrunSo, why Christianity instead of religious humanism? My UUA congregation has shared meals, rituals, rites of passage, traditions, children's programs, and community service. What is missing for you?
you are REALLY striking while the irons hot, starting this channel with the Wes Huff thing happening right now! look forward to more from you. And dont ever feel pressure either. At some point you might run out of trivia and experiences to share. from there, youll either have to do vine responses like Dan McClelan or current events punditry like Steve Shives. But its also totally okay to step back, take a break, come back later with different content or more of the same. dont burn out is all. much love and gobless
Not all literally true, but I’d say there are some valuable moral truths in it. The challenge is figuring out what’s what and not being dogmatic about it.
I'm glad to find your channel. I am a gnostic (knowledge seeker) atheist. I think you have a healthy perspective. I look forward to hearing your perspectives as a fresh take on the subject.
Fascinating. Not a biblical scholar here but not uninformed either - have read a fair amount on these topics over the decades - but in this video you introduced me to some new and very compelling ideas. Thanks!
A great explanation. I did not grow up in church. I went a little as a child and a little in high school. I was saved as a 54 year old. I threw myself into church to catch up and learn. I read the entire bible in a little over a year. I did every class and study my church had I could get fit in. A side story I won't get into started my questioning. I began to feel manipulated and church was not feeling good anymore. I kept at it to hope the feeling would change because it had become so important to me. I finally had to admit and confront I don't believe the bible and can't figure out how to keep going to church and greeting there when I don't believe what the church is preaching. It has been very difficult and heartbreaking. But maybe there is a way if I step back.. 😢 I dont feel like I fit in there. I don't speak the same language as the fellow church members. I love them but I don't fit in. How can God be so good when the bible has horrible stories. And other books I've read talk about going through such physical health problems for years and finally get healed after they totally give the appropriate faith to God.... seems very cruel. I'm sorry. A little bit of rambling. Thank you for your videos.
Thanks so much for your reflections. Is there another place you can find yo belong? It sounds like it's important to you, but that community itself might just be toxic
I thought your resolution to the question perfect. I have made a similar theological journey though without the academic part. Tom Holland in Dominion makes the case that Western society and its worldview is deeply indebted to the Christian inheritance. Indeed, even the development of concepts of human rights with its Enlightenment ideals has some connection to Christian development. Holland currently places himself "in the shadowlands between belief and agnosticism." I feel much the same. I value the Bible, despite its flaws, as I value what is good in Christianity and reject that history which should be rejected. Neither are infallible. But, many of its followers, fallible people like Dorothy Day, William Wilberforce, Francis of Assisi, Mother Teresa, Desmond Tutu, Maria Skobtsova of Paris, Martin Luther King, Jr and others inspire me on my own journey.
I feel like I'm in a similar place. I find a richness in the tradition. I'll look up that Tom Holland thing, I've never seen it. I do also think we underestimate how much of "Christian" ideas are actually just things Christians adopted from Greek/hellenistic philosophy (ie. natural law, a prime mover, etc.)_ Thank you so much for this thoughtful comment
Thank you for a great video. Very interesting and well laid out. I was raised fundamentalist lite (pre-complementarianism, pre-Hal Lindsey and his Late Great Planet Earth), but still with the dogma "God said it, I believe it, that settles it". While studying the OT, I saw references to the pillars under the earth, the windows of heaven, the firmament holding back the waters above, etc. Once I realized that we know for a fact that all of that is demonstrably false, I knew something else was at work. Then of course, there is Joshua asking God to make the sun stand still. That was the tipping point for me. After that, my beliefs changed to the Bible contains truths, but does not necessarily contain fact.
It's interesting to try to wrap your head around the sun standing still as a "Scientific fact." I'm not a scientist, but I suspect that would have some serious repercussions
Bravo. Getting to the core truths of Christianity doesn’t prohibit, but exacerbates for me. Anyway, the true teachings of Christ. Of altruism, love, kindness. Well, done, young man. 17:22
Are you aware that the Christian “Old” Testament is not the same thing as the Bible Jews use. The Bible Jews use ends with Chronicles II. The Christian “Old” Testament ends with Malachai. Catholics, Protestant and Jews include different books in each other and exclude different books.
True in a historical sense? Almost certainly not. True in a scientific sense? Not at all. True in that it reflects reality? Nope. True in that there are some inspirational or moral stories? Sure. True that it contains mythological stories that reflect deeper aspects about humanity? I think yes.
I agree. The Bible is mostly not true. Then what's the point of calling yourself a Christian and what does it even mean? If Jesus wasn't literally who the Bible claims he was, then what's the point? Paul even said if Jesus didn't rise then Christians are most to be pitied. When I realized the things you realized after 40 years of being a Christian, I became a skeptic and atheist. Why bother with "Cultural Christianity"? I still enjoy Christmas, but never would I call myself a Christian.
Even though I knew everything you have said, I enjoyed greatly this video in my search for God and truth. As an exfundamentalist ex-crazy-baptist-street-preaching-"hell"-type, who does believe the scriptures, with caution that is... I would for example, weigh Paul's epistles above things like Revelation, or 2 Peter and Jude... By weigh I mean, I am more confident that my faith rests on Paul being true and are more likely to be true than Rev, 2 Peter, Jude... I am not a "Christian", but a Unitarian Universalist as I believe my teacher Paul was, who I believe was taught of Christ Jesus. Thank you for this video, please keep up the videos like this one.
I respect the fact that your coming out and going against the grain. Its necessary and requires alot of courage to put it out to the public. We have all been indoctrinated with religion. Its everywhere. Usually starts as a youth. Proverbs 22:6 is so true, even outside of religion. Ive recently came out of Christianity completely. However i still believe in a Creator/s of all things. Cant guaranteed 1 or more. But this Earth and everything in it is a Creation. No doubt
So, i havent watched the full video yet personally, but i have listened to a bit, and I must address all 3 of your problems because i dont understand how you can say certain things while being a biblical scholar when you could easily find the answers to those questions... First is your problem with what constitutes canon, you include the Epistle of Barnabus as one of your examples, but we know exactly why that one got thrown out, it's cause it's not written by the guy it's said to be written by. The Johannine comma you bring up in your second point also doesnt change the meaning of the text at all, the full text in english reads: For there are three that beare record [in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.] [And there are three that beare witnesse in earth], the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood, and these three agree in one. If you take out the comma you get For there are three that beare record, the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood, and these three agree in one. Which... also confirms the trinity... so, the meaning is not changed. Finally, You use the example of Judas which has been addressed and definitely could be reasonably interpreted as not a contradiction at all. There are reasonable explanations to the contradictions you specifically chose to use, you explain the part where it could be that he was hanged then the corpse fell but then say the field being bought was another contradiction, which it isnt. If something is bought for you using your money, one might say you bought it. If Elon Musk tells his secretary to buy food for the party and pay for it using this money for example, the person who bought the food literally was the secretary but you would not be wrong in saying the buyer was Elon. In much the same way if Judas rejected the money and a field was bought for him, it could be said that Judas bought the field. Perhaps you struggle with other passages, to be honest you probably know more about the bible than I do, i understand that at times there are things that dont seem to make sense. But if youre trying to present an argument you cannot present weak evidence to back up your 3 main points. Because every single point has at least 1 example you use that is not just refutable but easily refutable, you do no service to your conclusion. And to be clear, Im not here to attack you, i just have problems with the specific examples you mentioned. But I do think you miss much of the forest for the trees. And do be careful, because Christianity is not the living traditions and it is not the culture of christians, it is the understanding and relationship that Jesus is God and that none come to the father except through him. If your relationship with Jesus is secure, you are a Christian regardless of how much we agree or disagree on the inerrancy of the scriptures.
TBH this is exactly the problem. Anyone steeped in apologetics will say "there are reasonable explanations for everything." Because we were trained to believe this. But there are avalanches of contradictions, historical problems, canon was a process, etc etc etc. It's the whole belief system that stinks, and this is exactly what's wrong with evangelical Christianity. I don't actually care if the Bible is infallible (it's obviously not). But it's a belief used by many many terrible people to hold power over others. And when it's so blatantly wrong, it needs to be undermined
@cjohnyrun that makes no sense. The problem is that there are answers to the questions you posed? The problem is that you can agree on the large fundamentals but disagree on the small minute details? The problem is that there have been historical errors that have been rectified and fixed and likely will be more in the future? I'm not sure what your point is here, I'm just pointing out you have very weak evidence for your claim. Even if I grant you the premise of "avalanches of contradictions" if they're as easily explainable as the examples you provided in the video, then they're avalanches of nothing. And what, are you expecting people to take claims without looking into the facts themselves? That's the complete opposite of the theory you posit that biblical worldviews lead to ignorance. Or are you saying that we shouldn't listen to apologetics who give reasonable inference? That also feels like you'd be far more ignorant if you did that. Shouldn't Christians be able to defend their faith as much as athiests or other antagonists are allowed to attack them? Are people not supposed to defend their beliefs? Sounds shady to me. Also, you can use just about any belief to justify almost any action, terrible people do terrible things regardless of belief system. Yes, the bible has been used to justify many historical issues but so has every other belief system in history. What's the plan, eliminate all religion? Terminate all governments? What will you be left with? No, the merits of the bible should be carefully considered as well as it's detriments, that's far more reasonable from a pragmatic standpoint, not a Christian one. And even from an Athiest standpoint, you'd be a fool to have some righteous need to undermine the bible in light of the many cultural benefits the religion provides, even Richard Dawkins agrees with that. Look, I dont mean to come here as your enemy, but you're abandoning logic and reason to fight ghosts. Up to you if you listen to my advice or not, but take a step back and consider your core values and beliefs, what things you feel are most important to you. Then, think of the core values and beliefs of Christianity and that are taught in scripture and compare the two. Think of where you differ and the reasons for it and think whether that's truly right of you, whether it's how God would want you to center yourself. And pray on it. It's possible, in my opinion, you've strayed. Strayed far enough that while in your head you call yourself a Christian, in your heart, you've already rejected Christ, there are many who do so, even I have in the past. And I obviously don't have all the answers, but God does, and it's up to you whether or not you put your faith and trust in him.
@@unnamedminus I don't think we'll find common ground here. I appreciate you taking the time to engage so kindly and respectfully--a rarity on RUclips. All the best
@cjohnyrun that's understandable, thank you for taking the time to consider my words. In all honesty, I feel like I was a bit too harsh in terms of wording and tone but truly I hope the best for you and pray you'll find the answers you seek. All the best.
Like much fundamentalism, it's based on fear. The fear being "If there's even the slightest error or contradiction in the Bible, EVERYTHING in it is not just questionable but possibly wrong...including the Resurrection." And naturally, if the Resurrection becomes dubious, the entire faith falls apart. So suddenly to keep the Resurrection "alive", you have to start believing in world-wide floods and the genocides performed by the Israelites was actually ordered by God and (pushed to the extreme) that the Universe, not just the Earth, is only 10,000 years old. The rise of atheist and agnosticism and "deconstruction" is ...ironically...more a product of that kind of Christianity than science.
