Ehrman Says Matthew Mistranslated Old Testament Stuff and I Respond Because of Course I Am

[@Drewman56]

Bart has singlehandedly given this channel so much content. Truly a blessing.

[@darkwolf7740]

It's a miracle!

[@georgechristiansen6785]

He does a great job of articulating the ridiculous arguments Atheists make regarding Jesus.

[@sentjojo]

Only one version of the story, "Well clearly that story was invented" Multiple versions of the story, "Well clearly they all copied from each other"

[@markwebb7576]

If the multiple versions are the same, "they copied each other" If the multiple versions differ, "clearly one is unreliable or wrong" One wonders what criteria would satisfy Ehrman. Moving the goalposts, anyone?

[@MrSeedi76]

​​​@@markwebb7576I've really read the following argument: if only we had a gospel written by Jesus then all would be good. I ask myself, what would really happen if someone found a "Gospel according to Jesus" 😊? Certainly it would be attacked as being fake, the gospel in fact anonymous and the name "Jesus" later added to it after everything in the text was changed to line up with church doctrine of an imaginary powerful Roman church existing in the 1st century 😂.

[@Kitiwake]

Nah.... That just applies to Islam which is a total invention and copyright infringement.

[@mcable217]

Did you listen? He says if we have one version we can't know whether it was invented or not, not that it was invented...

[@sentjojo]

@@mcable217 Yeah that's the reasonable take, but my point is that it's moot. Because the same guy is well known for also discrediting the Gospels where we have multiple versions. There's a healthy form skepticism and there's a cynical form of skepticism.

[@waxworse]

Bart Errman knows exactly what he's doing.

[@MrSeedi76]

That's what I'm thinking. Why would he even still offer classes and online lectures, etc? It's not like being evangelical or even Christian should be necessary to do that (as long as you present both sides of the story) but he became something of an "anti-apologist" and that's his job now. Must be nice being invited by all those atheist channels, giving speeches for a lot of money, etc. He often claims he's not attacking faith or the Bible but I have read more than once that people say he was the one making them leave the church and their faith (often as if that was a good thing 😮).

[@jacksonrelaxin3425]

@@MrSeedi76 people who follow him are just trying to reassure their own doubts. They know there’s something more to the Bible than they understand so they need him to make them feel comfy cozy about denying it outright.

[@michaelbabbitt3837]

One word describes Ehrman: Duplicitous.

[@christianmarvin5419]

"And let's dispel once and for all with this fiction that Bart Ehrman doesn't know what he's doing. He knows exactly what he's doing" - Marco Testify

[@JabberW00kie]

I have to agree. I don’t like accusing someone of purposely misleading, especially since I’ve heard Bart’s a pretty nice dude, but I have trouble believing that he is not aware of the MUCH more convincing explanation that Eric presented in this video. It really does feel like he downplayed it on purpose.

[@inukithesavage828]

Bart is just gonna do the argument from silence again. Sigh.

[@reasonforge9997]

Two thousand years from now will some distant descendent of Bart Ehrman feel comfortable calling us out for saying "good Samaritan" about somebody who was not from Samaria?

[@DanielApologetics]

Bart Ehrman example on Bible verses: verse 1) No miracles = Historical verse 2) No miracles = Historical *verse 3) Miracle = NOT HISTORICAL* verse 4) No miracles = Historical verse 5) No miracles = Historical verse 6) No miracles = Historical *verse 7) Miracle = NOT HISTORICAL*

[@darkwolf7740]

I see no flaws with that logic!

[@phineas8532]

Miracles don’t happen and Jesus resurrection didn’t happen. How do I know that? Because miracles don’t happen!

[@emmanuel8310]

@@phineas8532 Stupid logic

[@emmanuel8310]

@@phineas8532 Stupid logic

[@emmanuel8310]

@@darkwolf7740 Of course, it takes actual brain power and intelligence to see such flaws.

[@Michael-bk5nz]

It is amazing that Ehrman has a PhD in New Testament earned under Bruce Metzger, one of the most prestigious New Testament scholars of the second half of the 20th century, yet he seems to know absolutely nothing about New Testament exegesis, there is simply no way Ehrman is unaware of how Christians have traditionally interpreted these passages, for him to claim that no one really knows what Matthew means is either extraordinarily ignorant or disingenuous

[@stevej71393]

Sowing seeds of doubt is Bart's M.O. He depends on the ignorance of his listeners.

