"Nobody who sins has ever known God." Ok, so the Bible tells us that Moses sinned, David sinned, Paul sinned, Peter sinned, John sinned, and even Jesus did some stuff that would be called sin if anyone else did them. Seems like at least most of the Bible, then, was written by and/or about guys who never knew God, eh?
I was a Christian, church had a youth Bible study class. After that I left the church, years later I had re read the Bible a few times taking notes and seeking further information, and eventually I realized that I was no longer a Christian.
If the holy spirit sees an atheist reading the bible, it should be happy to convert the atheist by showing us the true way to read the book to make us believers.
The Baptist church that I once belonged to made it clear that we should not read the Bible without the guidance of the approved doctrinal study guides. These guides took full advantage of the chapter & verse structure of the texts to avoid the numerous biblical contradictions and weave together narratives that didn't exist in a plain reading of the texts. Case in point: The much lauded prophecies in the Old Testament that were supposedly fulfilled by Jesus. The study guide would isolate the prophesy and then provide the specific verse that fulfilled it. Often they would provide the specific verses in the study guide so you didn't have to strain yourself by actually opening your bible. Of course when I did actually open the bible and look at the prophecies in their full context I realized that it was all a scam. Coincidentally this was around the same time that the original "Footloose" was in theaters and the scene where Rev Moore (John Lithgow) was practicing his sermon and his daughter says "It's show business, isn't it?" really hit home with me. It's all about keeping butts in the pews and dollars in the offering plate.
Barr Ehrman said that he has his students go to the 4 gospels and hsjy write what they say about Easter Sunday. Who goes the tomb? How many were there? Who was there when they got there? Was the stone rolled away or not? And he has them do a side-by-side comparison. Fun exercise!
@@keepthechange2811 I didn’t know the contradictions had names. But two that I can share are what happened to the 30 pieces of silver? Did Judas use them to purchase a field as in Acts? Or did he give it back to the temple priests as in Mathew? Did god create man first or the animals first? Genesis 1 man is created after the animals and Genesis 2 man is created before the animals. Two of the contradictory stories I ask people about then watch the dishonest mental gymnastics and head cannon…
@lubrew5862 Pharisees bought a field with the silver. In Genesis Man is created after the animals on the 6th day. It never says otherwise. There's no contradictions there.
I agree that it's circular reasoning, specifically in order for him to avoid the questions raised as to why people can read his version of the Bible and still not believe it.
Unlike many atheists, I didn’t start off as a Christian. However, I have noted the psychological impact of Christianity. Believing in something for which there is no evidence is likely to result in poor decision-making. Sin, for example, is a concept that is entirely dependent upon religious claims being true. As there is no evidence for divine law, the concept of sin is meaningless to me. Reading the bible will not change the fact that there is no evidence for divine law. I remember being confused by the concept of original sin, when I was in my mid 20s. This is because I had never been indoctrinated.
How do you know? You refuse to read the bible. And the reason why many "Christians" become atheists is because they don't read it either. There's no religion supported in the bibles at all. But how can you know what you're talking about??? You can read it
@@gowdsake7103 It appears to turn their world upside-down. As I was never pressured into accepting claims that couldn't be demonstrated to be true, there was no reason for me take the bible at face value.
Okay, the glasses joke was a good start lol! I do appreciate your academic approach since you ARE an academic (and not just using that as a mask to jack your importance up), and you are doing a good job breaking down the point in this one to go from academic points to layman explanation. Your ability to navigate this bizarre field of doublespeak is still very impressive! As for all this, when you break it down to his major points it's just contradictory gibberish. You parsed away all the camo and revealed the mess he tried to sneak through inside.
@natp8387 thank you so much for the compliments! I am trying to learn how to accept them, so I will leave that as that. And thank YOU for enjoying the glasses bit. I wasn't sure how it would play, as it is just a bit silly.
It's true that I read the bible differently as a Xtian than an atheist. The first time I read the bible on my own, cover to cover, I was 17 and still a Xtian and taking the bible literally as I'd been raised to do. I can't say that alone made me an atheist, but it certainly started me down that road. Some 20 years later I read the bible cover to cover again, this time as someone who'd been an atheist for years. This time I read it as largely metaphorical, and it actually made a lot more sense to me. Didn't affect my atheism because it provided no evidence for the supernatural, which is my biggest stumbling block with religion, but I felt I was getting the point trying to be made better. Oh, and as to dinosaur bones, my mother told me it was god who salted the ground with those bones, to test the faith of believers.
the bible also makes more sense when you realize that it was written by different cultures and religions and traditions and the god they worship changed constantly.
“The content you know and love/tolerate.” 😂😂😂 Been so scattered I can’t recall if I’ve been doing my algorithmic duty by commenting, so I am commenting at the beginning and maybe again later…
It’s funny because believers use whats written in the bible as a weapon all the time but can’t handle it when they are called out by whats written in the Bible. Lets not forget 2timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness
The fun thing about reading the Bible is that Christianity becomes impossible when you do. • None of the actual messianic prophecies are fulfilled and you find out Matthew made up the rest by just randomly quoting. • God spends the entirely of the OT building his covenant with Jews, only for Paul to piss all over that concept. • God is eternal, God is ONE, God is timeless, God cannot be seen or known, God is unchanging and keeps his promises turns into God can beget himself and is in pieces and incarnated specifically to be seen and know and has totally changed his mind about humanity and salvation. • God accepts sacrifice was turning into ‘God actually wants genuine repentance because why would an eternal being need blood’ did a 180 back to ‘God needs blood so much he literally had to incarnate and create a limitless supply to quench it. • God wants righteousness turned into God wants you to quote a creed and is now God wants you to be a fascist. If you read the Bible, even just the Jesus bits, none of it matches with Christianity as it’s practiced. But if you read the Old Testament, you see that Christianity really shouldn’t be a thing.
it doesn't match christianity that is partially practiced. the catholic church doesn't take all that literally and still are Christians. many other Christians, especially the protestants in germany and probably rest of europe don't take any of the bible litterally and are still christians. I met and know many who don't even believe jesus resurrected or might even not have been one person, but they believe in a god and the teachings of jesus and/or the ten commandments. still nothing makes sense, but i don't like when people put their US-centric view on every believer.
"God gave us His word so that we can know him and come to salvation" "You can only understand God's word through the Holy Spirit" "Only believers who have received salvation have the Holy Spirit in them" Then....why even bother.
He has the voice of Zed from Police Academy, but he makes less sense. He's saying that you can't watch Star Wars if you don't believe in the Force, you can't read Harry Potter if you don't take Lord Voldemort into your life, and you can't listen to While My Guitar Gently Weeps if you don't recognise that Clapton is (just hypothetically) the greatest guitarist ever. He's operating his mouth without engaging his brain.
The KJV, of course. Written in Gawd's-own-language, early Modern English. And an abridged version at that. Note King James was a Catholic, and kept those "apocryphal" books, translated them into Early Modern English.
You know… the reasoning for the differences is enormously well documented. Spotting a difference and just asking “why difference” is only a demonstration of your void of desire to actually know.
@@TexxShields The question wasn't 'why are there different versions of the Bible?', the question was 'which version of the Bible is 'Untamed Truth' saying should be read?' You answered a question mr.spider267 didn't ask and promply accused him of acting in bad faith.
@ well ok, of all those different bibles then just stick to the 80% of books they unanimously agree on. All of these discrepancies are about the Old Testament. So start by reading the New Testament. Which he would know if he actually investigated the issue earnestly in good faith.
What is that even supposed to mean. That I can't read? That I am blind? That I can't read it without believing there is a God? That I have to assume it's all true to believe it?
I think one of the most common responses I see from Christians about atheists speaking about bible verses, is "you're taking it out of context" typically without providing an example of which context. Now context can mean somewhat differing things in various um... contexts. While it's sometimes as simple as the immediate context of verses directly around it, it can also refer to the bible as a whole. Or even specific hermeneutic interpretations. In other words, I have seen Christian claim "out of context", when what is really meant is they prefer a different interpretation. Or if I'm less charitable they prefer to engage in some cherry picking. In the case of this guy, he has decided his "context" to entail presupposing the fundamental conclusions that he wants. I have seen Christians behave this way to various degrees. But rarely as egregiously as this. I have a suspicion that more apologists believe this sort of thing, but have enough restraint to not say it out loud. Because it is astoundingly counterproductive if they want to engage with atheists. Engaging with anything more than trolling in mind at least. And finally, to apologists telling me I can't understand the bible, the message I get is that any engagement is futile, and there will never be any common ground sufficient to come to any understanding. And that the bible (according to them) should be irrelevant to me. Not what I consider effective evangelistic technique.