Hey, a technical stylistic recommendation: ask people to subscribe to you slightly earlier. That gives them more time to fiddle around with their phone and get to the subscribe button if they're going to do it
Are the accounts of angels and demons in the Bible true? Are there angels and demons? How about heaven and hell, are those places real? How should I understand John? Are these verses "true"? 2 My Father’s house has many rooms; if that were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you? 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am.
Just came across your channel. You mentioned in this video, or the first one that I watched, that you are now part of a church that is more progressive. I wouldn't describe myself that way. But I'll admit that my beliefs have changed a lot over the decades. Not a deconstruction, but more of a reconstruction. I'm not sure I would define myself anymore as an Evangelical Christian, but I do still hold loosely to many of those beliefs, and a few pretty firmly. However, the idea of inerrant Scriptures never made much sense to me. I felt that if God can accomplish his goals through an imperfect church, why can't he do it through imperfect Scriptures? Also, why emphasize inerrancy in the original autographs when we no longer have them? What good does that do us now? And, it seemed that those who were the strongest proponents of the position focused so intensely on it that the gospel was lost in the process. A while back, I came across a definition of infallibility by Kevin Vanhoozer, and it rang true with me. I'm paraphrasing, but he said something like this: Infallibility says that whatever God is up to in Scripture, it will accomplish the purpose for which he intended it. I'm good with that. However one wants to define the Bible, I find it to be a purifying fire that God is using to burn away the dross in my life and form me into the image of God in which I was created.
The Bible was indeed written by man however according to Simon Greenleaf someone that knows a thing or two about evidence, those contradictions actually give credibility to story
No human is capable of a completely objective, completely accurate, completely comprehensive interpretation of literally everything in any version of a "Bible". So then a qualifier like "is true" just simply isn't a useful phrase for this context. However, the people in our world who are the most qualified to get 'as close as we can' to accurately approximating the myriad of intended ideas present in the varied source texts, ... are secular Bible scholars who have tenured status at secular Ivy League Universities The greater the consensus those scholars can reach on any issue, the more justified the rest of us are ... in accepting their interpretations as 'probably essentially correct'. Granted, they can make mistakes. But that fact is very damning of the religious claim that an all-knowing, all-wise, all-powerful Super-Entity wants us all to know, understand, harmonize, and have justified confidence about whatever it's supposed to say and mean. Praying about it doesn't work. "Faith" that a "God" will impart correct understandings ... doesn't work either. We're on our own; no matter who or who caused our universe to exist.
Now, what am i going to do?😢 I'm so confused! I thought the Holy Spirit will show the truth to all humans and make his message to humanity so clear, that only I would have to believe, but, what should I believe?😢and I'm scared of going to Hell for not believing the right thing😢😢. I have to work all day and I have very little spare time to investigate this topics, and they are soo complex😢
Can we say that experts only realized recently that the doctrine of salvation in Jesus required the inerrancy of scriptures? If the bible is not inerrant, there is no compelling reason to believe in it, so I left the faith. Now, I just consider the bible as a man made book trying to explain everything with the limited knowledge of that time. We simply evolved from ancestral apes and now we can send probes to other planets and explore space.
I do not believe in Christ even if he appears now on the clouds on the wings of his angels. I would still not believe in Christ BUT I would know that Christ exists. But would you believe it? NO! I believe exactly the opposite of what Christians preach. So Christ's appearance in heaven would not change my NON-belief in him. People do not understand that some things cannot be trusted but must be known. The fact that you believe in God means nothing. Where is the proof that God believes in you? God and Christ don't care about anyone. To whom did Christ appear? Mayans and Aztecs and Japanese and Koreans and Bushmen..? Not just a handful of his apostles. So you came for your apostles and no one else. 12 apostles for the 12 tribes of Israel, of which only 3 remain today, and that's what the Jewish rabbi said, I didn't make it up. God is "good?" God is EVIL and I believe that, and Christ only justifies his evil which he calls good. And even when someone LIES that God loved the world, I get sick...NO ONE HAS EVER PROVED THAT GOD IS LOVE! God loves only his own interests and no one else, that's what I BELIEVE!
27 дней назад+1
Very good video. I went through a similar discovery at Seminary as well. I presumed the Bible figuratively fell out of heaven. I have a much more nuanced position today. While I believe it is reliable, I think there could be human errors we would expect from a crime scene interview of a crime by witnesses. I do believe it reliably conveys what the witnesses, and the early believers actually believed and reported. I noticed in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 - English Standard Version (ESV) 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. - I notice that it does not say it is historical (as well it does not define what is scripture). Since Jesus taught in parables, it is just as likely some of the OT is also intended to be morality stories. Do you believe in the Life, Death and Resurrection of Jesus, or do you question that? Do you understand your need for a savior? That is what makes or breaks Christianity. I had an interesting interaction with a fundamental inerrantist nearly 40 years ago. Judge Paul Pressler was my Sunday School teacher (Big wig in the Southern Baptist church and tied to Paige Patterson) when I was about 24. He invited me over to his home once and I invited my roommate to join us. I got over there thinking he wanted to recruit me for some church work or position, but it seemed the meeting didn't have any purpose. He did want us all to get in his hot tub. I explained I did not have a swimsuit and he said that was not necessary. I was uncomfortable without being suspicious of any intent. However, I found out a year ago that he would try to get young men into his hot tub and expect certain favors. I always wondered what he wanted. It took nearly 40 years to find out. I think people chose the inerrancy position because they can't deal with uncertainty. Since they can't deal with doubt, they double down on a position. I have come closer in my faith, that I don't need certainty. I know there will be questions I will never know. A similar situation comes from atheists who believe in naturalism as the origin of life. When you talk to them about abiogenesis, they become very uncomfortable.
Sounds like we landed in different places. I think your current beliefs sound a bit more like conventional "evangelical" ones (I know that word is a bit problematic, so forgive me using it). I personally don't see these as different witnesses, I'd be more inclined to see them as something like the myths of different communities (not that there isn't historical truth behind them. but I don't consider the gospels to be eyewintess accounts). Many churches have adopted language that says something like "The scriptures are inerrant in their original autographs" . this accounts for possible copying and transmission errors. And that hot tub story 😬
I think you can see the same threads in all religions. The prevailing, popular, apologetic interpretation is that "God wrote a book". This can be the Bible, the Quran, the book of Mormon etc. All followers can see the problems with the book that is not of their tradition, but not with their own. In fact the opening gambit of the Quran is that the Bible is not true. But this view often clouds the view of the moral guidance that can be drawn from these texts. Admittedly, that would almost always be a selective reading of the text (i.e., feeding the poor vs. killing the infidels). That is probably why all religions have a multitude of traditions. Even within evangelical Christianity you have the MAGA tradition and the red letter Christian tradition, which from the outside look like two different, almost incompatible religions. Historically, e.g., you had the "German Christians" and the "Confessing Church" in Nazi Germany. Again, an incompatible split which went through all Christian confessions.
1:17 "The inerrant Word of God, as a concept, was invented in the 20th century." A person may not believe Christians, but Christians have been teaching that the Scriptures are the Word of God and perfect since the Apostles. One example from Irenaeus (130 - 202 AD), a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the Apostle John : "The Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of God and His Spirit." Against Heresies, book 2, chapter 28, section 2. There are hundreds of quotes from Christians from the time of Jesus, in every century, up to the present day with the same teaching. Again, atheists and others may not believe it, but stop lying about Biblical inerrancy beginning in the 20th century.
@veritas399 yes, EArly Christians loved the Bible and Christian writings. and yes, they talked about "scripture".... But nobody pre 4th century (and probably before the 15th C) is talking about what you talk about when you say "the scriptures".... nobody. Not one person. Nada. Nilch. If you want to believe a 20th C doctrine, go ahead... but don't pretend it's what Christians have always believed--because that is a lie.
@cjohnyrun "Nobody pre-4th century is talking about scripture as we have scripture today." Again, Irenaeus wrote in against Heresies, about 180 AD, that there were 4 gospels, no more, and no less. The Muratorian Fragment from the 2nd century lists the 4 gospels, 13 Pauline Epistles, Acts, 2 Epistles of John, and the Revelation of John. What evidence leads you to think there were not 4 gospels recognized as genuine before the 4th century? Most of the New Testament is listed in the Muratorian Fragment. . . .
You know, TBH I don't have strongly formed thoughts. I have my own opinion, but it's not deeply rooted in either historical analysis of the bible or theology or Christian history. It's just my opinion 🤷♀ Sorry that's not really helpful.
I believe what is true about abortion and so do you. We use DNA evidence to put people to death which I don’t disagree with but we don’t use DNA evidence to prove and then safe innocent lives by abolishing abortions. I struggle to believe in the miracles of the Bible but I hope that my heart hasn’t hardened to the point of no return. Christs are almost the only opposition to abortion so even though I struggle. I believe the Bible is true because abolishing abortion would be a miracle and from what I see it only happens through Christ playing out right before our eyes. Good luck with your channel I’ll check in to see what happens from time to time.
So they call you a heretic! That's lazy thinking and just ignorance. Since most of the Bible can't be proven as fact this means belief requires Faith. On that subject what is your Faith today? Do you believe in G-D and his chosen Messiah? Do you believe in salvation through Faith or as I do, Jesus taught Faith requires some level of obedience? The Message of the Entire Book still remains the same: Love G-D and Love your Neighbor. If you still believe in those things then I consider you a Christian in the truest sense of the Word.
From my perspective, it doesn't matter. Because morality isn't as simple as figuring out "what the bible says." But for what it's worth, I don't think the Bible says anything clearly about it, and certianly nothing that fits within our modern undersating of sexual orientation and loving same-sex relationships. Dale Martin has a good article unpacking the words that get used for this.
@@cjohnyrun "nothing that fits within our modern understanding of sexual orientation" While it's not called as such in the bible, these verses could be considered: "... If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, ..." Lev, 20:13 "In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another." Rom 1:27 For the laymen like me, it looks like gay relations, right?
I want you do do your early subscribers a huge favor. Your information is fascinating. But I beg you…..so down. You speak so rapidly it’s a little hard to keep up. Just take some deep breaths. I have a feeling I’ll learn a great deal for your videos, and look forward to seeing many more in the future.