[@Russianfeels529]

Ehrman praises Metger’s knowledge and correctness behind closed doors, then talks out of the other side of he mouth to sell books in public

[@Derek_Baumgartner]

Alex O'Connor from Cosmic Skeptic CosmicTheist from Alex O'Connor CosmicChristian from CosmicTheist WHEN WILL THE REBRANDING END --- Jokes aside, keep up the good work!

[@jeffreyanderson6021]

I actually commented on the "trailer" video that Alex posted. I honestly had never heard this Nazarene thing as an argument against reliability. I just gave a possible explanation based on the etymology of Nazarene and how the Messiah in the old testament is often spoken of in terms of separateness and consecration as in Micah 4 and Zechariah 8.

[@markwebb7576]

Why do they characterize this as a mistranslation? What's translation got to do with it? They can't honestly believe Matthew thought Isaiah 11:1 should be translated, "A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Nazarene will bear fruit". Matthew either knows Hebrew and therefore wouldn't make that mistake, or he's using the septuigent, but the Greek for branch bears no resemblance to Nazarene.

[@repentantrevenant9776]

Agreed, I’ve heard scholars say that Matthew was making an intentional play on words. Idk why one would interpret it as a “mistranslation” from a language he and his audience already know…

[@e.t.h.559]

This verse refers to the prophet Isaiah’s description of a prophecy in Isaiah 11:1. The prophecy states, “And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots.” This prophecy is acknowledged by several rabbis to refer to the Messiah. It was fulfilled in Jesus, who descended from Jesse’s lineage and lived in Nazareth. By living in Nazareth, Jesus was identified and called a Nazarene or “Netzer,” which means “the branch” in Hebrew, connecting him to the prophecy.

[@e.t.h.559]

@@michaelhenry1763 Firstly, the concept of the Messiah in the Old Testament encompasses various roles, including that of a spiritual deliverer and savior, not solely a political leader. Jesus' primary mission was to reconcile God’s people with Him through his sacrificial death and offer redemption from sin. (John 1:29, John 3:14-16.) He brought about a spiritual liberation rather than a political revolution. Secondly, Jesus' genealogy does trace back to the house of David, fulfilling prophecies such as Isaiah 9:7 and Jeremiah 23:5-6. Though David's line may have suffered setbacks throughout history, it didn't mean that it was completely eliminated. To further strengthen the evidence, one can study the numerous Old Testament prophecies fulfilled in the life of Jesus. These include his birth from a virgin (Isaiah 7:14), his birthplace in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2), and the events surrounding his crucifixion and resurrection (Psalm 22, Isaiah 53). These prophecies provide substantial evidence of Jesus being the Messiah. Additionally, understanding the historical and cultural context of The Jewish people of Jesus' era is important. They had specific expectations of the Messiah, which primarily revolved around political liberation. However, Jesus came to offer a more significant and eternal liberation from sin, which did not align with their limited understanding at the time.

[@e.t.h.559]