I like your approach and the combination of humor, intellect, and skilled research you provide. My only general feedback (not specific to this video) for improvement is just a personal pet peeve of mine: I absolutely hate overuse of the word "moreover." I've edited a lot of academic papers, and I sometimes joked with clients that they were limited to 2 moreovers per paper. It's just something in a list of things that I think connote pretentiousness without conveying much useful information. (The one thing higher on that list is "It should be noted that..." I always want to shake them and say, "Just say what you mean!" But you don't resort to that one.) Keep up the good work. I appreciate your work.
Thank you for the compliment and the feedback! If reminded me of a time in my middle school English class. We had to write an 8-page story, but we could only use the word "said" two times. I will take your point to heart. Sincerely, thank you. ^_^
Possibly the biggest copout in literary history. 1 Corinthians 2 : _13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. 14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit._ In other words, you gotta believe it for it to make sense. Which is just the sort of logic you would expect from a 1st century religious fanatic.
10:00 Exactly, Like when i say to Christians when questioned on a subject. and to show that i do have the experience and education to comment on this topic, i'll say "I'm an Ordained Minister, I have a degree from University and i served in the church for 20years" then they reply with the dumbest possible crap you can imagine. things like "so.. If you're a minister then why do you say the bible isn't god's word" I can't begin to explain how stupid this is. - I mean.. I JUST SAID I WAS A MINISTER, so why is that so hard to believe. if i person says to you "I'm a doctor" you don't reply with "Ok so if you're a doctor then why this.." or sometimes i get "that doesn't mean anything, a degree is just a piece of paper" LOL.. OK you illiterate well it should read "that means nothing" because when something "DOESN'T mean anything" it means that it DOES mean something. But the stupidity that is required to say that a university degree IS JUST A PIECE OF PAPER My God !!!! But the Gall required of them to think that their experience is above my own when they haven't even read the bible vs this was my profession. LOL..... I mean. that's like me walking up to my mechanic and saying "You don't anything, it's not the timing belt, you need to change the tyre" LOL i mean.. Jesus christ this is funny
@@darkofalltrades You're Welcome. that was the main aim of my comment. I literally just got this clown on another channel who said the following.. PREPARE YOURSELF DO NOT DRINK COFFEE OR LIQUIDS WHILE READING THIS AS IT WILL GO UP YOUR NOSE :p This twit says to me "So.. You say you're an ordained minister... well that doesn't mean anything" (Note : I'm really cleaning up his inability to spell) Followed by "Yeah well my grandparents are ordained ministers and they preach every weekend so you have a lot to learn" Now putting aside the fact that them preaching each weekend has absolutely no correlation to what i need to learn.. HE COMPLETELY MISSES THE POINT THAT.. - If my Degree is worthless - Then he just acknowledged that his grandparents degree's are worthless LMFAO.... I mean... they really don't think do they ? They get passionate about discrediting someone , which in itself is not a quality that jesus taught christians to have. and then they just put their foot in it
I love the realization about Protestantism’s insistence that there need be no intermediary between man and god via the bible coming around to the original view that there need be an intermediary between man and god. The syllogistic argument approach is very useful. Thank you. Keeping the goalposts moving seems to be a constant in a lot of apologetic argumentation.
Pointing out EXACTLY what is being said means I can hold them to a standard, and when they break that standard, it becomes glaringly obvious with those syllpgistic forms. I'm really glad you like that I do that! Thank you for saying so! ^_^
Not sure why people who have never met me think they are qualified to condemn me for all eternity based on a prejudiced notion of my character. I accept the bit in the Bible where Jesus says not to judge others. Sounds fair to me. If God exists, the he knows my heart far better than some shouty bigot on social media passing uninformed judgement. They ought concentrate on their own hearts instead of presuming they are saved. Spiritual sin is a thing they have swept under the carpet.
If I were a god (which only my dog would agree with), I would cause a bible to be written that had only one interpretation. As language changed, I'd have it infallibly updated.
As for the enemy having certain instruments: a religious authority in my early life said that "She's Leaving Home" by The Beatles was music of the Enemy. It's scored for string quartet and harp.
If God were real and truly wanted people to have access to his word, then he would put angels throughout the earth, reciting God's word night and day in a way that every human would be able to understand without the problem of mistranslations.
If I believed my immortal soul depended upon me reading the Bible and knowing its contents, I most certainly would read it, cover to cover. Not the way most Christians read it - reading some parts they like but not the others. I read it cover-to-cover as a Christian but focused on those "nice" parts (some people focus on the vindictive parts). I think I've read it more evenly - the good and the bad - as an atheist.
@@darkofalltrades It depends. If I'm reading a novel, and I don't like a certain section of it, but like other parts, I can skip paragraphs or chapters if I want, and read other parts. Or, just put the book aside. If it's an important book for some reason - contains information which I'll use later, or background information for something I really want to learn, I need to read all of it. I may want to criticize it, or even to reconsider if the (ultimate goal) should be something I even want to take part in or with. The ultimate importance should be eternity - if I believed eternity was even a thing involving individual consciousness. If it's something like the Bible is believed to be, one should not be reading like the novel I don't like all of in the first paragraph. Many people it seems won't even TRY to read the Bible, yet call themselves "Christian". There was a reason 1000 years ago when few people could read or write, before the printing press when a single copy of the Bible took over a "man-year" to create. These days it's inexcusable.
I still remember the first time one of my friends made this argument: “If you don’t believe in the Bible and have the Holy Spirit in you, it’s impossible to understand it properly.” I had to try hard not to laugh at him.
So, the Bible is the word of God? Well, we have it, we know how to read, and we can read it, so let's read it. What? What do you mean I can't? I literally have multiple copies of it, and they are in a language I can read, even if some of them are different versions. Fine, we can stick to just one version just to satisfy you (even though it is one version you already demonstrated to have never read yourself). What is stopping me from reading it then? What? "I need the Holy Spirit"? Well, how do I get it? ... Uh, and how exactly does that tie to whether or not I can read the Bible? Okay, then why the ^^^^ do you even have the Bible or any scripture in the first place? You make a rather strong case for it only being so that you can cherry-pick from it in order to justify your own biases, which just so happens to include some of the most bigoted and hateful s^^t that even some of your ilk would tell you to at least tone down on. All you seem to want to do is say whatever the ^^^^ you want - and it tends to be that bigoted s^^t - and be treated as though you are always correct. That is one massive ego. Who do you think you are? Joesph Smith? L Ron Hubbard? You strike me more as a wannabe David Koresh. No wonder you make videos of you screaming, because who the ^^^^ would want to be around you?
Well when I read Homer and when I read Gilgamesh.I first had to read about the book before I read the book. Like the bible , they were written a long , long time ago and other cultures than mine. Any time I read an ancient text.I also read books about the texts so I can better understand.
16:13 So, for the past 2 or 3 days I've been on a real tear about the difference between hypocrisy and double standards. If calling someone a hypocrite is a fallacy, but all you're doing is pointing out their fallacy of holding double standards, who is right in this situation?
If we can read it but it doesn't matter, then ok, we won't read it. Why even tell an atheist about your faith as it seems there is nothing a person can do to become a Christian, as an unbeliever can't understand any of your arguments as they are all based on your book, which doesn't matter.
I don't quite understand why contradictions and lack of historic accuracy are such a problem. Marvel comics has lots and lots of contradictions and retcons. None of the events in the comics are historically accurate. But the stories provide comfort and a lot of moral guidance. " With great power comes great responsibility" That's a great proverb even though spiderman does not exist. I will not stop reading comics because they're not historically accurate nor will I stop reading the bible because it is not historically accurate. You don't have to believe in historical accuracy or biblical inerancy to be a christian. In fact believing that it's historically accurate causes all kinds of problems. God commanded the slaughtering of all the Canaanites? No that's just what the people wrote down to justify their existence in that land. Although...i will read a religious text both ways. I read them in a scholarly fashion, but ill also read the Koran as if God did speak to Mohammed. That helps me understand the truth of the text and also understand what followers of that book see there.