Thank you for creating such a honest and thought-provoking video. Your journey from evangelicalism/fundamentalism to seeing the Bible as a record of Revelation, rather than Revelation itself, is both deeply inspiring and a testament to the power of intelligence and critical thinking guided by faith. As an LGBT person, I was especially moved by your ability to approach the Bible with clarity and context, one that seeks truth beyond the ways the Bible has often been weaponized. For many of LGBTs, the weaponization of Scripture can lead to profound trauma. It’s a heartbreaking reality that some of us don’t survive, succumbing to suicide after enduring spiritual abuse, while others live with deep emotional scars that hinder our ability to develop meaningful, loving, intimate relationships. Those traumas that prevent us from being available for love and intimacy are then used against us to prove we’re evil, wrong or defective. We lose our families at a young age, often rejected, abandoned and turn to alcohol, drugs and a false sense of intimacy (sex) to soothe ourselves from all the pain. I was just speaking with a lesbian friend this morning who parents told her she was demon possessed and even went as far to try to hold a exorcism to expell the demon. I knew a guy who rode my bus who parents wouldn't let him eat off the same dishes as him. For those of us who want to hold onto God despite this, it takes immense courage and effort to study and understand the Bible in the way you have. Without this work, we’re often left feeling as though we must live life without God and turn to atheism in order to be ok with ourselves and not exhist in cognative dissonance. But as you know, it takes either IQ or a tenacious spirit to study the Bible and not everyone can do it. I think this is the cruelest thing of all, forcing people to live without God, which is perhaps one of the most painful burdens anyone could bear. Imagine going through all the challenges of life without knowing your best friend? I have many friends who cringe if I just say the word God. They associate God with the abuse and would rather live alone than open that festering wound. Do you think this weaponization of the Bible, the use of God to harm others, is a form of evil itself? It sometimes feels as though Christianity has been hijacked by evil forces that prioritize control and condemnation over love and grace, allowing the very faith meant to heal to instead cause suffering and death by scripture. Your video gives me hope that there are voices like yours offering a way to reclaim Scripture for its true purpose: to guide, uplift, and reveal God’s love for all of us. As a survivor of Christian spiritual gaslighting and abuse, I can honestly say I think using God against a human is one of the worst things one can do to another human…. And to invoke God’s name and use scripture to justify one’s cruelty…. It’s not only painful but kills. It’s a slow soul-death where we LGBTs believe the lies, “Maybe there is something wrong with me?” “Maybe I am not good enough for God?” “Maybe I’m wrong?” And those questions drive human souls to suicide. Call me dramatic, but weaponizing the Bible is murderous and many LGBT suicides still happen many times every day. Just because a 16 year old killed a family in a car accident because she looked down at a text, doesn’t mean that the family isn’t dead. Sure, it’s manslaughter… And they may be ignorant, but ignorance has consequences, in this case it’s deadly. Thank you again for sharing your journey, it is truly a blessing. May the Holy Spirit guide you to more knowledge and into a deeper, more loving, and more intimate relationship with God. I still think it’s beautiful our Jesus and his hand selected disciples who studied under him, walked with him and were mentored by him never said anything to hurt us. I didn’t mean to make this all about LGBTs, it’s just the journey you’re on is one we’re forced to take if we want to be followers of the Way. It’s liberating when the Holy Spirit reveals the truth, but it’s also sad when you realize that they’re practicing idolatry. They don’t know God, nor follow him. They worship the Bible.
@alivealex9914 Wow, thank you so much for this powerful and raw comment. This hit me: - "I think this is the cruelest thing of all, forcing people to live without God." You're 100% right." And not only God, but also without being able to belong to a community--which every human needs and deserves. And then love, which every human deserves. I remember looking at my wife one day as I was deconstructing and realizing that any tradition that denies people the right to find a soulmate (if they want one) is disgusting. To love and be loved by another human is one of the most basic and essential human needs. I can't imagine going through life without that because someone else told me God didn't allow it for me. I hate the weaponization of the Bible... especially since, as the video alludes to, it's not justified. LGBTQ+ ppl have faced an enormous amount of this--as as you say, bear the scars both psyologically and literally. For a tradition that claims "by their fruit you shall know them..." if the "fruit" is dead and broken kids, the whole thing is rotten. To respond to your question, I think the Bible and its interpretation in fundamentlist environments is almost always an exercise of power and control. Ironically, one of the reasons I lasted so long was because as a straight, white guy, it was too easy to belong. I studied for years and was the golden boy--in line for ministry, and it was the problems with the truth claims itself that took me out. My sisters' story was very different--they were forced to reckon with a tradition that told them they didn't matter as much as I did. My gay friends had to leave, because they were told they didn't belong at all. But they witnessed to me, because if they could go through that and still have faith, I can leave the door open a bit. Thank you again for the comment. I love and appreciate the blessing too. I live most of my days as an agnostic, but I do believe that the tradition at its core holds a lot of richness and I'm open to the possibility of "the spirit." I'm sure you know this, but I'll say it just in case, there are some wonderful churches out there that accept LGBTQ+ ppl without trying to change anything. All the best
the sermon of the mount, and the stories of Jesus miracles are true, the virgin birth is true, anything from acts to revelation is just Paul's doctrine . it is not the first time in history that people take a prominent figure in a faith and give them divinity
@@midwestairway interesting synthesis. There are a few places in early Christian literature where people got mad that Paul stole everything. I'll do a video on at some point
Interesting. Marcion and Thomas Jefferson come to mind. Curious, what is your criteria for affirming the truthfulness of the Gospels, but nothing else in the New Testament?
There are two appearances, within the same generation, at the end of the ages, the time of the harvest - the sacrifice followed by the resurrection. Being born in a barn has to do with the resurrection. His sacrifice is a broken spirit. He is accustomed to infirmity. He becomes spiritually destitute. the one who is and who was and who is to come, the almighty (Rev 1:8 NABO) The beast that you saw existed once but now exists no longer. It will come up from the Abyss and is headed for destruction. (Rev 17:8 NABO) Do not say… 'Who will go down into the Abyss (nether world)?' (…to bring Christ up from the dead) (Rom 10:7 NABO) Santa Claus is coming to town but, shouldn't it be on Thanksgiving while we remember Krampus with a meal on Christmas? No one comes to the Father except through me. I came into this world for judgment. The Bible was written by a Shakespeare to confound even a Sherlock Holmes. So, you don't believe in a talking donkey?
After watching a series of this guy's videos, I believe we are witnessing the rise of the antithesis to Wess Huff... Sprinkled with the image of a younger Michael Keaton, I might add. lol 🤭 so really, we're just witnessing the rise of the Bible Batman. This should be interesting.
Well, Protestantism is a heresy to begin with. The Catholic Church has always believed in the inerrancy of Scripture. Here are clear scriptural proofs of the inerrancy of Scripture: 1. John 10:35: “Scripture cannot be broken.” Jesus Himself affirms the absolute authority and inerrancy of Scripture, emphasizing its divine origin and unchanging truth. 2. 2 Timothy 3:16-17: “All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.” This verse explicitly states that Scripture is “God-breathed,” confirming its divine authorship and reliability. 3. Matthew 5:18: “For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” Jesus highlights the enduring and inerrant nature of even the smallest details of Scripture. 4. Psalm 12:6: “The words of the Lord are pure words, like silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times.” This verse compares the purity and perfection of God’s words to the most refined metal, underscoring their inerrancy. 5. Proverbs 30:5-6: “Every word of God proves true; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you and you be found a liar.” God’s words are entirely true and trustworthy, and no additions or alterations are permitted. 6. Isaiah 55:11: “So shall My word be that goes out from My mouth; it shall not return to Me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.” God’s word is infallible, always achieving His divine purpose without error. These verses collectively demonstrate that Scripture, as the Word of God, is entirely inerrant and trustworthy.
Hi C.J. I want to take a minute to encourage you. You're definitely not alone. Just last Sunday after church, I spoke with our pastor about why I believed that the Bible is not the inherent word of God. I am writing a book about this, but the key revelation for me, which is the driver for writing my book, is that Jesus did not believe in the inherency of Scripture either, and he was killed for it, by the fundamentalists of his day! Each miracle proves it, and when Jesus said Moses made concessions, Jesus was essentially saying that Moses added his own words to prophesy, placing God's name on Moses's own thoughts, words, and intent. The response was, "we know Moses, but who are you? ". Who are you to say that the OT isn't God breathed, inherent, and 100% accurate. So, we are in good company. Christians need the truth now, more than ever. Many thanks for the sincerity of your biblical studies and for sharing them on this channel. God Bless
For me the Bible of today is made up of three cultures which are the Hebrew, Greek and Latin or Roman. If the first fundamental lesson of the Grammatical Languages of each of these cultures was taught and understood any one could see the false hood of the Latin Roman fundamental Church Christianity and its insanity. Example: in the Hebrew Language all nouns are either Feminine or Masculine and by using the word SPIRIT in each of the 3 Languages you can gain Spiritual wisdom and understanding. Hebrew word Spirit = Ruach which is a Feminine noun, Greek word Spirit = pneuma is a neuter word which can mean both feminine or masculine, and the Latin word Spirit = Spiritus which in Roman Latin a Masculine pro noun only. To realize their are two Christianities which consists of the False one being a outward physical Exoteric way: the broad and wide way of Roman Church Doctrines and the other the true Strait and narrow way few walk in which is living in the Hebrew, Greek Christ Conscious anointing of both the Feminine and Masculine Spirits United and Balanced as One LORD, One Faith and One Spirit Baptism in Christ Consciousness. In the Bibles 2nd John it say's in the New Covenant their is only ONE Spirit Doctrine which is the Doctrine of Christ and very few know what the origin and meaning of the word or title Christ is. Most Evangelical fundamental believers think and are taught Christ is the last name of Jesus and because they believe every thing they are told they are deceived like Eve and believe Lies. One more thing about the two Hebrew words Grace = chem which is a Masculine word and Faith = emunah a Feminine word and the revelation of understanding that it takes both Male and Female united as one in perfect balance for the Life Force Divine Energy to produce Spiritual Life in any and Every Human Being. It is the Life Christ Anointing Energy of Divine Consciousness that Makes Humans Human and nothing else. Think you for allowing me to comment..
The problem with you like guys who have PhD or any other degrees in the biblical study is that those PhD or eloquent degrees aren't beneficial when it comes to biblical doctrines, the necessary thing is that not the degrees but the Holy Spirit, so receiving the Holy Spirit from God and receiving these sort of degrees are mutually exclusive. So, here is the fact that the Gospels are eye witness accounts, and it can be explained in words and also can be physically demonstrated and it's impossible if anyone has a PhD or other degrees. Now, who is the eye witness? Early Apostles were with JESUS over a period of 3 years, seeing and hearing what JESUS was speaking,doing etc , so technically they're eye witnesses but according to JESUS, they're not witnesses or eye witnesses. Now Jesus said you must be witnesses to Me just before His ascension, and after 10 days only all of them became witnesses. Now, what do you learn from these things? One can only become a witness of JESUS only through the reception of the Holy Spirit into the body by the removal of his parents Spirit from his physical body. Thus, one can become a witness of JESUS at any time even in the 21st century as per this criterion. So, early Apostles were eye witnesses of everything that's there in the Holy Bible. Now in the 21st century one can receive the Holy Spirit and eventually become an eye witness of JESUS & able to physically demonstrate by claiming to exist before 2k years, and also challenging his physical body is the temple of God, and prove to the world objectively. However, this is only possible with two people as of now they're living in South India having their ancestry root from Jerusalem. So, your studies on the Holy Bible and your degrees never ever give you any facts, and that you are wrong dude.