@@michaelhenry1763 First, the Messiah is not just a political leader, but a savior and deliverer for all people. As I have mentioned, the Hebrew Scriptures prophesied that the Messiah would be born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14), suffer and die for our sins (Isaiah 53), and rise from the dead (Psalm 16:10). These prophecies were fulfilled by Jesus, who claimed to be the Messiah and proved it by his miracles, death, and resurrection. Jesus also fulfilled the role of a prophet, priest, and king, as he taught God’s word, offered himself as a sacrifice, and established his kingdom. furthermore, it is true that it may have seemed as if David’s lineage was eliminated with the Babylonian captivity,However, God had promised to David that his throne would be established forever (2 Samuel 7:16) and that he would raise up a righteous branch from his line who would reign as king and save his people (Jeremiah 23:5-6). God also promised to restore the fortunes of Judah and bring them back from exile (Jeremiah 29:10-14). These promises were fulfilled in part when some of the exiles returned to Jerusalem under the Persian king Cyrus in 538 BC and rebuilt the city and the temple. Among them was Zerubbabel, a descendant of David, who became the governor of Judah and led the rebuilding efforts (Ezra 3:8). Zerubbabel was the son of Shealtiel, who was the son of Jeconiah (also called Jehoiachin or Coniah), who was the son of Jehoiakim, who was the son of Josiah, who was the son of Amon, who was the son of Manasseh, who was the son of Hezekiah, who was the son of Ahaz, who was the son of Jotham, who was the son of Uzziah, who was the son of Amaziah, who was the son of Joash, who was the son of Ahaziah, who was the son of Jehoram, who was the son of Jehoshaphat, who was the son of Asa, who was the son of Abijah, who was the son of Rehoboam, who was the son of Solomon, who was the son of David (1 Chronicles 3:10-19; Matthew 1:6-12). He was also recognized as a signet ring on God’s hand, a symbol of his chosen status and authority (Haggai 2:23). Second, Jesus’ genealogy is not ahistorical or contradictory, but rather shows his legal and physical descent from David. Matthew traces the genealogy of Jesus through Joseph, his legal father, who was a descendant of Solomon, son of David. Luke traces the genealogy of Jesus through Mary, his biological mother, who was a descendant of Nathan, another son of David. Both genealogies show that Jesus had a legal right to the throne of David as well as a physical connection to him. Third, the virgin birth is not a myth or a mistranslation, but a historical fact and a miraculous sign. The word used in Isaiah 7:14 for “virgin” is “almah”, which means a young woman of marriageable age who is presumed to be a virgin. “The term ‘maid” or young woman, is used consistently in various passages, such as Genesis 24:43, Exodus 2:8, Psalm 68:25, Song of Solomon 1:3 and 6:8, where it denotes, a virgin, and even in Proverbs 30:19. The example given in Proverbs 30:19 is when some Jewish rabbis refer to the word being used for a corrupted woman. It is important to note that there is no evidence suggesting that the ‘maid’ and the adulterous woman are the same person. Even if they were, she could still be called a maid or virgin, despite being corrupted. This could be based on her own self-description, how she appeared to others who did not know about her corruption, or as she was before her defilement. This usage is not uncommon in Scripture, as seen in Deuteronomy 22:28.” moreover, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, called the Septuagint, used the word “parthenos”, which means a virgin in a more specific sense. Matthew quoted from the Septuagint when he applied Isaiah 7:14 to Mary, who conceived Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit. The virgin birth was also confirmed by Luke, who interviewed Mary and other eyewitnesses of Jesus’ life. The virgin birth shows that Jesus was not an ordinary human being, but the Son of God who came to save us from our sins. Fourth, Jesus’ passion narratives are not inventions or misinterpretations, but reliable accounts and fulfillments of Scripture. The four Gospels record the events of Jesus’ arrest, trial, crucifixion, death, and burial with remarkable consistency and detail. They also show how these events were foretold by the prophets and how Jesus understood them as part of God’s plan. Jesus did not die as a victim or a failure, but as a victor and a redeemer. He willingly gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45) and as an expression of his love for us (John 15:13). He also predicted his resurrection on the third day (Matthew 16:21) and proved it by appearing to his disciples and many others (1 Corinthians 15:3-8).

[@dougbendo8817]