Buy the logic of "Anyone who continues to sin has mever known or seen God." Does that mean Lucifer and ever angel that fell from grace never knew or seen God? And no one better give me that angels aren't who(s) thing. They think like humans, act some what like humans, and oh yeah, have genetic material that is compatable with humans as shoen in the bible.
I understand. Thank you for this, really. It means more than you know. I am going to try really small things at first, perhaps subtle things, and then throw in some bigger changes. This one had a couple of tests in it that seemed to go well!
Have you tried to find people who will satisfy your need for good answers? People who could be in your level of intelligence or higher, people who understands how arguments works so they will know when you point out the flaws in their argument. I am a newcomer for a christian, and still don't know much, but I study the bible on my own specially now that my one on one bible studies are done. I don't trust other people's word easily so I also want to find different perspectives on things. I might not be able to quote directly from the book yet but I think it was said that Christ's life cannot be compressed in a book, and like any branch of knowledge, one cannot learn everything about it. Considering this, I will not give up in seeking for truth and without becoming biased to any side. If a person makes a circular reasoning, do not expect more to them. Just have a mind that listens closely and heart that is open for changes. We are all students so be critical, but to learn we must first humble ourselves. Sorry if my English is not that good.
Hello! Thank you for such a thoughtful and well-expressed comment! Your English is actually quite good, and you've captured some profound ideas here. I especially appreciate your point about remaining humble while being critical - that's a crucial balance in both theological study and intellectual discourse in general. You're also absolutely right about John 21:25 - that's the verse you were thinking of about Christ's life being too vast to capture in books. I want to highlight the first thing you said. It is a really insightful observation about finding discussion partners who understand how arguments work and can engage with complex ideas. In theological study, having someone who can recognize logical flaws and engage in rigorous analysis is incredibly valuable - it helps us refine our understanding and avoid falling into weak reasoning. Sometimes it's not about having all the answers, but about knowing how to properly examine and discuss the questions. Your approach to studying independently while remaining open to different perspectives is admirable. Would you mind sharing some of the methods you use in your independent Bible study? I think other viewers might benefit from your approach. Thank you for your comment. I enjoyed reading and thinking about it! Cheers!
@@darkofalltrades I know for certain that even though I do fellowship as the scripture said, I still don't want to put myself in the situation where I have to finish that something (debate/discourse) or else the time that I put into that will be wasted. In plain words, I just don't want to put myself into a place where I cannot disengage. I could see it as cowardice, but it is just not in priority. We are told not to waste time as we might not have much left. I recognize that I am also in some ways a hypocrite, I must say, I still deserve hell even through all the repentance that I am doing. But my thoughts should be filtered before it gets transformed into action. I must not get bothered by anything when enhancing my faith in Christ. Amen. This is me trying to introduce myself. I just felt like it was the way to be polite. .. I don't know if these pastors have already reached your algorithms but there are pastors like Cliffe Knetchelle/Sam Shamoun and many more(not sure if I get their names right), but they work in a similar fashion where they go to places where there are students/non-believers. There they not only share Christ but they also open themselves to the people's questions about him. I have had so many questions before as an atheist. "I just realized, I can't remember any instance where the students/professors/person they are debating with call out flaws in their reasoning". Most of the questions that rise are about the contradictions/problems that are related to bible. These pastors are backed with sufficient knowledge about the logical, and historical insights inside and outside christianity that their answers just make sense. Some vids might be cut where they have the last say, but still the question in focus was answered. And just for my study in scripture, I also read in the app Enduring Word, there they explain and expound the knowledge compiled in the bible. I believe I am on the right path just as long as I keep seeking for truth Please do correct me if needed. Did these pastors provide illogical answers to the questions that they received?
I'd say that the interpretation I have of the Bible since deconverting is more accurate. Without a need for belief in its truth, I can investigate it more deeply and understand it a lot better BTW: *first* ;-) Also BTW: I read the Bible *twice* when I first became a Christian. Doing so was instrumental in helping me to *stop* being a Christian
Reading the Bible with the lens of the Holy Spirit simply means accepting the words of the bible when it is convenient, and ignoring, or interpreting the parts that are inconvenient.
Cant read the bible by just by reading it? That pure nonsense. Oh wait I got it he think read is the same as understand. As for 2 Corinthians 3:6 it clear to me from reading it Paul is talking about following the spirit of the law of the covenant and not the letter like the Pharisees did. Otherwise why did Paul bother to meantion the new covenant in the same sentence?
She you people like to blabber so much and rather die than address the damn point? This is why shorts are so popular. Not because people's attention spans magically got shorter, but because they are to the point. Breath of fresh air.
@darkofalltrades in saying when someone tries to share their thoughts and sentiments - it's very annoying when the good first half of the video is overloaded with their thoughts and sentiments without the main topic being addressed. I had the same issue when I was in sales. All the novice spokespeople make that mistake, however it does not excuses the mistake itself. Try to address the main topic ASAP and then just extrapolate and break it down. It will help with the viewer retention and by extension with the overall popularity of the channel.
This is excellent feedback! Thank you for clarifying, and I will take it into consideration. Perhaps getting to the good stuff earlier would help. I think you are right.
Thank you so much for saying this! Post a video on your medias of social. If you are in a debate group, share a relevant video, even if it is one of my Explains Logical Fallacies videos. I've been thinking about bringing my name up to other creators as well. I am open to suggestions, too! I'd love to get more eyes on the channel. I know Godless Engineer is subscribed to me.
@@darkofalltrades Just began to, I have joined a french atheist channel, I tend to hand them interesting sources. We are lacking in term of counterapologetic.
I wish I could speak French and help you with it as well. But if you ever have ANY questions, please don't hesitate to reach out. DarkOfAllTrades@gmail.com
Oh don't worry, there's at the very least three people that are fluent in english on the discord I mentionned, amongst the most active members. It revolves around an atheist that decided to go through the Bible and point out where the deity described there is... Really different than the one they tend to present in churches, but during the weekly live there is an open line and people present their beliefs. Most arguments about why they think what they believe in is true are old washed out ones... But your methodical approach may help to understand what is the actual argument (most guests don't really understand them themselves) and you present various answers that can help someone to either present them... Or come with another one on their own. Just to tell you about one today... I had presented a syllogism that could or could not be true and proposed to examine the premices. The answer I received was "syllogisms are sophisms". Well... They can... You can't know just yet, check the premices to see if it is a valid syllogism or not... Turns out they were right, and that syllogism invalidates the "The Church makes no error" idea through the use of the "errare humanum est" idea that my... Opposant ? Not really one but let's call him that... Used to excuse that he could be mistaken but the dogma can't... Turns out that the Church is made by and of humans and I pointed out the actual argument : the dogma has changed, more than once... And refuted itself more than once too. Not only was it a valid syllogism because all three propositions of it were true... But it was not even the actual reflexion. It was but a diversion still leading to the same conclusion : the Church makes mistakes, hence it can not miraculously protect from heresy, because you can't even know what would be the objectively non heretical dogma nowadays.
I just have no interest in whats in the bible, or Quran or Book of Mormon, or Bag Vita whatsits or whatever holy writings they claim to have. They all cant decide amongst themselves what it all means. So im not interested in it.
There is something to be said about letting the fight about it, and when they come to a consensus, then we can talk. That often applied to JUST Christians or JUST Jews too. They can't agree. I think more Hindus agree on the Bhagavad Gita than the other two.
How would I know if I have the right kind of Holy Spirit? Satan might be deceiving me. Spoiler I suspect it has something to do with how well I agree with his opinions.