Your premise is flawed so your entire argument is false. The Bible repeatedly teaches scripture is the standard. Why do you feel the need to lie? Because you want to make man's word the standard. More specifically, you want to make your word the standard.
What a brilliant double standard. Do you not realize you are making your word the “standard” by proclaiming it? Fundamentalism is forever the enemy of our future.
@@GregAnderson-r3k Thank you for participating even if you didn't put any effort into your response. We know you did your best and that is what counts.
Does your journey look like mine? Do you find this argument convincing? Unconvincing? 🙃
Either way, comment and tell me about it! I'd love feedback, good or bad.
👇👇👇👇👇👇
Think the best description I can give on where I am at is in "no man's land". All that you've shared has struck a cord with me. When people leave Christianity, the majority of the time is because of so and so in the church or the church itself and also the pressures of the world can potentially lure Christians away as in the parable of the sower. There are many who've left the faith because of the old adage,"how can a loving God permit me to go thru this pain"?
But it's only the minority that leave the faith due to intellectual reasons. It's also been my experience if you're enduring a tough time, moral sin or anything within that zone, one will always find the warm arm of Christian love around you EXCEPT when you're struggling to believe if the bible is true. I've seen the sweetest of Christians transform from "Dr.jekyll to Mr.hyde " if you question the bible. It's as if you've personally attacked their character. Then you get those who say, "yes it's good to ask questions....". But personally I think it's ok to ask questions provided you agree with your pastor at the end!
The beliefs are only there to as "ticket" to get you into the church club. Once you're in no one after a Sunday service or even after bible studies chats about the difficulty in believing in the formation of the Canon(using this as an example) Christians understanding of Christianity centres around loving, supporting, enjoying fellowship and praying for each other is their main focus. The topic you and I struggle with belongs to theologians and nerdy Christians.
Anyway it's 11am here in Perth Australia and I am falling asleep. Love to hear from you
You are still a believer. Did you ever have a conversation with Dr Bart Ehrman? I've noticed something Bible stories affect people different cjojohnny still a believer, Bart Ehrman became a agnostic still teaches the Bible leaves a open playing field,Seth Andrews turned Atheist and attacks Christianity,Matt Dillahunty gets vulgar and attacks everyone who disagrees with him. I'm a Christian I left mind controlling Fundamentalism.
It's a library of ancient texts of all different genres, articulating many different voices, written down across a long period of time. The word of God in the words of men. I"m a Catholic, and for me, the more Biblical scholarship the better. The Catholic Tradition has never been fundamentalist or literalist, because it shuts down so many approaches to the Bible, and makes it virtually impossible to read.
Hi C.J. I want to take a minute to encourage you. You're definitely not alone. Just last Sunday after church, I spoke with our pastor about why I believed that the Bible is not the inherent word of God. I am writing a book about this, but the key revelation for me, which is the driver for writing my book, is that Jesus did not believe in the inherency of Scripture either, and he was killed for it, by the fundamentalists of his day! Each miracle proves it, and when Jesus said Moses made concessions, Jesus was essentially saying that Moses added his own words to prophesy, placing God's name on Moses's own thoughts, words, and intent. The response was, "we know Moses, but who are you? ". Who are you to say that the OT isn't God breathed, inherent, and 100% accurate. So, we are in good company. Christians need the truth now, more than ever. Many thanks for the sincerity of your biblical studies and for sharing them on this channel. God Bless
Of all the people sharing their experiences on RUclips, you are absolutely the closest to my own experience is almost all regards. One difference , I did not continue higher education in this regard, as my deconstruction started happening when I had a “pre-registration interview” before I was to apply for admission to a very well-known “Southern” seminary. I mentioned that I had just purchased a fresh King James Version from Zondervan and asked what other versions would be used in study. The absolute abhorrence that I would even contemplate any other editions for any reason whatsoever settled like a pall on the room. Realizing a “mid-step” I did sort of go back to why I chose that particular book at the bookstore hoping to tie to a London UK printed version (as a sort of homage to King James.) The conversation deteriorated very quickly and almost dramatically as I basically identified my Bible as a printed book from a factory that was intended to be sold. I was almost ejected from the consternation flying through the air. They, indeed, seem to think bibles just “drop from God’s hands from the sky. “ I walked out and never looked back. I then moved on to a state university.
As a scientist, this is seriously underrated, because I remember someone critiquing me by saying, “You can’t pick and choose what you believe in the Bible, you either believe in all of it or you are a hypocrite.” We can both be empirical and skeptics, while having faith in something we find compelling.
@Rex-ye3uf Totally. I remember how many times I heard "follow the evidence where it leads" or "God wants you to use your brain," but then when I came up against serious problems it was "you need to be humble, then believe."
Ironically, I was in ministry when I was 20, preaching, and fundamentalists gladly listened to me. Now I have 3 degrees in Bible and know way more, and fundamentalists think I'm a liar
😆
Your academic and intellectual integrity shines through. The doctrine of inerrancy is the most erroneous doctrine, leading to bible-olotry.
I like your informed synthesis of views on this topic. I left the church many years ago as I found the apologists and true believers just trying to turn a blind eye to the obvious problems. I used to call apologetics "excuseogentics" as its practitioners never addressed the issued, but tried to come up with any excuse, even an improbable excuse, to allow themselves to not have to address the real issues. I would still call myself a Christian, but there is no church I could where I could be authentic. I listen to the debates between Christian and skeptical scholars, hoping to hear something that would sway me one way or the other. I do not know how similar I am to you, but I am interested in hearing your ideas.
@charleskann886 lol "excuseogentics". That's amazing. Sounds like we are the same boat. I left evangelicalism for the same reason--ironically, my Christian upbringing gave me a desire for truth-seeking, and I couldn't stay in a place that I no longer believed had that. Your comment honestly resonates with me so much. I've struggled too, I love the tradition of Christianity and find the historical questions super interesting. But it's hard to find a community to belong with that fits this. And the all or nothing approach of Christian vs skeptic is completely unsatisfying.
If you're so inclined, I'd love to chat. I'm just starting the channel and trying to get a sense of what type of conversations people are curious about here. There's an email in the video description if you're willing. No pressure though. All the best. Thanks again for your comment
Similar journey for me. Raised Evangelical and fundamentalist, attended non-fundamentalist eastern seminary, faced with a crisis resulting in a deeper plunge into fundamentalism and eventually coming out many years later to a non-fundamentalist position, though still a believer in and follower of the Son of God. Thanks for your thoughts.
Your observations make a lot of sense.
I too was dragged kicking and screaming from my fundamentalism. Because of my personality, there was nothing left of Christianity for me after that. (Though I kept my life verse - "you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.")
@@be1tube that's a good one. I also had a lot more fun as a biblical scholar once I was able to follow the evidence wherever it led. I never understood people who want to devote their life to studying something in order to maintain their existing beliefs.
Here, here, well said. Honest, relatively concise for such an enormous subject. After more than 50 years of inquiry it is refreshing to hear such a brief but coherent response as this.
Subbed
@@anothergraypicker thanks!
Alright, dude, are you me? Everything you're saying is exactly what I've been going through, down to the "I didn't want to change, I left kicking and screaming" statement. I didn't start studying with the intention of leaving the faith. Quite the opposite, actually. I started studying to affirm and reinforce my faith. But when I reached the point where the foundation was cracked, there was nothing I could do. I could be dishonest with myself and say that nothing had changed, but that would be fundamentally wrong. Everything that I thought I knew had changed.
@MrBlakeD82 There are so many of us!! It's wild how many similar stories we can find
Your experience very much reminds me of the experience of Dr. Bart Ehrman, who has been teaching Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill since 1988. Bart was a dedicated fundamentalist Christian as a teen, and he attended Bible Moody Institute. From there he went to Princeton Theological Seminary where they taught the Bible academically (called biblical criticism), and they pointed out all the flaws in the Bible. Ehrman at first was quite upset, but slowly over time he changed his belief system. He has stated that it was a difficult process. Over time he has had over 30 books published, most of them detailing the many flaws in the Bible. One of his best-selling books is titled “Misquoting Jesus.” Ehrman has stated that he no longer considers himself a Christian. He eventually became an agnostic atheist.
That book was heavily criticized.
He is doing backtracking ever since
@@koppite9600 Well I hope he takes criticism and makes changes. That's the way it should be.
@@harrydecker8731
He's making it about technicalities, he is ducking.
What's an agnostic atheist?
@waynekasmar4401
One who wants to be believed that God doesn't exist. They don't like being asked for knowledge for their beliefs.
The thing that really clinched it for me was the story of the tower of babel. When I was a child I questioned why god said 'if they can do this, they can do anything'
@@danielsmith2447 sort of an interesting thing for an "omnipotent" God to be worried about, isn't it? especially since presumably he/they doesn't live in the clouds.
@cjohnyrun yes, interesting you say they, it does say 'let us go down and see what they are doing'
(tower of Babel) That's one of the many red flags in the bible.
Others:
talking animals
serpent telling the truth
NT seems to be written around the doctrine of salvation rather than being an historical account.
Feel free to add to this list, I will collect them all!
Your fifth one got me. I went through deconstruction while my children grew up. I didn’t lead them ever in a Sinner’s Prayer. At the same time my old denomination emphasized youth ministry and having summer camps to “lead kids to Christ.” That was extremely formative for me. Harmful? Yes. Formative? Also, yes. You’re making me ponder this concept.
Wow, I'd be curious to hear your reflections. There's obviously a lot to unpack here. But if you're doing your deconstruction in front of them, I bet they learn from that too. There's an incredible humanity in questioning
@@cjohnyrun: Long story short: Ex-Salvation Army Officer (yes, pastor), who was terminated for being bisexual and going through a divorce. I began my deconstruction after returning to the United States when I was a missionary to Germany for 10 years. Nothing worse than reverse culture shock.
@@verweiler1
Motive to leave faith noted😂
Similar to you, I gave up the dogma of inerrancy pretty quickly in my journey. I left evangelicalism and had shifted to Greek Orthodoxy but later left Christianity altogether. And it’s funny how much I have continued to study and examine the Bible after leaving the church. Count me in to follow along with your journey here on RUclips.
Thanks man! I appreciate your honesty and you are definitely welcome here
Thank you so much for these videos. These were some of the very things I grappled with in the fundamentalist/Pentecostal church I spent so many years in. Never could anyone dare question the authenticity or authority of the Bible.
It can be a difficult and lonely road. Thank you for taking the time to watch and comment.
From an atheist: well said. Good luck in your journey
my only "pushback" would be something along the lines that truth does not necessarily mean factual. Poetry often expresses truth or fiction can express truth, w/o being at all factual.
all too many of our issues w/ the text often come from using a western worldview, with lists, bullet points, and outlines. "Just the facts, Ma'am". (yes, dating myself). the eastern viewpoint tends to be more about relationship and story. the Who and Why rather than the How and What.
still only about 2 years into "de/reconstruction" and simply trust the Lord's character.