@@michaelhenry1763 clearly you have no clue of what you're talking about 😂 The Trinity is the relationship in witch the Father is to be worshiped through the name of the Son to show you recognize the perfect blood atonement that he made as the holy of holies spoke of by the prophets and through recognizing the act of the Son's death and resurrection the Son baptizes you with the nature of the Lord his Holy Spirit given authority to him by the father. The term trinity in it’s purist form speaks to the core pillars of the “new covenant” the Most High spoke about through the profits that was to supper-seed the “old covenant” that was created that the nation of Israel failed to uphold. --- Tanahk Jeremiah 31 30 Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, and I will form a covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, a new covenant. 31 Not like the covenant that I formed with their forefathers on the day I took them by the hand to take them out of the land of Egypt, that they broke My covenant, although I was a lord over them, says the Lord. 32 For this is the covenant that I will form with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will place My law in their midst and I will inscribe it upon their hearts, and I will be their God and they shall be My people. Jeremiah 32 40And I will form for them an everlasting covenant, that I will not turn away from them to do them good, and My fear I will place in their heart, not to turn away from Me. 41And I will rejoice over them to do good to them, and I will plant them in this land truly with all My heart and with all My soul. --- Scripture even tells of the time when this will take place. --- Tanakh - The Hebrew Bible Ketuvim (Scriptures) Daniel - Chapter 9 23 In the beginning of your supplications, a word came forth, and I have come to tell it, for you have desirable qualities; now contemplate the word and understand the vision. 24 Seventy weeks [of years] have been decreed upon your people and upon the city of your Sanctuary to terminate the transgression and to end sin, and to expiate iniquity, and to bring eternal righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies. 25 And you shall know and understand that from the emergence of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until the anointed king [shall be] seven weeks, and [for] sixty-two weeks it will return and be built street and moat, but in troubled times. 26 And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one will be cut off, and he will be no more, and the people of the coming monarch will destroy the city and the Sanctuary, and his end will come about by inundation, and until the end of the war, it will be cut off into desolation. --- Key words to look at “ to expiate iniquity, and to bring eternal righteousness” - This would be the “new covenant” spoken by Jeremiah 31 and 32! “ to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies” - Christ was the seal of the prophets and as the “ Holy of Holies” he had to be the son of The Most High! “ the anointed one will be cut off, and he will be no more” - What does “cut off” mean? It means to be killed. Christ was killed on the cross because it was the will of the father so that Christ could be lifted up on the third day so that you would believe and glorify The Most High in doing so. “ the people of the coming monarch will destroy the city and the Sanctuary, and his end will come about by inundation, and until the end of the war” - this took place in 70AD during the roman Jewish war. --- John 19:11 Jesus answered, “You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.” --- The most high “ destroy the city and the Sanctuary” because the Jews had falsely handed Christ over to the Romans to be crucified. And in the trinity there is ONLY ONE GOD! "Before Me no god was formed, nor will there be one after Me. I, even I, am HaShem, and besides Me there is no Saviour." Isaiah 43:11. That last part you really need to focus on. So how can Christ be our saviour? So to answer your question we must first start off with “let us make man in our likeness”. Man is made up of Soul, Body and Spirit. I won’t go into detail into all three of them but what I will tell you is the GOD is spirt. What Jesus had in him was the spirt of the Lord. This is talked about throughout the Christ testament. The Soul was Jesus and the body was Jesus as well which Jesus was of man. The spirit was of God! Having the spirit of God in him gave Christ the authority to do the works he was able to do and remain sinless. Christ was a servant unto the Lord as one being a son onto his father. God is spirit he is not flesh and through Gods spirit Christ was able to do the fathers will. In modern day English we call it “taking the wheel”. Christ could have done nothing unless it was of the father's will. This is said time and again through the Christ scriptures. That “oneness” was the spiritual connection to God. The fact is that his soul could communicate with the father on a direct level because Christ had given his spirit over to the Lord completely. Remember because the Father is spirit the Lord could reside in Christ and be everywhere else at the same time. Hence making everything possible through the will of the Lord and why Christ could still look to the Heavens and give him all the glory. JOHN 14:11 Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves. Before the Trinity (new convent) Luke 3:16 John answered and said to them all, “As for me, I baptize you with water; but One is coming who is mightier than I, and I am not fit to untie the thong of His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. After the Trinity (new convent) Matthew 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and Christ did have a biological father...Joseph John 1 45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. Hebrews 2 16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed (sperm) of Abraham. 17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. Matthew 1:20-21 But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will bear a son (meaning hasn't had a child yet), and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” Luke 2:33 And his father and his mother marveled at what was said about him Luke 4:22 And all spoke well of him and marveled at the gracious words that were coming from his mouth. And they said, “Is not this Joseph's son?”

[@Bobduck20]

Bart- "Jesus didn't claim to be God because he didn't say Iam God worship me"😅🤦 Jesus- "Who has seen me has seen the Father" " Me and the Father are one" " Before Abraham Iam" also it says in the Bible"Says the Lord" when he is speaking to the prophets before him etc

[@Bobduck20]

Bart- "The Bible is corrupted" The Dead Sea Scrolls- " It got changed once because of Martin Luther who created protestants but if you compare it to the Orthodox Ancient Christianity with all the original scriptures it's the same it doesn't take a genius to figure that one out" 😅

[@MrSeedi76]

​@@Bobduck20it didn't get changed though. Luther tried to use the best documents he could find, which was the textus receptus at that time.