How were you studying to be a pastor but are simultaneously unaware that there is enough free biblical commentary to pave Asia, and then in that ignorance claim recommending commentary support is grifting… How were you studying to be a pastor but don’t know “sin” isn’t a religious term, it’s a Greek archery term… I smell a rat
@@TexxShields The claim about "sin" being a Greek archery term is a common internet myth. The English word "sin" actually derives from Old English "synn" with Germanic roots (Proto-Germanic *sundjo). The Greek word you're likely thinking of is "hamartia" (ἁμαρτία), which, while sometimes used metaphorically in contexts including archery, was already established as a religious and ethical term well before its New Testament usage. Regarding biblical commentaries - while free resources certainly exist (and thank goodness for that), the existence of free materials doesn't negate the value of curated or recommended scholarly resources. This is true across all academic disciplines, theology included. Feel free to verify this in the Oxford English Dictionary or Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. They're fascinating reads. As someone ordained in 2003 who has also studied linguistics, I'm always happy to engage in substantive dialogue about these topics, preferably without assumptions about rats. P.S. Asia is quite large - I suspect we'd need significantly more commentaries for such an ambitious paving project. 😊
@ Yes, but protogermanic “sundjo” isn’t specific to religious law but just guilt or wrongdoings at all, to which is then applied to breaking religious law, naturally. Hamartia being not exclusive to archery sure, Aristotle uses it in your sense as moral/ethical errs. But that’s the point I’m making anyway if not just more historically nuanced; that the term already existed in language to describe taboos, downfalls or other misdeeds. To when applying that same concept to a religious framework, the word of its kind is used. When Greek scripture is then translated from its original ‘hamartia’ into various intermingling European languages a very natural translation would be something like protogerman ‘sundjo’, Latin ‘sons’ etc. But my point still stands that the concept of “sin” isn’t purely or even originally religious specifically. The popularity of religion just swallowed the phraseology basically. Like Kleenex instead of facial tissue
I appreciate the more nuanced linguistic discussion! Your Kleenex analogy is actually quite apt for demonstrating how religious usage came to dominate certain terminology. However, this is quite different from your original claim that "sin" was "a Greek archery term" - a common misconception that oversimplifies the complex linguistic and theological evolution of the concept. But that's okay. We can drop that. While you're correct that religious language often adopts and adapts existing terminology (as your examples of Proto-Germanic "sundjo" and Latin "sons" demonstrate), this supports a different argument than your initial one. The development of religious vocabulary and its relationship to secular terms is a fascinating and fun field of study - the interplay between theological concepts and their linguistic evolution tells us a lot about both language and cultural development. I hope this discussion helps demonstrate why questions about my theological education and linguistic background aren't particularly concerning to me. These are areas I've studied extensively. Cheers!
There is nothing wrong with academic rigour if you a trying to train an academic. Nice trick with the glasses. I was thunking, I don't remember DoAT wearing glasses??? I thunk good. Believers are just pissed off that many Atheists understand the bible better than they do.
Thank you for the feedback! I am sincerely glad you enjoyed the glasses bit. I did it and was worried it would come off as too silly or something like that. So, the validation is gratifying. Thank you!
What the hell are you wearing? I get the shirt and the vest. That makes sense. But what’s on your shoulders? If it’s a cape, where does the material go? Is it only three inches long in the back? It should definitely be visible in the crook of your left arm. And what’s holding it in place over your right arm?
You'll forgive me, but I am not sure to what you are referring. I may not be very intelligent. I am thinking of what I was doing then. I was working overnights as that was a Sunday.... Sorry, I don't know what you are talking about. How do I look different than my avatar? I mean, I am not quite that thin. But I think I look like that.
"Ive read the bible many times" My favorite atheist lie. Ive been reading it for 2 years and haven't finished it. If id gotten through it more than once id be able to say the nmbr instead of "many times"
Are you a poe? Are you trying to make theists look unintelligent by claiming you couldn't finish a single book in 2 years? I read the Silmarillion at least a dozen times. I have no clue about how often I did it because it's irrelevant. I know the content and could recite it at the top of my head. But if I don't make up a number I have, according to you, not read it. But please, continue to show christians in the worst light possible. You're doing a great job!
@Finckelstein A single book no problem. But 66 is how many books there are in the bible. I've read many of those more than once. But not all. Not yet. But you go ahead and believe that numbnuts read it "many times" even though he can't tell you ANYTHING ABOUT IT
Yeah my comments are getting deleted on here. Anyways the bible is actually is together 66 books if you don't count the apochrypha that was originally included in the kjv. To read all of them "many times" and then providing zero insight leads me to believe the claimer hasn't read any of it. While I've read many of the books more than once I have yet to read them all. I could probably do it faster but with a full time job and a family there isn't too much extra time for reading though I do make the effort. If any of you did even a glossing over of the bible you'd find pretty quickly there's no religion supported therein. You'd also find that ALL religion flies opposite the bible. It's a book of life, truth, knowledge, wisdom, and the way to salvation. And it's completely undefeated in its historical veracity. God bless yall I hope you'll investigate this for yourselves.
The only problem with calling it "circular reasoning" is that I'm pretty sure there's no *reasoning* going on at all.
I don't know if it's circular or just backwards.
You have to have read it, to know what it says, BEFORE you can believe it
If it wasn't for bad logic, they wouldn't have any logic at all.
"Nobody who sins has ever known God." Ok, so the Bible tells us that Moses sinned, David sinned, Paul sinned, Peter sinned, John sinned, and even Jesus did some stuff that would be called sin if anyone else did them. Seems like at least most of the Bible, then, was written by and/or about guys who never knew God, eh?
Jesus never sinned.
@@keepthechange2811 Putting yourself before Jehoviah is a sin, and Jesus claimed that no one comes to God except through him. That's a sin.
@@snaptrap5558 sigh.... reading comprehension is lacking here.
@@Dominicus13 Lol, reading between the lines (as Christians always have to do) isn't actually reading
It sure seems God doesn’t like sin.
Sort of makes you wonder why he let us have free will and then let that damn serpent into the garden.
I was a Christian, church had a youth Bible study class. After that I left the church, years later I had re read the Bible a few times taking notes and seeking further information, and eventually I realized that I was no longer a Christian.
If the holy spirit sees an atheist reading the bible, it should be happy to convert the atheist by showing us the true way to read the book to make us believers.
My point exactly!
The Baptist church that I once belonged to made it clear that we should not read the Bible without the guidance of the approved doctrinal study guides. These guides took full advantage of the chapter & verse structure of the texts to avoid the numerous biblical contradictions and weave together narratives that didn't exist in a plain reading of the texts.
Case in point: The much lauded prophecies in the Old Testament that were supposedly fulfilled by Jesus. The study guide would isolate the prophesy and then provide the specific verse that fulfilled it. Often they would provide the specific verses in the study guide so you didn't have to strain yourself by actually opening your bible.
Of course when I did actually open the bible and look at the prophecies in their full context I realized that it was all a scam. Coincidentally this was around the same time that the original "Footloose" was in theaters and the scene where Rev Moore (John Lithgow) was practicing his sermon and his daughter says "It's show business, isn't it?" really hit home with me. It's all about keeping butts in the pews and dollars in the offering plate.
Barr Ehrman said that he has his students go to the 4 gospels and hsjy write what they say about Easter Sunday. Who goes the tomb? How many were there? Who was there when they got there? Was the stone rolled away or not?
And he has them do a side-by-side comparison.
Fun exercise!
@@chrisose Been there, been done by that. My father said we were not allowec our own interpitation of the Bible. Sorry, can't turn the brain off.
I think they're just afraid of someone spotting the contradictions and calling them out on it.
Probably.
But I don't let people get away with it!
@@LewisLittle66 That ship has sailed.
@@LewisLittle66 Name a contradiction. Quickly before the channel deletes my comment
@@keepthechange2811 I didn’t know the contradictions had names. But two that I can share are what happened to the 30 pieces of silver? Did Judas use them to purchase a field as in Acts? Or did he give it back to the temple priests as in Mathew? Did god create man first or the animals first? Genesis 1 man is created after the animals and Genesis 2 man is created before the animals.
Two of the contradictory stories I ask people about then watch the dishonest mental gymnastics and head cannon…
@lubrew5862 Pharisees bought a field with the silver.
In Genesis Man is created after the animals on the 6th day. It never says otherwise. There's no contradictions there.
I agree that it's circular reasoning, specifically in order for him to avoid the questions raised as to why people can read his version of the Bible and still not believe it.
Count the hits. Ignore the misses.
Unlike many atheists, I didn’t start off as a Christian. However, I have noted the psychological impact of Christianity. Believing in something for which there is no evidence is likely to result in poor decision-making. Sin, for example, is a concept that is entirely dependent upon religious claims being true. As there is no evidence for divine law, the concept of sin is meaningless to me. Reading the bible will not change the fact that there is no evidence for divine law. I remember being confused by the concept of original sin, when I was in my mid 20s. This is because I had never been indoctrinated.
How do you know? You refuse to read the bible. And the reason why many "Christians" become atheists is because they don't read it either. There's no religion supported in the bibles at all. But how can you know what you're talking about??? You can read it
Same here, deconversion seems so hard to many of them
@@gowdsake7103 I see deconversion like a superhero origin story. Including a fundamental shift in the understanding of reality.