I do agree. My issue is more with how I was taught to ask this question-- not that there aren't other kinds of truth in the Bible. Well said
Very good points. I'm a lay preacher and adult Sunday School teacher in the Wesleyan tradition. I always tell people that I believe that the Bible contains absolute truths, but not necessarily absolute fact. Some of the truths: God's love of his people is steadfast. God wants his people to love their neighbors, care for the poor, love their enemies, turn the other cheek, thereby rejecting the cycle of vengeance, and more. When you study the entire Bible (as opposed to proof texting) these truths become evident.
I thank you for this video. I have long felt slightly guilty for calling myself a Christian and at the same time doubting the claim that the Bible is faultless.
As an Atheist who has recovered from a mild dose of Christianity. Good to see you thinking seriously about this, as long as you seek truth and be Intellectuality Honest. Then your deconstruction and journey to freeing your mind is well on the way. All the best and good luck.
There's no freedom outside of xtianity
No, it isn't.
😂😂😂
Right. Not even in the slightest. How can it be the truth when Judaism Hinduism Buddhism and many others significantly predate it? If anything Christianity pulled a lot of information from older various religions and compile them all to create their own version of "truth"
@@facereality0007nope ahistorical and the Bible contains the works of Judaism …
Tis.
I think there are many "mental gymnastics" to circumvent the Bible's "inerrancy". e.g. most evangelicals wear mixed fabrics and eat shellfish. They would have some creative interpretations for explaining why they don't need to follow those rules. It is impossible NOT to cherry-pick the Bible.
@brucetopping248 100% agree. There is no reading the bible without interpretation--even though people seem to be of the impression that "the Bible clearly says" things
"most evangelicals wear mixed fabrics and eat shellfish"
That, with the 'eating a kid in his mother's milk", I considered that as god's 'little princess whims' even as a Christian, and had many more harsh comments about god.
one question i always had is why did God only choose to reveal himself to the middle east? what about east asia or the americas. seems kind of unfair.
definitely. I find the answers to this question given by believers extremely unsatisfactory
I began to wonder at one point, are those peoples there because God wanted them to be? Is the Christian idea of condemnation outside of their one faith truly as 'hardcore' as some people claim it to be, or are they part of God's plan even outside of Christianity? Obviously that goes against a lot of church teachings... but still curious to wonder if the Big Man's focus on the Middle East was simply what we needed to progress as intended...
And the Mormons say Jesus came to America during his zombie 40 days. But zero evidence of it.
Never once occurred to you that God might reveal himself in different ways to different people in ways that are relevant to them in their own culture, did it?
@@byrondickensI don't understand your answer
Interestingly, and in line with this, the standard Christian creeds (Nicene or Apostles') make no claim about any inerrancy, authority, or preeminent theological role of the Bible. Many people seem to forget that.
There is a fundamental problem with this approach tho, and it leads to a weird situation where I as an atheist have much more respect for fundamentalists than those others seemingly more "rational" Christians.
So, the problem:
- bible is the only "evidence" (well, the evidence is not even good enough to put someone to prison for one hour, or to even consider any scientific position - but this is not the point now) that exists for the fundamental claims. Many of these claims (or most of these claims) are unfalsifiable (any claim that cannot be reliably independently proven or disproven, which is a bug not a feature).
So, if inside the very document that makes these unfalsifiable supernatural claims are also many FALSIFIABLE claims that are easily debunked (all the problems you are talking about, or all the inconsistencies or all the denial of basic biology or physics), than there is no reason to even consider those unfalsifiable claims to be truthful.
TLDR: By acknowledging the "problems" inside falsifiable claims in the bible, you are drastically lowering any chances of those unfalsifiable claims inside being truthful.
Basically take it or leave it, cherry-picking is just a form of dishonesty.
Very simplified example:
There is a source material claiming that there is a corpse of a unicorn orbiting the sun (a currently unfalsifiable claim), and the same source is also claiming that striped goats can be bred by making two goats watching striped twigs during the intercourse (a falsifiable claim that you may recognize) - then the unfalsifiable claim loses any weight if it had any to begin with.
@milansvancara I actually completely agree. And you're right, liberal or progressive Christianity can get pretty wishy washy when it's like "yeah, X and Y are myths, but Z is 100% true!!"
As a historian, I find a lot of problems with the founding moments of Christianity, including all its core claims. Most would consider me a heretic.
Here's one piece of food for thought. I might make a video on this in the future.
I do think that both fundamentalism and atheism have both accepted (often uncritically) a sort of modernist claim that religion needs to be a sort of scientific, rationalist set of truth propositions. It's worth exploring the idea of whether religion could have other value. I don't find any particularist religion convincing--any argument that "God belongs to us at the expense of THEM" seems ridiculous.
It's worth questioning whether Christianity could have value for other reasons. I still to go church, because for me this form of religion is a part of being human. My anscestors were all Christians. I choose to stay connected to the tradition because of my humanity, not because of theology. But I'm open to metaphysical truth as well, but reject the notion that any faiuth tradition owns it. Not sure if that helps, but I do think it's worth expanding the idea of belonging to a religion beyond the simplistic ways we talk about it
@@cjohnyrun "It's worth exploring the idea of whether religion could have other value."
That's called philosophy. Whether or not a philosophical position has merit has nothing to do with claims about the divinity of its source.
Your suggestion dilutes both religious faith and secular philosophy. It defers resolution. It's not any kind of solution to the dilemma. IMO.
@@cjohnyrun I see where you are coming from, thanks for further clarifications. I would be completely okay with completely separating religion and science if many of those religious claims didn't include scientific topics, and as a result being heavily politicized and having vast effect on anyone living in the particular democratic country.
Then we are somewhat forced to require same standards for these claims if they are interconnected and we need to have a conversation about them.
Which is also a reason why I moved from "live and let live I don't care" atheist into an anti-theist atheist.
Yes, religion can definitely have many positive values, but as long as scientific facts can be marked as immoral to dismiss them, we are on a territory far behind my red line.
Either way, you are very kind and thanks for the conversation
@@ZymonAaronn I don't find this completely convincing. Here's a counter argument, LMK what you think.
I love philosophy, and studied extensively--then did a degree in theology (and the two were basically the same discipline for at least 1,000 years). If you're talking about rationalist truth claims, then philosophy might do it as a replacement for the strictly theological parts of religion. But we don't yet have philosophical schools that meet our fundamental needs for belonging or community or ritual. Ironically, the ancient practice of philosophy was much more applied and integrated with what we'd call "religion".. They had shared meals and rituals, communal living arangements, and worshipped together in many cases (obv. not all). When I read the middle Platonists and Stocists, they look pretty similar to what eventually became Christian theology (My masters thesis was on Philo of Alexandria). And the famous "Catechetical school of Alexandria" was an adaptation of this Greek philosophical tradition with Christian trappings.
Modern philosophy seems to be more about ideas than practice, although there are a few exceptions. I love philosophy, but humans need spaces to belong too. We're more than just brains on meat sticks
@@cjohnyrunSo, why Christianity instead of religious humanism? My UUA congregation has shared meals, rituals, rites of passage, traditions, children's programs, and community service. What is missing for you?
you are REALLY striking while the irons hot, starting this channel with the Wes Huff thing happening right now!
look forward to more from you. And dont ever feel pressure either. At some point you might run out of trivia and experiences to share. from there, youll either have to do vine responses like Dan McClelan or current events punditry like Steve Shives. But its also totally okay to step back, take a break, come back later with different content or more of the same. dont burn out is all. much love and gobless
thanks so much!
Not all literally true, but I’d say there are some valuable moral truths in it. The challenge is figuring out what’s what and not being dogmatic about it.
I'm glad to find your channel. I am a gnostic (knowledge seeker) atheist. I think you have a healthy perspective. I look forward to hearing your perspectives as a fresh take on the subject.
Thanks so much! welcome aboard :)
@cjohnyrun great work. I am doing a speed run of your videos.
Fascinating. Not a biblical scholar here but not uninformed either - have read a fair amount on these topics over the decades - but in this video you introduced me to some new and very compelling ideas. Thanks!
@@DC41ST my pleasure
A great explanation. I did not grow up in church. I went a little as a child and a little in high school. I was saved as a 54 year old. I threw myself into church to catch up and learn. I read the entire bible in a little over a year. I did every class and study my church had I could get fit in. A side story I won't get into started my questioning. I began to feel manipulated and church was not feeling good anymore. I kept at it to hope the feeling would change because it had become so important to me. I finally had to admit and confront I don't believe the bible and can't figure out how to keep going to church and greeting there when I don't believe what the church is preaching. It has been very difficult and heartbreaking. But maybe there is a way if I step back.. 😢 I dont feel like I fit in there. I don't speak the same language as the fellow church members. I love them but I don't fit in. How can God be so good when the bible has horrible stories. And other books I've read talk about going through such physical health problems for years and finally get healed after they totally give the appropriate faith to God.... seems very cruel. I'm sorry. A little bit of rambling. Thank you for your videos.
Thanks so much for your reflections. Is there another place you can find yo belong? It sounds like it's important to you, but that community itself might just be toxic
@cjohnyrun I don't know yet where I might fit in better. But yes this one might be toxic. It'll take some time I guess to find. Thank you so much.
Glad I found your you tube channel, very educational from an expert.
I thought your resolution to the question perfect. I have made a similar theological journey though without the academic part. Tom Holland in Dominion makes the case that Western society and its worldview is deeply indebted to the Christian inheritance. Indeed, even the development of concepts of human rights with its Enlightenment ideals has some connection to Christian development. Holland currently places himself "in the shadowlands between belief and agnosticism." I feel much the same. I value the Bible, despite its flaws, as I value what is good in Christianity and reject that history which should be rejected. Neither are infallible. But, many of its followers, fallible people like Dorothy Day, William Wilberforce, Francis of Assisi, Mother Teresa, Desmond Tutu, Maria Skobtsova of Paris, Martin Luther King, Jr and others inspire me on my own journey.
I feel like I'm in a similar place. I find a richness in the tradition. I'll look up that Tom Holland thing, I've never seen it. I do also think we underestimate how much of "Christian" ideas are actually just things Christians adopted from Greek/hellenistic philosophy (ie. natural law, a prime mover, etc.)_
Thank you so much for this thoughtful comment
The world needs more ‘heretics.’ 😊 Well argued video. You gained another subscriber
Yes! Thank you! I appreciate it
"The 'Bible', DID Drop from the Sky in it's Complete and Inerrant Form ... I Was There and Saw ... It !!"
Amusing how much Mr. King uses biblical references.
Thank you for a great video. Very interesting and well laid out. I was raised fundamentalist lite (pre-complementarianism, pre-Hal Lindsey and his Late Great Planet Earth), but still with the dogma "God said it, I believe it, that settles it". While studying the OT, I saw references to the pillars under the earth, the windows of heaven, the firmament holding back the waters above, etc. Once I realized that we know for a fact that all of that is demonstrably false, I knew something else was at work. Then of course, there is Joshua asking God to make the sun stand still. That was the tipping point for me. After that, my beliefs changed to the Bible contains truths, but does not necessarily contain fact.