[@Bobduck20]

@@MrSeedi76He removed some scriptures but orthodox has all of them he removed a bit too much because he though icons and idols are the same

[@MrSeedi76]

​@@Bobduck20he did translate the texts that are all in the catholic Bible though. They just were left out for doubtful reasons later on. I have multiple Luther bibles that contain them.

[@Bobduck20]

@@MrSeedi76KJV and orthodox study Bible is my personal favourites

[@ryanevans2655]

Alex (or Bart) converting would win thousands of converts and bring thousands of brilliant minds to the Church. Praying for them 🙏🏼

[@Idaho-Cowboy]

Don't worry about being the Bart Ehrman response channel. His name shows up a lot in stories of people deconstructing their faith and probably the biggest worry I have in witnessing is running into one of his acolytes since it's my limited study time versus a guy who makes his leaving attempting to tear the Bible apart. It's also worth noting Jonah (a type of Christ Luke 11:29) came from the area around Nazareth called Gath-hepher.

[@JabberW00kie]

The branch theory is the one I’m familiar with, and I was surprised when Bart did not go that route. It has way more weight than the explanation he chose. I can’t imagine he is not familiar with it.

[@greenbird679]

There is a youtuber called Christian Prince who discusses Islam. As per him, the early Islam was influenced by a heretic Christian group called Nasrani Christians. As per him, Nasrani means ignorant or lesser knowledge. I think now I can make a connection between Nazarene and Nasrani. Thank you for this video and the knowledge.

[@CircusofPython]

The influence is very obvious when you look at Eastern Christianity (eastern orthodox and eastern catholics). The liturgy, spirituality, terminology, all make it very clear that Islam descends from it. It’s partly why Muhammad mistakenly says in the Qur’an that Christians see God as a trinity of “God (Father), Isa (Jesus), and Maryam (Mary)”. Also bear in mind that Muhammad had a Christian uncle who he was close to, and this uncle “confirmed” Muhammad was a prophet just before he died per the Islamic tradition.

[@Mark-cd2wf]

“It’s obvious that Matthew just came up with somethin’.” What scholarship. What erudition. What a brilliant, well-thought out critique. What a load of crap. The level of disrespect Ehrman shows here just to Alex, let alone his audience, is amazing. Does he think Alex is stupid? He’s an Oxford graduate, for crying out loud. This is incredibly thin gruel, and Ehrman thinks people are going to buy it just because of his reputation. Pathetic.

[@reaganlecroy7773]

You should read all the comments on Alex's video, everyone praising Bart for cutting through thousands of years of lies by Christians. I'm not very well educated on all of these matters, and I still had some objections to some of his conclusions and thought processes.

[@azrael516]

deluded

[@azrael516]

​@@reaganlecroy7773deluded??

[@jamiehudson3661]

Good video. I'm mainly commenting, hoping that Eric will finally like one of my comments.

[@ikengaspirit3063]

That stuff you started with, you want to know why I am sure he is in bad faith?. Because he makes alot errors not based on anything in the various talks and just happens to always make those errors anti the New Testament and never pro the New Testament. This is as clear an evidence of negative bias as we will ever get.

[@MrSeedi76]

😂 "budding future apologist who just hasn't realized it yet" - awesome! Just the other day I posted on his channel that there will probably soon be a "conversion reveal" since he claimed he thinks the chances for theism being true are 45% 😊. I'm looking forward to it.

[@bilbobaggins9893]

what video and at what point in the video did he make the "45%" comment?

[@MrSeedi76]

​@@bilbobaggins9893it was probably just an example I think. But the last few videos he didn't seem as skeptical as before the name change of the channel.

[@bilbobaggins9893]

@@adamcosper3308 yes, the most recent Forbes list does indeed have Christian apologist listed as one of the most lucrative careers.

[@Sugarycaaaaaandygoodness]

You and me both. Alex seems like he genuinely cares about the truth, few things would make me happier that seeing God grab onto someone like that

[@racsooj456]

I think what you said about the messiah being despised and rejected by men is bang on here. Even John records Phillip saying 'can anything good come from Nazareth?' I think the word Nazarene isn't the important part. Its what it meant to be a Nazarene at that time that I think Matthew is referring to. As the scriptures broadly attest, which explains why he didn't name a specific prophet.

[@racsooj456]

@@michaelhenry1763 That's irrelevant to my point. John recording that being a Nazarene wasn't such a great thing fits nicely with the point being made here.