It’s a trip. When I realized what I believed was not true, I started the hardest emotional and psychological year of my life.
@@gowdsake7103 It appears to turn their world upside-down. As I was never pressured into accepting claims that couldn't be demonstrated to be true, there was no reason for me take the bible at face value.
Them: We understand the bible because we have the holy spirit.
Me: Show me the spirit.
Show me on the doll where the holy spirit touched you.
If it has to be interpreted and not read as is, then that is more proof it's not the inerrant word of some deity.
Fallibility is a pretty harsh argument against god.
They wouldn't be able to lie to the masses if people actually read the text without a middleman interpreting it for them 😂
I thought about checking out the last page to find out how it ends.
Spoiler alert: It was the butler who did it!
@@KarstenNygaard-d8c weird, in my version they do the butler
@@destinystrapper
Oh. You must have the
Who Knew Testamente!
I will certainly not look
into that😆👍
Okay, the glasses joke was a good start lol! I do appreciate your academic approach since you ARE an academic (and not just using that as a mask to jack your importance up), and you are doing a good job breaking down the point in this one to go from academic points to layman explanation. Your ability to navigate this bizarre field of doublespeak is still very impressive! As for all this, when you break it down to his major points it's just contradictory gibberish. You parsed away all the camo and revealed the mess he tried to sneak through inside.
@natp8387 thank you so much for the compliments! I am trying to learn how to accept them, so I will leave that as that.
And thank YOU for enjoying the glasses bit. I wasn't sure how it would play, as it is just a bit silly.
It's true that I read the bible differently as a Xtian than an atheist. The first time I read the bible on my own, cover to cover, I was 17 and still a Xtian and taking the bible literally as I'd been raised to do. I can't say that alone made me an atheist, but it certainly started me down that road.
Some 20 years later I read the bible cover to cover again, this time as someone who'd been an atheist for years. This time I read it as largely metaphorical, and it actually made a lot more sense to me. Didn't affect my atheism because it provided no evidence for the supernatural, which is my biggest stumbling block with religion, but I felt I was getting the point trying to be made better.
Oh, and as to dinosaur bones, my mother told me it was god who salted the ground with those bones, to test the faith of believers.
the bible also makes more sense when you realize that it was written by different cultures and religions and traditions and the god they worship changed constantly.
@@sandracraft517 it seems we had similar starting points down the road to atheism.
“The content you know and love/tolerate.” 😂😂😂 Been so scattered I can’t recall if I’ve been doing my algorithmic duty by commenting, so I am commenting at the beginning and maybe again later…
@@riseofdarkleela i am so glad someone caught and appreciated that line. ^_^
Thank you fellow Dark one.
It’s funny because believers use whats written in the bible as a weapon all the time but can’t handle it when they are called out by whats written in the Bible. Lets not forget 2timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness
Almost like they use what they want when it is convenient for them, and ignore parts that aren't....
The fun thing about reading the Bible is that Christianity becomes impossible when you do.
• None of the actual messianic prophecies are fulfilled and you find out Matthew made up the rest by just randomly quoting.
• God spends the entirely of the OT building his covenant with Jews, only for Paul to piss all over that concept.
• God is eternal, God is ONE, God is timeless, God cannot be seen or known, God is unchanging and keeps his promises turns into God can beget himself and is in pieces and incarnated specifically to be seen and know and has totally changed his mind about humanity and salvation.
• God accepts sacrifice was turning into ‘God actually wants genuine repentance because why would an eternal being need blood’ did a 180 back to ‘God needs blood so much he literally had to incarnate and create a limitless supply to quench it.
• God wants righteousness turned into God wants you to quote a creed and is now God wants you to be a fascist.
If you read the Bible, even just the Jesus bits, none of it matches with Christianity as it’s practiced.
But if you read the Old Testament, you see that Christianity really shouldn’t be a thing.
it doesn't match christianity that is partially practiced. the catholic church doesn't take all that literally and still are Christians. many other Christians, especially the protestants in germany and probably rest of europe don't take any of the bible litterally and are still christians. I met and know many who don't even believe jesus resurrected or might even not have been one person, but they believe in a god and the teachings of jesus and/or the ten commandments.
still nothing makes sense, but i don't like when people put their US-centric view on every believer.
"God gave us His word so that we can know him and come to salvation"
"You can only understand God's word through the Holy Spirit"
"Only believers who have received salvation have the Holy Spirit in them"
Then....why even bother.
You are a self centered heartless person no doubt at all
"no one can know what god is" is also something a lot of them say
@Soapy-chan Answering questions by making them more convoluted XD
I just wonder if shouting makes his message more convincing.
@@DwainMarsh LOUD NOISES MEANS I'M RIGHT BECAUSE NO ONE CAN HEAR ANYONE REFUTE ME!
Round round and round. My father's tleology in a nutshell.
Too many people has that mindset.
@@darkofalltrades And you cannot reason with "I'm right because I'm right".
"What evidence can you give someone who will not accept evidence?"
He has the voice of Zed from Police Academy, but he makes less sense. He's saying that you can't watch Star Wars if you don't believe in the Force, you can't read Harry Potter if you don't take Lord Voldemort into your life, and you can't listen to While My Guitar Gently Weeps if you don't recognise that Clapton is (just hypothetically) the greatest guitarist ever. He's operating his mouth without engaging his brain.
@donaldnumbskull9745 oh...my....Atheismo...
I haven't even THOUGHT about Zed from Police Academy for YEARS!!!
Whose Bible? Catholic? Orthodox? Coptic? Protestant? If Protestant, which one?
Principia Discordia, verbose edition
The KJV, of course. Written in Gawd's-own-language, early Modern English. And an abridged version at that. Note King James was a Catholic, and kept those "apocryphal" books, translated them into Early Modern English.
You know… the reasoning for the differences is enormously well documented. Spotting a difference and just asking “why difference” is only a demonstration of your void of desire to actually know.
@@TexxShields The question wasn't 'why are there different versions of the Bible?', the question was 'which version of the Bible is 'Untamed Truth' saying should be read?'
You answered a question mr.spider267 didn't ask and promply accused him of acting in bad faith.
@ well ok, of all those different bibles then just stick to the 80% of books they unanimously agree on.
All of these discrepancies are about the Old Testament. So start by reading the New Testament. Which he would know if he actually investigated the issue earnestly in good faith.
I really enjoy your videos, and even your more esoteric are very well explained. Good Job! Keep up the good work! :D
@@Adriell.h.b. I appreciate you saying so! I definitely want to keep the academic content coming!
What is that even supposed to mean. That I can't read? That I am blind? That I can't read it without believing there is a God? That I have to assume it's all true to believe it?
I think the idiot thinks read means the same as understand. So it's no wonder the rest of his takes are nonsense as well.
accepting word by word??? Please, do not let this dude near any waiter working on the wrong day. He might try to stone the waiter.
The lesson here is to allow presupposition to fuel confirmation bias and know that his faith is more better than all the other faiths because…reasons.
…hopefully that was a typo!?
it’s better to have proper grammar when comprehension is involved.
I think one of the most common responses I see from Christians about atheists speaking about bible verses, is "you're taking it out of context" typically without providing an example of which context.
Now context can mean somewhat differing things in various um... contexts.
While it's sometimes as simple as the immediate context of verses directly around it, it can also refer to the bible as a whole. Or even specific hermeneutic interpretations.
In other words, I have seen Christian claim "out of context", when what is really meant is they prefer a different interpretation. Or if I'm less charitable they prefer to engage in some cherry picking.
In the case of this guy, he has decided his "context" to entail presupposing the fundamental conclusions that he wants. I have seen Christians behave this way to various degrees. But rarely as egregiously as this.
I have a suspicion that more apologists believe this sort of thing, but have enough restraint to not say it out loud. Because it is astoundingly counterproductive if they want to engage with atheists. Engaging with anything more than trolling in mind at least.
And finally, to apologists telling me I can't understand the bible, the message I get is that any engagement is futile, and there will never be any common ground sufficient to come to any understanding. And that the bible (according to them) should be irrelevant to me. Not what I consider effective evangelistic technique.
My context is that the bible is a collection of mythological stories. I'm not sure if that really gives specific verses more credibility. 😉
I like your approach and the combination of humor, intellect, and skilled research you provide.