It's interesting to try to wrap your head around the sun standing still as a "Scientific fact." I'm not a scientist, but I suspect that would have some serious repercussions
I think this is a good representation of what the Bible is and is not. We need for Christianity to take a closer look at what they are telling people.
It is the Jewish explanation of creation, their god, and tales of how they interacted with Yahweh and surrounding groups.
This is the result of Sola Scriptura. You will face this doubt and ask this question if you believe the Bible is the sole and infallible authority.
Very vague question... no
Preach it!! 😂
You’re definitely right about revelation and the end of the ‘world’ - that’s why I’m a preterist 😊
Bravo. Getting to the core truths of Christianity doesn’t prohibit, but exacerbates for me. Anyway, the true teachings of Christ. Of altruism, love, kindness. Well, done, young man. 17:22
Are you aware that the Christian “Old” Testament is not the same thing as the Bible Jews use. The Bible Jews use ends with Chronicles II. The Christian “Old” Testament ends with Malachai. Catholics, Protestant and Jews include different books in each other and exclude different books.
Completely wrong. The Tanach just has the books in a different order.
True in a historical sense? Almost certainly not. True in a scientific sense? Not at all. True in that it reflects reality? Nope. True in that there are some inspirational or moral stories? Sure. True that it contains mythological stories that reflect deeper aspects about humanity? I think yes.
I agree. The Bible is mostly not true. Then what's the point of calling yourself a Christian and what does it even mean?
If Jesus wasn't literally who the Bible claims he was, then what's the point? Paul even said if Jesus didn't rise then Christians are most to be pitied.
When I realized the things you realized after 40 years of being a Christian, I became a skeptic and atheist. Why bother with "Cultural Christianity"?
I still enjoy Christmas, but never would I call myself a Christian.
Even though I knew everything you have said, I enjoyed greatly this video in my search for God and truth. As an exfundamentalist ex-crazy-baptist-street-preaching-"hell"-type, who does believe the scriptures, with caution that is... I would for example, weigh Paul's epistles above things like Revelation, or 2 Peter and Jude... By weigh I mean, I am more confident that my faith rests on Paul being true and are more likely to be true than Rev, 2 Peter, Jude...
I am not a "Christian", but a Unitarian Universalist as I believe my teacher Paul was, who I believe was taught of Christ Jesus.
Thank you for this video, please keep up the videos like this one.
Thanks so much for watching. Love your user name!
I respect the fact that your coming out and going against the grain. Its necessary and requires alot of courage to put it out to the public. We have all been indoctrinated with religion. Its everywhere. Usually starts as a youth. Proverbs 22:6 is so true, even outside of religion. Ive recently came out of Christianity completely. However i still believe in a Creator/s of all things. Cant guaranteed 1 or more. But this Earth and everything in it is a Creation. No doubt
So, i havent watched the full video yet personally, but i have listened to a bit, and I must address all 3 of your problems because i dont understand how you can say certain things while being a biblical scholar when you could easily find the answers to those questions...
First is your problem with what constitutes canon, you include the Epistle of Barnabus as one of your examples, but we know exactly why that one got thrown out, it's cause it's not written by the guy it's said to be written by.
The Johannine comma you bring up in your second point also doesnt change the meaning of the text at all, the full text in english reads: For there are three that beare record [in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.] [And there are three that beare witnesse in earth], the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood, and these three agree in one. If you take out the comma you get For there are three that beare record, the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood, and these three agree in one. Which... also confirms the trinity... so, the meaning is not changed.
Finally, You use the example of Judas which has been addressed and definitely could be reasonably interpreted as not a contradiction at all. There are reasonable explanations to the contradictions you specifically chose to use, you explain the part where it could be that he was hanged then the corpse fell but then say the field being bought was another contradiction, which it isnt. If something is bought for you using your money, one might say you bought it. If Elon Musk tells his secretary to buy food for the party and pay for it using this money for example, the person who bought the food literally was the secretary but you would not be wrong in saying the buyer was Elon. In much the same way if Judas rejected the money and a field was bought for him, it could be said that Judas bought the field.
Perhaps you struggle with other passages, to be honest you probably know more about the bible than I do, i understand that at times there are things that dont seem to make sense. But if youre trying to present an argument you cannot present weak evidence to back up your 3 main points. Because every single point has at least 1 example you use that is not just refutable but easily refutable, you do no service to your conclusion.
And to be clear, Im not here to attack you, i just have problems with the specific examples you mentioned. But I do think you miss much of the forest for the trees. And do be careful, because Christianity is not the living traditions and it is not the culture of christians, it is the understanding and relationship that Jesus is God and that none come to the father except through him. If your relationship with Jesus is secure, you are a Christian regardless of how much we agree or disagree on the inerrancy of the scriptures.
TBH this is exactly the problem. Anyone steeped in apologetics will say "there are reasonable explanations for everything." Because we were trained to believe this. But there are avalanches of contradictions, historical problems, canon was a process, etc etc etc. It's the whole belief system that stinks, and this is exactly what's wrong with evangelical Christianity.
I don't actually care if the Bible is infallible (it's obviously not). But it's a belief used by many many terrible people to hold power over others. And when it's so blatantly wrong, it needs to be undermined
@cjohnyrun that makes no sense. The problem is that there are answers to the questions you posed? The problem is that you can agree on the large fundamentals but disagree on the small minute details? The problem is that there have been historical errors that have been rectified and fixed and likely will be more in the future? I'm not sure what your point is here, I'm just pointing out you have very weak evidence for your claim. Even if I grant you the premise of "avalanches of contradictions" if they're as easily explainable as the examples you provided in the video, then they're avalanches of nothing.
And what, are you expecting people to take claims without looking into the facts themselves? That's the complete opposite of the theory you posit that biblical worldviews lead to ignorance. Or are you saying that we shouldn't listen to apologetics who give reasonable inference? That also feels like you'd be far more ignorant if you did that. Shouldn't Christians be able to defend their faith as much as athiests or other antagonists are allowed to attack them? Are people not supposed to defend their beliefs? Sounds shady to me.
Also, you can use just about any belief to justify almost any action, terrible people do terrible things regardless of belief system. Yes, the bible has been used to justify many historical issues but so has every other belief system in history. What's the plan, eliminate all religion? Terminate all governments? What will you be left with? No, the merits of the bible should be carefully considered as well as it's detriments, that's far more reasonable from a pragmatic standpoint, not a Christian one. And even from an Athiest standpoint, you'd be a fool to have some righteous need to undermine the bible in light of the many cultural benefits the religion provides, even Richard Dawkins agrees with that.
Look, I dont mean to come here as your enemy, but you're abandoning logic and reason to fight ghosts. Up to you if you listen to my advice or not, but take a step back and consider your core values and beliefs, what things you feel are most important to you. Then, think of the core values and beliefs of Christianity and that are taught in scripture and compare the two. Think of where you differ and the reasons for it and think whether that's truly right of you, whether it's how God would want you to center yourself. And pray on it. It's possible, in my opinion, you've strayed. Strayed far enough that while in your head you call yourself a Christian, in your heart, you've already rejected Christ, there are many who do so, even I have in the past. And I obviously don't have all the answers, but God does, and it's up to you whether or not you put your faith and trust in him.
@@unnamedminus I don't think we'll find common ground here. I appreciate you taking the time to engage so kindly and respectfully--a rarity on RUclips. All the best
@cjohnyrun that's understandable, thank you for taking the time to consider my words. In all honesty, I feel like I was a bit too harsh in terms of wording and tone but truly I hope the best for you and pray you'll find the answers you seek. All the best.
@@unnamedminus I appreciate your comments. I had similar thoughts as well.
Like much fundamentalism, it's based on fear. The fear being "If there's even the slightest error or contradiction in the Bible, EVERYTHING in it is not just questionable but possibly wrong...including the Resurrection." And naturally, if the Resurrection becomes dubious, the entire faith falls apart. So suddenly to keep the Resurrection "alive", you have to start believing in world-wide floods and the genocides performed by the Israelites was actually ordered by God and (pushed to the extreme) that the Universe, not just the Earth, is only 10,000 years old. The rise of atheist and agnosticism and "deconstruction" is ...ironically...more a product of that kind of Christianity than science.
Hey, a technical stylistic recommendation: ask people to subscribe to you slightly earlier. That gives them more time to fiddle around with their phone and get to the subscribe button if they're going to do it
Every time you say "drink deep," I hear Jeff Goldblum saying that in David Cronenberg's _The Fly_ (1986). It's a bit unsettling.
a bit before my time, but thanks for the note
😂
Are the accounts of angels and demons in the Bible true? Are there angels and demons? How about heaven and hell, are those places real? How should I understand John? Are these verses "true"? 2 My Father’s house has many rooms; if that were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you? 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am.
I'm curious, do you think that the resurrection of Jesus occurred as a Christian?
Just came across your channel.
You mentioned in this video, or the first one that I watched, that you are now part of a church that is more progressive.
I wouldn't describe myself that way. But I'll admit that my beliefs have changed a lot over the decades. Not a deconstruction, but more of a reconstruction.
I'm not sure I would define myself anymore as an Evangelical Christian, but I do still hold loosely to many of those beliefs, and a few pretty firmly.
However, the idea of inerrant Scriptures never made much sense to me. I felt that if God can accomplish his goals through an imperfect church, why can't he do it through imperfect Scriptures?
Also, why emphasize inerrancy in the original autographs when we no longer have them? What good does that do us now?
And, it seemed that those who were the strongest proponents of the position focused so intensely on it that the gospel was lost in the process.
A while back, I came across a definition of infallibility by Kevin Vanhoozer, and it rang true with me.
I'm paraphrasing, but he said something like this: Infallibility says that whatever God is up to in Scripture, it will accomplish the purpose for which he intended it.
I'm good with that.
However one wants to define the Bible, I find it to be a purifying fire that God is using to burn away the dross in my life and form me into the image of God in which I was created.
The Bible was indeed written by man however according to Simon Greenleaf someone that knows a thing or two about evidence, those contradictions actually give credibility to story
The question on the surface is ambiguous. The question is who's interpretation is true?
No human is capable of a completely objective,
completely accurate,
completely comprehensive interpretation of literally everything in any version of a "Bible".
So then a qualifier like "is true" just simply isn't a useful phrase for this context.
However,
the people in our world who are the most qualified to get 'as close as we can' to accurately approximating the myriad of intended ideas present in the varied source texts, ...
are secular Bible scholars who have tenured status at secular Ivy League Universities
The greater the consensus those scholars can reach on any issue,
the more justified the rest of us are ... in accepting their interpretations as 'probably essentially correct'.
Granted, they can make mistakes. But that fact is very damning of the religious claim that an all-knowing, all-wise, all-powerful Super-Entity wants us all to know, understand, harmonize, and have justified confidence about whatever it's supposed to say and mean.