My only general feedback (not specific to this video) for improvement is just a personal pet peeve of mine: I absolutely hate overuse of the word "moreover." I've edited a lot of academic papers, and I sometimes joked with clients that they were limited to 2 moreovers per paper. It's just something in a list of things that I think connote pretentiousness without conveying much useful information. (The one thing higher on that list is "It should be noted that..." I always want to shake them and say, "Just say what you mean!" But you don't resort to that one.)
Keep up the good work. I appreciate your work.
Thank you for the compliment and the feedback!
If reminded me of a time in my middle school English class. We had to write an 8-page story, but we could only use the word "said" two times.
I will take your point to heart. Sincerely, thank you. ^_^
Possibly the biggest copout in literary history. 1 Corinthians 2 : _13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. 14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit._ In other words, you gotta believe it for it to make sense. Which is just the sort of logic you would expect from a 1st century religious fanatic.
10:00
Exactly, Like when i say to Christians when questioned on a subject.
and to show that i do have the experience and education to comment
on this topic, i'll say
"I'm an Ordained Minister, I have a degree from University
and i served in the church for 20years"
then they reply with the dumbest possible crap you can imagine.
things like
"so.. If you're a minister then why do you say the bible isn't god's word"
I can't begin to explain how stupid this is.
- I mean.. I JUST SAID I WAS A MINISTER, so why is that so hard to believe.
if i person says to you "I'm a doctor" you don't reply with
"Ok so if you're a doctor then why this.."
or sometimes i get
"that doesn't mean anything, a degree is just a piece of paper"
LOL.. OK you illiterate
well it should read "that means nothing" because when something
"DOESN'T mean anything" it means that it DOES mean something.
But the stupidity that is required to say that a university degree
IS JUST A PIECE OF PAPER
My God !!!!
But the Gall required of them to think that their experience is above my own
when they haven't even read the bible vs this was my profession.
LOL.....
I mean. that's like me walking up to my mechanic and saying
"You don't anything, it's not the timing belt, you need to change the tyre"
LOL
i mean.. Jesus christ this is funny
@@martinkuliza I've gotten some VERY similar responses as well.
Thank you for validating my experience as well. You are appreciated.
@@darkofalltrades
You're Welcome.
that was the main aim of my comment.
I literally just got this clown on another channel
who said the following..
PREPARE YOURSELF
DO NOT DRINK COFFEE OR LIQUIDS WHILE READING THIS AS IT WILL GO UP YOUR NOSE :p
This twit says to me
"So.. You say you're an ordained minister...
well that doesn't mean anything"
(Note : I'm really cleaning up his inability to spell)
Followed by
"Yeah well my grandparents are ordained ministers and they preach every weekend so you have a lot to learn"
Now putting aside the fact that them preaching each weekend has absolutely no correlation to what i need to learn..
HE COMPLETELY MISSES THE POINT THAT..
- If my Degree is worthless
- Then he just acknowledged that his grandparents degree's are worthless
LMFAO....
I mean... they really don't think do they ?
They get passionate about discrediting someone , which in itself is not a quality that jesus taught christians to have.
and then they just put their foot in it
I love the realization about Protestantism’s insistence that there need be no intermediary between man and god via the bible coming around to the original view that there need be an intermediary between man and god.
The syllogistic argument approach is very useful. Thank you. Keeping the goalposts moving seems to be a constant in a lot of apologetic argumentation.
Pointing out EXACTLY what is being said means I can hold them to a standard, and when they break that standard, it becomes glaringly obvious with those syllpgistic forms.
I'm really glad you like that I do that! Thank you for saying so! ^_^
Not sure why people who have never met me think they are qualified to condemn me for all eternity based on a prejudiced notion of my character.
I accept the bit in the Bible where Jesus says not to judge others. Sounds fair to me.
If God exists, the he knows my heart far better than some shouty bigot on social media passing uninformed judgement. They ought concentrate on their own hearts instead of presuming they are saved. Spiritual sin is a thing they have swept under the carpet.
it's funny because while jesus said don't judge others, that's literally what he does in the gospels
You don't believe in the bible because you haven't read it, but you can't read it unless you believe it before you start.
That seems to be EXACTLY his point.
The Bible is for thumping, not for reading. 😂
If I were a god (which only my dog would agree with), I would cause a bible to be written that had only one interpretation. As language changed, I'd have it infallibly updated.
Dog is love.
In a few years, Untamed Truth just might start his own cult.
Too many of those kinds of people exist.
Bloody hell. He is right there in front of the camera. There is no need to yell.😂
I even scaled his audio back too!
As for the enemy having certain instruments: a religious authority in my early life said that "She's Leaving Home" by The Beatles was music of the Enemy.
It's scored for string quartet and harp.
Not caught up in a while. We are back though. Lets see whats been going on!
Welcome back!
If God were real and truly wanted people to have access to his word, then he would put angels throughout the earth, reciting God's word night and day in a way that every human would be able to understand without the problem of mistranslations.
That would definitely be ONE semi-decent way to take care of that problem.
If I believed my immortal soul depended upon me reading the Bible and knowing its contents, I most certainly would read it, cover to cover. Not the way most Christians read it - reading some parts they like but not the others. I read it cover-to-cover as a Christian but focused on those "nice" parts (some people focus on the vindictive parts). I think I've read it more evenly - the good and the bad - as an atheist.
As you should read all texts, like the Iliad, the Bhagavad Gita, or The Epic of Gilgamesh.
I think you're doing it right.
@@darkofalltrades It depends. If I'm reading a novel, and I don't like a certain section of it, but like other parts, I can skip paragraphs or chapters if I want, and read other parts. Or, just put the book aside.
If it's an important book for some reason - contains information which I'll use later, or background information for something I really want to learn, I need to read all of it. I may want to criticize it, or even to reconsider if the (ultimate goal) should be something I even want to take part in or with.
The ultimate importance should be eternity - if I believed eternity was even a thing involving individual consciousness. If it's something like the Bible is believed to be, one should not be reading like the novel I don't like all of in the first paragraph. Many people it seems won't even TRY to read the Bible, yet call themselves "Christian". There was a reason 1000 years ago when few people could read or write, before the printing press when a single copy of the Bible took over a "man-year" to create. These days it's inexcusable.
Anyone who sins has never known or seen God? Hmm how did orginal sin happen then?
So many questions.
"Only heaven's silence for an answer."
The barcode thing sounds so silly… until you decide to venture into a freaking Hobby Lobby for some unknown reason and realise they don’t use them. 😂
Nothing to add. I do agree with you.👍
I still remember the first time one of my friends made this argument: “If you don’t believe in the Bible and have the Holy Spirit in you, it’s impossible to understand it properly.”
I had to try hard not to laugh at him.
let me bet: He will not demonstrate the holy spirit... thing we need. Well, at least, he tried to help us. Right?
So, the Bible is the word of God? Well, we have it, we know how to read, and we can read it, so let's read it.
What? What do you mean I can't? I literally have multiple copies of it, and they are in a language I can read, even if some of them are different versions. Fine, we can stick to just one version just to satisfy you (even though it is one version you already demonstrated to have never read yourself). What is stopping me from reading it then?
What? "I need the Holy Spirit"? Well, how do I get it? ... Uh, and how exactly does that tie to whether or not I can read the Bible?
Okay, then why the ^^^^ do you even have the Bible or any scripture in the first place? You make a rather strong case for it only being so that you can cherry-pick from it in order to justify your own biases, which just so happens to include some of the most bigoted and hateful s^^t that even some of your ilk would tell you to at least tone down on. All you seem to want to do is say whatever the ^^^^ you want - and it tends to be that bigoted s^^t - and be treated as though you are always correct. That is one massive ego. Who do you think you are? Joesph Smith? L Ron Hubbard? You strike me more as a wannabe David Koresh. No wonder you make videos of you screaming, because who the ^^^^ would want to be around you?
Pretty much exactly this ^
Well when I read Homer and when I read Gilgamesh.I first had to read about the book before I read the book.
Like the bible , they were written a long , long time ago and other cultures than mine.
Any time I read an ancient text.I also read books about the texts so I can better understand.
16:13 So, for the past 2 or 3 days I've been on a real tear about the difference between hypocrisy and double standards.
If calling someone a hypocrite is a fallacy, but all you're doing is pointing out their fallacy of holding double standards, who is right in this situation?