Praying about it doesn't work.
"Faith" that a "God" will impart correct understandings ... doesn't work either.
We're on our own; no matter who or who caused our universe to exist.
Now, what am i going to do?😢 I'm so confused! I thought the Holy Spirit will show the truth to all humans and make his message to humanity so clear, that only I would have to believe, but, what should I believe?😢and I'm scared of going to Hell for not believing the right thing😢😢. I have to work all day and I have very little spare time to investigate this topics, and they are soo complex😢
I'm just an internet guy. I'd suggest you find a local faith community and engage there--it's a journey that shouldn't be taken alone.
Can we say that experts only realized recently that the doctrine of salvation in Jesus required the inerrancy of scriptures?
If the bible is not inerrant, there is no compelling reason to believe in it, so I left the faith.
Now, I just consider the bible as a man made book trying to explain everything with the limited knowledge of that time.
We simply evolved from ancestral apes and now we can send probes to other planets and explore space.
Did jesus say he was coming back in the lifetimes of some before him, did he come back, nope 🤷
Hey if christianity doesn't work for you don't follow it. I want spiritual stuff that works.
I do not believe in Christ even if he appears now on the clouds on the wings of his angels. I would still not believe in Christ BUT I would know that Christ exists. But would you believe it? NO! I believe exactly the opposite of what Christians preach. So Christ's appearance in heaven would not change my NON-belief in him. People do not understand that some things cannot be trusted but must be known. The fact that you believe in God means nothing. Where is the proof that God believes in you? God and Christ don't care about anyone. To whom did Christ appear? Mayans and Aztecs and Japanese and Koreans and Bushmen..? Not just a handful of his apostles. So you came for your apostles and no one else. 12 apostles for the 12 tribes of Israel, of which only 3 remain today, and that's what the Jewish rabbi said, I didn't make it up. God is "good?" God is EVIL and I believe that, and Christ only justifies his evil which he calls good. And even when someone LIES that God loved the world, I get sick...NO ONE HAS EVER PROVED THAT GOD IS LOVE! God loves only his own interests and no one else, that's what I BELIEVE!
Very good video. I went through a similar discovery at Seminary as well. I presumed the Bible figuratively fell out of heaven. I have a much more nuanced position today. While I believe it is reliable, I think there could be human errors we would expect from a crime scene interview of a crime by witnesses. I do believe it reliably conveys what the witnesses, and the early believers actually believed and reported.
I noticed in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 - English Standard Version (ESV) 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. - I notice that it does not say it is historical (as well it does not define what is scripture). Since Jesus taught in parables, it is just as likely some of the OT is also intended to be morality stories.
Do you believe in the Life, Death and Resurrection of Jesus, or do you question that? Do you understand your need for a savior? That is what makes or breaks Christianity.
I had an interesting interaction with a fundamental inerrantist nearly 40 years ago. Judge Paul Pressler was my Sunday School teacher (Big wig in the Southern Baptist church and tied to Paige Patterson) when I was about 24. He invited me over to his home once and I invited my roommate to join us. I got over there thinking he wanted to recruit me for some church work or position, but it seemed the meeting didn't have any purpose. He did want us all to get in his hot tub. I explained I did not have a swimsuit and he said that was not necessary. I was uncomfortable without being suspicious of any intent. However, I found out a year ago that he would try to get young men into his hot tub and expect certain favors. I always wondered what he wanted. It took nearly 40 years to find out.
I think people chose the inerrancy position because they can't deal with uncertainty. Since they can't deal with doubt, they double down on a position. I have come closer in my faith, that I don't need certainty. I know there will be questions I will never know.
A similar situation comes from atheists who believe in naturalism as the origin of life. When you talk to them about abiogenesis, they become very uncomfortable.
Sounds like we landed in different places. I think your current beliefs sound a bit more like conventional "evangelical" ones (I know that word is a bit problematic, so forgive me using it). I personally don't see these as different witnesses, I'd be more inclined to see them as something like the myths of different communities (not that there isn't historical truth behind them. but I don't consider the gospels to be eyewintess accounts). Many churches have adopted language that says something like "The scriptures are inerrant in their original autographs" . this accounts for possible copying and transmission errors.
And that hot tub story 😬
I think you can see the same threads in all religions. The prevailing, popular, apologetic interpretation is that "God wrote a book". This can be the Bible, the Quran, the book of Mormon etc. All followers can see the problems with the book that is not of their tradition, but not with their own. In fact the opening gambit of the Quran is that the Bible is not true.
But this view often clouds the view of the moral guidance that can be drawn from these texts. Admittedly, that would almost always be a selective reading of the text (i.e., feeding the poor vs. killing the infidels). That is probably why all religions have a multitude of traditions.
Even within evangelical Christianity you have the MAGA tradition and the red letter Christian tradition, which from the outside look like two different, almost incompatible religions. Historically, e.g., you had the "German Christians" and the "Confessing Church" in Nazi Germany. Again, an incompatible split which went through all Christian confessions.
your problem is that you studied too much. just listen to your pastor dawg! everyone knows, the more you study the less you know. hehe
😹
1:17 "The inerrant Word of God, as a concept, was invented in the 20th century." A person may not believe Christians, but Christians have been teaching that the Scriptures are the Word of God and perfect since the Apostles. One example from Irenaeus (130 - 202 AD), a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the Apostle John : "The Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of God and His Spirit." Against Heresies, book 2, chapter 28, section 2. There are hundreds of quotes from Christians from the time of Jesus, in every century, up to the present day with the same teaching. Again, atheists and others may not believe it, but stop lying about Biblical inerrancy beginning in the 20th century.
@veritas399 yes, EArly Christians loved the Bible and Christian writings. and yes, they talked about "scripture".... But nobody pre 4th century (and probably before the 15th C) is talking about what you talk about when you say "the scriptures".... nobody. Not one person. Nada. Nilch. If you want to believe a 20th C doctrine, go ahead... but don't pretend it's what Christians have always believed--because that is a lie.
You really don't have a clue. "Word of God" is not splotches of ink on a piece of paper but a theological concept.
@cjohnyrun "Nobody pre-4th century is talking about scripture as we have scripture today." Again, Irenaeus wrote in against Heresies, about 180 AD, that there were 4 gospels, no more, and no less. The Muratorian Fragment from the 2nd century lists the 4 gospels, 13 Pauline Epistles, Acts, 2 Epistles of John, and the Revelation of John. What evidence leads you to think there were not 4 gospels recognized as genuine before the 4th century? Most of the New Testament is listed in the Muratorian Fragment. . . .
I’m interested in hearing your thoughts on abortion. A video would be great but a reply in the comments is fine too.
You know, TBH I don't have strongly formed thoughts. I have my own opinion, but it's not deeply rooted in either historical analysis of the bible or theology or Christian history. It's just my opinion 🤷♀ Sorry that's not really helpful.
I believe what is true about abortion and so do you. We use DNA evidence to put people to death which I don’t disagree with but we don’t use DNA evidence to prove and then safe innocent lives by abolishing abortions. I struggle to believe in the miracles of the Bible but I hope that my heart hasn’t hardened to the point of no return. Christs are almost the only opposition to abortion so even though I struggle. I believe the Bible is true because abolishing abortion would be a miracle and from what I see it only happens through Christ playing out right before our eyes. Good luck with your channel I’ll check in to see what happens from time to time.
So they call you a heretic! That's lazy thinking and just ignorance. Since most of the Bible can't be proven as fact this means belief requires Faith. On that subject what is your Faith today? Do you believe in G-D and his chosen Messiah? Do you believe in salvation through Faith or as I do, Jesus taught Faith requires some level of obedience?
The Message of the Entire Book still remains the same: Love G-D and Love your Neighbor. If you still believe in those things then I consider you a Christian in the truest sense of the Word.
What does the Bible say about being gay?
It claims that god says it's a "no-no!" But it does endorse slayvery.
From my perspective, it doesn't matter. Because morality isn't as simple as figuring out "what the bible says." But for what it's worth, I don't think the Bible says anything clearly about it, and certianly nothing that fits within our modern undersating of sexual orientation and loving same-sex relationships. Dale Martin has a good article unpacking the words that get used for this.
Why does it matter? Christian’s pick and choose what they want out of the Bible… it’s disgusting!
Nothing. It couldn't. "Sexual orientation" wasn't even a concept.
@@cjohnyrun
"nothing that fits within our modern understanding of sexual orientation"
While it's not called as such in the bible, these verses could be considered:
"... If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, ..." Lev, 20:13
"In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another." Rom 1:27
For the laymen like me, it looks like gay relations, right?
I want you do do your early subscribers a huge favor. Your information is fascinating. But I beg you…..so down. You speak so rapidly it’s a little hard to keep up. Just take some deep breaths.
I have a feeling I’ll learn a great deal for your videos, and look forward to seeing many more in the future.
@WilliamJohnson-wq4ii Good tip! Thanks. I'll work on it
Thank you for creating such a honest and thought-provoking video. Your journey from evangelicalism/fundamentalism to seeing the Bible as a record of Revelation, rather than Revelation itself, is both deeply inspiring and a testament to the power of intelligence and critical thinking guided by faith.
As an LGBT person, I was especially moved by your ability to approach the Bible with clarity and context, one that seeks truth beyond the ways the Bible has often been weaponized. For many of LGBTs, the weaponization of Scripture can lead to profound trauma. It’s a heartbreaking reality that some of us don’t survive, succumbing to suicide after enduring spiritual abuse, while others live with deep emotional scars that hinder our ability to develop meaningful, loving, intimate relationships. Those traumas that prevent us from being available for love and intimacy are then used against us to prove we’re evil, wrong or defective. We lose our families at a young age, often rejected, abandoned and turn to alcohol, drugs and a false sense of intimacy (sex) to soothe ourselves from all the pain. I was just speaking with a lesbian friend this morning who parents told her she was demon possessed and even went as far to try to hold a exorcism to expell the demon. I knew a guy who rode my bus who parents wouldn't let him eat off the same dishes as him. For those of us who want to hold onto God despite this, it takes immense courage and effort to study and understand the Bible in the way you have. Without this work, we’re often left feeling as though we must live life without God and turn to atheism in order to be ok with ourselves and not exhist in cognative dissonance. But as you know, it takes either IQ or a tenacious spirit to study the Bible and not everyone can do it. I think this is the cruelest thing of all, forcing people to live without God, which is perhaps one of the most painful burdens anyone could bear. Imagine going through all the challenges of life without knowing your best friend? I have many friends who cringe if I just say the word God. They associate God with the abuse and would rather live alone than open that festering wound.