Does anybody have a link to the original video?
If you search for the creator and under his shorts, you'll find the vid. I didn't cut anything out (except the music at the end).
You have to read the Bible in the spirit with holy eyes, heart and mind. Duh 🙄 😂
Ahhh yes its not what it says its what I make up
If you become a pastor does that mean you are pasteurised
Interestingly enough, I also worked on a dairy farm around that time too.
The guy your covering sounds like one of those AI game ads
I'm waiting for a Raid: Shadow Legends ad to pop up within his video.
All the Christians I know encourage me to read the Bible and do not tell me that I can't read it.
If we can read it but it doesn't matter, then ok, we won't read it. Why even tell an atheist about your faith as it seems there is nothing a person can do to become a Christian, as an unbeliever can't understand any of your arguments as they are all based on your book, which doesn't matter.
Oh yeah! A LOT of issues with this as well.
Chiefly, the idea of soteriology.
If we didn't know about Mr. Jesus, do we still go to hell?
I don't quite understand why contradictions and lack of historic accuracy are such a problem.
Marvel comics has lots and lots of contradictions and retcons.
None of the events in the comics are historically accurate.
But the stories provide comfort and a lot of moral guidance.
" With great power comes great responsibility"
That's a great proverb even though spiderman does not exist.
I will not stop reading comics because they're not historically accurate nor will I stop reading the bible because it is not historically accurate.
You don't have to believe in historical accuracy or biblical inerancy to be a christian.
In fact believing that it's historically accurate causes all kinds of problems. God commanded the slaughtering of all the Canaanites?
No that's just what the people wrote down to justify their existence in that land.
Although...i will read a religious text both ways.
I read them in a scholarly fashion, but ill also read the Koran as if God did speak to Mohammed. That helps me understand the truth of the text and also understand what followers of that book see there.
Buy the logic of "Anyone who continues to sin has mever known or seen God." Does that mean Lucifer and ever angel that fell from grace never knew or seen God?
And no one better give me that angels aren't who(s) thing. They think like humans, act some what like humans, and oh yeah, have genetic material that is compatable with humans as shoen in the bible.
If this is true "Anyone who continues to sin has mever known or seen God", how did the orginal sin happen?
@mattm8870 Oh. I didn't even think of that one.
Sorry, I don't know what you did differently.
I understand. Thank you for this, really. It means more than you know.
I am going to try really small things at first, perhaps subtle things, and then throw in some bigger changes.
This one had a couple of tests in it that seemed to go well!
He's a bit shouty...
Excellent video!!!
Thank you!
I even turned his audio down for the response.
Have you tried to find people who will satisfy your need for good answers? People who could be in your level of intelligence or higher, people who understands how arguments works so they will know when you point out the flaws in their argument.
I am a newcomer for a christian, and still don't know much, but I study the bible on my own specially now that my one on one bible studies are done. I don't trust other people's word easily so I also want to find different perspectives on things.
I might not be able to quote directly from the book yet but I think it was said that Christ's life cannot be compressed in a book, and like any branch of knowledge, one cannot learn everything about it. Considering this, I will not give up in seeking for truth and without becoming biased to any side.
If a person makes a circular reasoning, do not expect more to them.
Just have a mind that listens closely and heart that is open for changes. We are all students so be critical, but to learn we must first humble ourselves.
Sorry if my English is not that good.
Hello!
Thank you for such a thoughtful and well-expressed comment! Your English is actually quite good, and you've captured some profound ideas here. I especially appreciate your point about remaining humble while being critical - that's a crucial balance in both theological study and intellectual discourse in general. You're also absolutely right about John 21:25 - that's the verse you were thinking of about Christ's life being too vast to capture in books.
I want to highlight the first thing you said. It is a really insightful observation about finding discussion partners who understand how arguments work and can engage with complex ideas. In theological study, having someone who can recognize logical flaws and engage in rigorous analysis is incredibly valuable - it helps us refine our understanding and avoid falling into weak reasoning. Sometimes it's not about having all the answers, but about knowing how to properly examine and discuss the questions.
Your approach to studying independently while remaining open to different perspectives is admirable. Would you mind sharing some of the methods you use in your independent Bible study? I think other viewers might benefit from your approach.
Thank you for your comment. I enjoyed reading and thinking about it!
Cheers!
@@darkofalltrades I know for certain that even though I do fellowship as the scripture said, I still don't want to put myself in the situation where I have to finish that something (debate/discourse) or else the time that I put into that will be wasted. In plain words, I just don't want to put myself into a place where I cannot disengage. I could see it as cowardice, but it is just not in priority. We are told not to waste time as we might not have much left.
I recognize that I am also in some ways a hypocrite, I must say, I still deserve hell even through all the repentance that I am doing.
But my thoughts should be filtered before it gets transformed into action. I must not get bothered by anything when enhancing my faith in Christ. Amen.
This is me trying to introduce myself. I just felt like it was the way to be polite.
.. I don't know if these pastors have already reached your algorithms but there are pastors like Cliffe Knetchelle/Sam Shamoun and many more(not sure if I get their names right), but they work in a similar fashion where they go to places where there are students/non-believers. There they not only share Christ but they also open themselves to the people's questions about him. I have had so many questions before as an atheist. "I just realized, I can't remember any instance where the students/professors/person they are debating with call out flaws in their reasoning". Most of the questions that rise are about the contradictions/problems that are related to bible. These pastors are backed with sufficient knowledge about the logical, and historical insights inside and outside christianity that their answers just make sense.
Some vids might be cut where they have the last say, but still the question in focus was answered.
And just for my study in scripture, I also read in the app Enduring Word, there they explain and expound the knowledge compiled in the bible.
I believe I am on the right path just as long as I keep seeking for truth
Please do correct me if needed. Did these pastors provide illogical answers to the questions that they received?
""don't believe your lying eyes!!!111!!""
No, I don't think I'll disbelieve my own eyes lol 😂
I'd say that the interpretation I have of the Bible since deconverting is more accurate. Without a need for belief in its truth, I can investigate it more deeply and understand it a lot better
BTW: *first* ;-)
Also BTW: I read the Bible *twice* when I first became a Christian. Doing so was instrumental in helping me to *stop* being a Christian
You decided that you know better than God?
@@Charles.Wright They do know better than god, and so do I. We're both real.
@Charles.Wright that was pathetic.
It's tur - I *have* never known or seen God. *No-one has*
That's 'cos God is pretend
And the next thing this guy is going to complain about is how "the gays" stole his rainbow... /s
Reading the Bible with the lens of the Holy Spirit simply means accepting the words of the bible when it is convenient, and ignoring, or interpreting the parts that are inconvenient.
It's as if Wycliffe never happened. 🙄
What the hell is a sin?😊
Disobeying the rules/commands of the divine in this case the God of the bible.
Cant read the bible by just by reading it? That pure nonsense. Oh wait I got it he think read is the same as understand.
As for 2 Corinthians 3:6 it clear to me from reading it Paul is talking about following the spirit of the law of the covenant and not the letter like the Pharisees did. Otherwise why did Paul bother to meantion the new covenant in the same sentence?
She you people like to blabber so much and rather die than address the damn point? This is why shorts are so popular. Not because people's attention spans magically got shorter, but because they are to the point. Breath of fresh air.
Are you saying I should make shorts? Or are you saying that shorts are simply just the point with nothing else?
@darkofalltrades in saying when someone tries to share their thoughts and sentiments - it's very annoying when the good first half of the video is overloaded with their thoughts and sentiments without the main topic being addressed. I had the same issue when I was in sales. All the novice spokespeople make that mistake, however it does not excuses the mistake itself.
Try to address the main topic ASAP and then just extrapolate and break it down. It will help with the viewer retention and by extension with the overall popularity of the channel.
This is excellent feedback! Thank you for clarifying, and I will take it into consideration. Perhaps getting to the good stuff earlier would help. I think you are right.
you don't get enough views, Dark... We need to fix that.
Thank you so much for saying this!
Post a video on your medias of social. If you are in a debate group, share a relevant video, even if it is one of my Explains Logical Fallacies videos.
I've been thinking about bringing my name up to other creators as well.
I am open to suggestions, too! I'd love to get more eyes on the channel.
I know Godless Engineer is subscribed to me.
@@darkofalltrades Just began to, I have joined a french atheist channel, I tend to hand them interesting sources.
We are lacking in term of counterapologetic.
I wish I could speak French and help you with it as well. But if you ever have ANY questions, please don't hesitate to reach out.
DarkOfAllTrades@gmail.com
Oh don't worry, there's at the very least three people that are fluent in english on the discord I mentionned, amongst the most active members.
It revolves around an atheist that decided to go through the Bible and point out where the deity described there is... Really different than the one they tend to present in churches, but during the weekly live there is an open line and people present their beliefs.
Most arguments about why they think what they believe in is true are old washed out ones... But your methodical approach may help to understand what is the actual argument (most guests don't really understand them themselves) and you present various answers that can help someone to either present them... Or come with another one on their own.
Just to tell you about one today... I had presented a syllogism that could or could not be true and proposed to examine the premices. The answer I received was "syllogisms are sophisms". Well... They can... You can't know just yet, check the premices to see if it is a valid syllogism or not...
Turns out they were right, and that syllogism invalidates the "The Church makes no error" idea through the use of the "errare humanum est" idea that my... Opposant ? Not really one but let's call him that... Used to excuse that he could be mistaken but the dogma can't... Turns out that the Church is made by and of humans and I pointed out the actual argument : the dogma has changed, more than once... And refuted itself more than once too.
Not only was it a valid syllogism because all three propositions of it were true... But it was not even the actual reflexion. It was but a diversion still leading to the same conclusion : the Church makes mistakes, hence it can not miraculously protect from heresy, because you can't even know what would be the objectively non heretical dogma nowadays.
Why is he shouting the entire video? Does he need to shout to get his points across?
I even turned down his volume for the response too....
I just have no interest in whats in the bible, or Quran or Book of Mormon, or Bag Vita whatsits or whatever holy writings they claim to have. They all cant decide amongst themselves what it all means. So im not interested in it.
There is something to be said about letting the fight about it, and when they come to a consensus, then we can talk.
That often applied to JUST Christians or JUST Jews too. They can't agree.
I think more Hindus agree on the Bhagavad Gita than the other two.
Yay! Yelling for Jesus!
How would I know if I have the right kind of Holy Spirit? Satan might be deceiving me. Spoiler I suspect it has something to do with how well I agree with his opinions.
How were you studying to be a pastor but are simultaneously unaware that there is enough free biblical commentary to pave Asia, and then in that ignorance claim recommending commentary support is grifting…
How were you studying to be a pastor but don’t know “sin” isn’t a religious term, it’s a Greek archery term…
I smell a rat
@@TexxShields The claim about "sin" being a Greek archery term is a common internet myth. The English word "sin" actually derives from Old English "synn" with Germanic roots (Proto-Germanic *sundjo). The Greek word you're likely thinking of is "hamartia" (ἁμαρτία), which, while sometimes used metaphorically in contexts including archery, was already established as a religious and ethical term well before its New Testament usage.
Regarding biblical commentaries - while free resources certainly exist (and thank goodness for that), the existence of free materials doesn't negate the value of curated or recommended scholarly resources. This is true across all academic disciplines, theology included.
Feel free to verify this in the Oxford English Dictionary or Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. They're fascinating reads.
As someone ordained in 2003 who has also studied linguistics, I'm always happy to engage in substantive dialogue about these topics, preferably without assumptions about rats.
P.S. Asia is quite large - I suspect we'd need significantly more commentaries for such an ambitious paving project. 😊
@ Yes, but protogermanic “sundjo” isn’t specific to religious law but just guilt or wrongdoings at all, to which is then applied to breaking religious law, naturally. Hamartia being not exclusive to archery sure, Aristotle uses it in your sense as moral/ethical errs. But that’s the point I’m making anyway if not just more historically nuanced; that the term already existed in language to describe taboos, downfalls or other misdeeds.
To when applying that same concept to a religious framework, the word of its kind is used. When Greek scripture is then translated from its original ‘hamartia’ into various intermingling European languages a very natural translation would be something like protogerman ‘sundjo’, Latin ‘sons’ etc.
But my point still stands that the concept of “sin” isn’t purely or even originally religious specifically. The popularity of religion just swallowed the phraseology basically.
Like Kleenex instead of facial tissue
I appreciate the more nuanced linguistic discussion! Your Kleenex analogy is actually quite apt for demonstrating how religious usage came to dominate certain terminology. However, this is quite different from your original claim that "sin" was "a Greek archery term" - a common misconception that oversimplifies the complex linguistic and theological evolution of the concept. But that's okay. We can drop that.
While you're correct that religious language often adopts and adapts existing terminology (as your examples of Proto-Germanic "sundjo" and Latin "sons" demonstrate), this supports a different argument than your initial one. The development of religious vocabulary and its relationship to secular terms is a fascinating and fun field of study - the interplay between theological concepts and their linguistic evolution tells us a lot about both language and cultural development.
I hope this discussion helps demonstrate why questions about my theological education and linguistic background aren't particularly concerning to me. These are areas I've studied extensively.
Cheers!
There is nothing wrong with academic rigour if you a trying to train an academic.
Nice trick with the glasses. I was thunking, I don't remember DoAT wearing glasses??? I thunk good.
Believers are just pissed off that many Atheists understand the bible better than they do.
Thank you for the feedback!
I am sincerely glad you enjoyed the glasses bit. I did it and was worried it would come off as too silly or something like that. So, the validation is gratifying. Thank you!
What the hell are you wearing? I get the shirt and the vest. That makes sense. But what’s on your shoulders? If it’s a cape, where does the material go? Is it only three inches long in the back? It should definitely be visible in the crook of your left arm. And what’s holding it in place over your right arm?
I had the avatar for like a year and a half before I noticed. My artist who did it hasn't gotten back to me yet.
It is supposed to be a cloak/cape.
Its a cape designed by Edna Mode. It doesnt get sucked into a plane yet like this😂😂@darkofalltrades
@@darkofalltrades I didn’t notice until two weeks ago. Probably should have mentioned this was another great video. I really enjoy your format.
@@theflyingdutchguy9870 that makes perfect sense. I’d forgotten that Dark is also a superhero. He is dark of all trades.
It keeps my shoulders warm, too!
I know for a fact you don’t look like your avatar lmao
Oh? I am pretty sure I do.
But I'll bite.
How do you know?
@@darkofalltrades 1:41 PM · Sep 21, 2020
Way too easy.
You'll forgive me, but I am not sure to what you are referring. I may not be very intelligent.
I am thinking of what I was doing then. I was working overnights as that was a Sunday....
Sorry, I don't know what you are talking about.
How do I look different than my avatar? I mean, I am not quite that thin. But I think I look like that.
You could have boiled this video down to ten minutes or less, and it would be a better piece. This has an unnecessary amount of egotistical scoffing.
2012 called, they want their reddit tier new atheist slop back 😭🙏
"Ive read the bible many times"
My favorite atheist lie.
Ive been reading it for 2 years and haven't finished it.
If id gotten through it more than once id be able to say the nmbr instead of "many times"
Are you a poe? Are you trying to make theists look unintelligent by claiming you couldn't finish a single book in 2 years?
I read the Silmarillion at least a dozen times. I have no clue about how often I did it because it's irrelevant. I know the content and could recite it at the top of my head. But if I don't make up a number I have, according to you, not read it.
But please, continue to show christians in the worst light possible. You're doing a great job!
Thats not a lie, you just read slow af🤣 bro
@Finckelstein A single book no problem. But 66 is how many books there are in the bible. I've read many of those more than once. But not all. Not yet.
But you go ahead and believe that numbnuts read it "many times" even though he can't tell you ANYTHING ABOUT IT
If you've been picking a book up and putting it down for two years, it doesn't sound like you're particularly invested in it.
Yeah my comments are getting deleted on here. Anyways the bible is actually is together 66 books if you don't count the apochrypha that was originally included in the kjv. To read all of them "many times" and then providing zero insight leads me to believe the claimer hasn't read any of it. While I've read many of the books more than once I have yet to read them all. I could probably do it faster but with a full time job and a family there isn't too much extra time for reading though I do make the effort.
If any of you did even a glossing over of the bible you'd find pretty quickly there's no religion supported therein. You'd also find that ALL religion flies opposite the bible. It's a book of life, truth, knowledge, wisdom, and the way to salvation. And it's completely undefeated in its historical veracity. God bless yall I hope you'll investigate this for yourselves.