Do you think this weaponization of the Bible, the use of God to harm others, is a form of evil itself? It sometimes feels as though Christianity has been hijacked by evil forces that prioritize control and condemnation over love and grace, allowing the very faith meant to heal to instead cause suffering and death by scripture. Your video gives me hope that there are voices like yours offering a way to reclaim Scripture for its true purpose: to guide, uplift, and reveal God’s love for all of us. As a survivor of Christian spiritual gaslighting and abuse, I can honestly say I think using God against a human is one of the worst things one can do to another human…. And to invoke God’s name and use scripture to justify one’s cruelty…. It’s not only painful but kills. It’s a slow soul-death where we LGBTs believe the lies, “Maybe there is something wrong with me?” “Maybe I am not good enough for God?” “Maybe I’m wrong?” And those questions drive human souls to suicide. Call me dramatic, but weaponizing the Bible is murderous and many LGBT suicides still happen many times every day. Just because a 16 year old killed a family in a car accident because she looked down at a text, doesn’t mean that the family isn’t dead. Sure, it’s manslaughter… And they may be ignorant, but ignorance has consequences, in this case it’s deadly. Thank you again for sharing your journey, it is truly a blessing. May the Holy Spirit guide you to more knowledge and into a deeper, more loving, and more intimate relationship with God. I still think it’s beautiful our Jesus and his hand selected disciples who studied under him, walked with him and were mentored by him never said anything to hurt us. I didn’t mean to make this all about LGBTs, it’s just the journey you’re on is one we’re forced to take if we want to be followers of the Way. It’s liberating when the Holy Spirit reveals the truth, but it’s also sad when you realize that they’re practicing idolatry. They don’t know God, nor follow him. They worship the Bible.
@alivealex9914 Wow, thank you so much for this powerful and raw comment. This hit me: - "I think this is the cruelest thing of all, forcing people to live without God." You're 100% right." And not only God, but also without being able to belong to a community--which every human needs and deserves. And then love, which every human deserves. I remember looking at my wife one day as I was deconstructing and realizing that any tradition that denies people the right to find a soulmate (if they want one) is disgusting. To love and be loved by another human is one of the most basic and essential human needs. I can't imagine going through life without that because someone else told me God didn't allow it for me.
I hate the weaponization of the Bible... especially since, as the video alludes to, it's not justified. LGBTQ+ ppl have faced an enormous amount of this--as as you say, bear the scars both psyologically and literally. For a tradition that claims "by their fruit you shall know them..." if the "fruit" is dead and broken kids, the whole thing is rotten.
To respond to your question, I think the Bible and its interpretation in fundamentlist environments is almost always an exercise of power and control. Ironically, one of the reasons I lasted so long was because as a straight, white guy, it was too easy to belong. I studied for years and was the golden boy--in line for ministry, and it was the problems with the truth claims itself that took me out. My sisters' story was very different--they were forced to reckon with a tradition that told them they didn't matter as much as I did. My gay friends had to leave, because they were told they didn't belong at all. But they witnessed to me, because if they could go through that and still have faith, I can leave the door open a bit.
Thank you again for the comment. I love and appreciate the blessing too. I live most of my days as an agnostic, but I do believe that the tradition at its core holds a lot of richness and I'm open to the possibility of "the spirit." I'm sure you know this, but I'll say it just in case, there are some wonderful churches out there that accept LGBTQ+ ppl without trying to change anything.
All the best
the sermon of the mount, and the stories of Jesus miracles are true, the virgin birth is true, anything from acts to revelation is just Paul's doctrine . it is not the first time in history that people take a prominent figure in a faith and give them divinity
@@midwestairway interesting synthesis. There are a few places in early Christian literature where people got mad that Paul stole everything. I'll do a video on at some point
Would like to see that video
Interesting. Marcion and Thomas Jefferson come to mind.
Curious, what is your criteria for affirming the truthfulness of the Gospels, but nothing else in the New Testament?
There are two appearances, within the same generation, at the end of the ages, the time of the harvest - the sacrifice followed by the resurrection. Being born in a barn has to do with the resurrection. His sacrifice is a broken spirit. He is accustomed to infirmity. He becomes spiritually destitute.
the one who is and who was and who is to come, the almighty (Rev 1:8 NABO)
The beast that you saw existed once but now exists no longer. It will come up from the Abyss and is headed for destruction. (Rev 17:8 NABO)
Do not say… 'Who will go down into the Abyss (nether world)?' (…to bring Christ up from the dead) (Rom 10:7 NABO)
Santa Claus is coming to town but, shouldn't it be on Thanksgiving while we remember Krampus with a meal on Christmas? No one comes to the Father except through me. I came into this world for judgment.
The Bible was written by a Shakespeare to confound even a Sherlock Holmes. So, you don't believe in a talking donkey?
After watching a series of this guy's videos, I believe we are witnessing the rise of the antithesis to Wess Huff... Sprinkled with the image of a younger Michael Keaton, I might add. lol 🤭 so really, we're just witnessing the rise of the Bible Batman.
This should be interesting.
😂😂😂
The bible is what it is a book of institutions. And witnessed statments You 😢dont need the bible to believe in christ you just have to believe.
It can't be true completely because it's a conglomeration. Most of it probably is not true
Well, Protestantism is a heresy to begin with. The Catholic Church has always believed in the inerrancy of Scripture. Here are clear scriptural proofs of the inerrancy of Scripture:
1. John 10:35:
“Scripture cannot be broken.”
Jesus Himself affirms the absolute authority and inerrancy of Scripture, emphasizing its divine origin and unchanging truth.
2. 2 Timothy 3:16-17:
“All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.”
This verse explicitly states that Scripture is “God-breathed,” confirming its divine authorship and reliability.
3. Matthew 5:18:
“For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.”
Jesus highlights the enduring and inerrant nature of even the smallest details of Scripture.
4. Psalm 12:6:
“The words of the Lord are pure words, like silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times.”
This verse compares the purity and perfection of God’s words to the most refined metal, underscoring their inerrancy.
5. Proverbs 30:5-6:
“Every word of God proves true; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you and you be found a liar.”
God’s words are entirely true and trustworthy, and no additions or alterations are permitted.
6. Isaiah 55:11:
“So shall My word be that goes out from My mouth; it shall not return to Me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.”
God’s word is infallible, always achieving His divine purpose without error.
These verses collectively demonstrate that Scripture, as the Word of God, is entirely inerrant and trustworthy.
Agree.
Myth is important.
Would you be willing to share the schools where you studied?
Just found your channel. Subscribed immediately
I added a video with my background. Thanks so much!
@cjohnyrun I watched it! Thanks so much. Looking forward to catching up on your content
@@allencampbell8308 awesome! Thanks so much
Hi C.J. I want to take a minute to encourage you. You're definitely not alone. Just last Sunday after church, I spoke with our pastor about why I believed that the Bible is not the inherent word of God. I am writing a book about this, but the key revelation for me, which is the driver for writing my book, is that Jesus did not believe in the inherency of Scripture either, and he was killed for it, by the fundamentalists of his day! Each miracle proves it, and when Jesus said Moses made concessions, Jesus was essentially saying that Moses added his own words to prophesy, placing God's name on Moses's own thoughts, words, and intent. The response was, "we know Moses, but who are you? ". Who are you to say that the OT isn't God breathed, inherent, and 100% accurate. So, we are in good company. Christians need the truth now, more than ever. Many thanks for the sincerity of your biblical studies and for sharing them on this channel. God Bless
For me the Bible of today is made up of three cultures which are the Hebrew, Greek and Latin or Roman. If the first fundamental lesson of the Grammatical Languages of each of these cultures was taught and understood any one could see the false hood of the Latin Roman fundamental Church Christianity and its insanity. Example: in the Hebrew Language all nouns are either Feminine or Masculine and by using the word SPIRIT in each of the 3 Languages you can gain Spiritual wisdom and understanding. Hebrew word Spirit = Ruach which is a Feminine noun, Greek word Spirit = pneuma is a neuter word which can mean both feminine or masculine, and the Latin word Spirit = Spiritus which in Roman Latin a Masculine pro noun only. To realize their are two Christianities which consists of the False one being a outward physical Exoteric way: the broad and wide way of Roman Church Doctrines and the other the true Strait and narrow way few walk in which is living in the Hebrew, Greek Christ Conscious anointing of both the Feminine and Masculine Spirits United and Balanced as One LORD, One Faith and One Spirit Baptism in Christ Consciousness. In the Bibles 2nd John it say's in the New Covenant their is only ONE Spirit Doctrine which is the Doctrine of Christ and very few know what the origin and meaning of the word or title Christ is. Most Evangelical fundamental believers think and are taught Christ is the last name of Jesus and because they believe every thing they are told they are deceived like Eve and believe Lies. One more thing about the two Hebrew words Grace = chem which is a Masculine word and Faith = emunah a Feminine word and the revelation of understanding that it takes both Male and Female united as one in perfect balance for the Life Force Divine Energy to produce Spiritual Life in any and Every Human Being. It is the Life Christ Anointing Energy of Divine Consciousness that Makes Humans Human and nothing else. Think you for allowing me to comment..
The problem with you like guys who have PhD or any other degrees in the biblical study is that those PhD or eloquent degrees aren't beneficial when it comes to biblical doctrines, the necessary thing is that not the degrees but the Holy Spirit, so receiving the Holy Spirit from God and receiving these sort of degrees are mutually exclusive.
So, here is the fact that the Gospels are eye witness accounts, and it can be explained in words and also can be physically demonstrated and it's impossible if anyone has a PhD or other degrees. Now, who is the eye witness?
Early Apostles were with JESUS over a period of 3 years, seeing and hearing what JESUS was speaking,doing etc , so technically they're eye witnesses but according to JESUS, they're not witnesses or eye witnesses. Now Jesus said you must be witnesses to Me just before His ascension, and after 10 days only all of them became witnesses. Now, what do you learn from these things?
One can only become a witness of JESUS only through the reception of the Holy Spirit into the body by the removal of his parents Spirit from his physical body. Thus, one can become a witness of JESUS at any time even in the 21st century as per this criterion. So, early Apostles were eye witnesses of everything that's there in the Holy Bible. Now in the 21st century one can receive the Holy Spirit and eventually become an eye witness of JESUS & able to physically demonstrate by claiming to exist before 2k years, and also challenging his physical body is the temple of God, and prove to the world objectively. However, this is only possible with two people as of now they're living in South India having their ancestry root from Jerusalem.
So, your studies on the Holy Bible and your degrees never ever give you any facts, and that you are wrong dude.
Yes irtis
No, not true. Obvious.
Your premise is flawed so your entire argument is false. The Bible repeatedly teaches scripture is the standard. Why do you feel the need to lie? Because you want to make man's word the standard. More specifically, you want to make your word the standard.
What a brilliant double standard. Do you not realize you are making your word the “standard” by proclaiming it? Fundamentalism is forever the enemy of our future.
Well it's a pretty bad standard if it's the standard. Full of inconsistencies, contradictions, absurdity 😂
@@GregAnderson-r3k Thank you for participating even if you didn't put any effort into your response. We know you did your best and that is what counts.
@@cba4389 you're just mad because you know I'm right and you can't hold onto sky daddy and your delusional fantasy world.
the bible was written by men after the fact. so man's word is the standard. problem solved. your welcome.