[@racsooj456]

@@michaelhenry1763 That's quite implausible since Matthew's gospel is clearly written to persuade a Jewish audience - which no doubt would have been aware (far more than we are, 2000 years removed from the context) if there was zero reason to bring up Nazareth in relation to the scriptures.

[@racsooj456]

@@michaelhenry1763I think you are erroneously equating technically 'not knowing' who wrote the gospels with the gospels 'definitely not' being connected to the traditionally ascribed authors. You are then making assumptions based of that which ends up being baseless speculation since by your own admission you don't know who wrote Matthew. For all you know he could be the author of Mark writting another gospel for a different audience...The best you can do is to say you 'suppose'' Matthew made up xyz for xyz reasons based on your assumptions about the nature of the writer.. Yet conversely, there's nothing implausible about the traditional authorship (understood charitably) and there are some reasonable considerations in favour of it, so it's not as if history is crying out that the gospels were obviously anonymous. But putting that aside; the author(s) of Matthew is presenting Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. The fact that he (whoever he was) was writing or presenting anything suggests there was some reason for doing so..I'd say it's pretty obvious the writer(s) was a Christian. So he probably has a Christian reason for doing so i.e to tell the story of his Lord.. Do you really think Matthew is putting in all these proposed messianic references from the scriptures for an audience that has literally no idea about them or doesn't think they have any authority? I find that very unlikely.

[@racsooj456]

@@michaelhenry1763 Mark mentions Matthew as one of the twelve so I don't think Matthew invented him. Matthew could have just left Levi as a noted follower of Jesus who wasn't a disciple If he wanted but he didn't, there wasn't an internal contradiction in Mark to fix. If anything he created the appearance of one. Also, there's really nothing that implausible about a Jewish tax collector having a Greek and Hebrew name. You seem to think the author of Matthew is a massivehypocrite since he (presumably as a believer) recorded, among other things, one of the most incredibly demanding set of moral teachings by Jesus - but then went about lying and making up stories in his name. I guess I'm just not with you on that one.

[@racsooj456]

@@michaelhenry1763 Why think Mark made a mistake/contradiction if nobody (I suppose that includes Mark) knew who the twelve were at the time? That seems quite an illogical assertion. And why think that Matthew would care about forcing Levi and Matthew together if nobody knew who the twelve were? There was nothing to try and fit together..He could have just left it as an interesting story about the fact that Jesus even called tax collectors to follow him, which probably would have fit nicely with his gospels theme anyway. Also, the gospels were written at worst within the lifetimes of the students of the disciples, so I doubt that the names of the twelve were a complete mystery to the Christians at that time.

[@305thief8]

No one really talks about how the gospels give attributes/abilities that only the God of the OT can only have. Even Stephen Boyce brings this up

[@martyfromnebraska1045]

Brant Pitre brings up this stuff all the time in his Case for Jesus book. Incidentally, there’s also a video of him stumping Bart on KZbin at a Q&A with very simple questions.

[@jacksonrelaxin3425]

What attributes are those? God of the Old Testament is always killing people while the God if the New Testament does the polar opposite. Notice when Jesus contradicts the “eye an eye, tooth for a tooth” concept? How could you possibly think this is the same person. Oh wait; lemme guess, “he’s the same yesterday, today, and forever.” right? I agree, which is why I don’t think we need to ignore our common sense and believe that one person is going to be teaching two different things.

[@MrSeedi76]

​@@jacksonrelaxin3425you don't seem to understand what the "eye for an eye" even means - it was a legal ruling that you had to make amends, not that your eye should be poked out. And yes, it's the same God. Otherwise your following Marcion who was a heretic. But I do indeed think that God changes in the course of the Bible. If God couldn't change, he'd be less than us because we can change. Reading the Bible it seems to me the story of God coming ever closer to us until he becomes human and shows that he's with us even in death and weakness. That's the story of the Bible to me, even tough it might not agree with some.

[@jacksonrelaxin3425]

@@MrSeedi76 so you’re calling Jesus a heretic too because he also contradicts the rule as well.

[@MrSeedi76]

​@@jacksonrelaxin3425no. Please do a little research before you make statements like this.

[@survivaloptions4999]

So, a 21st century American atheist is schooling a first century Isaeli Jew about what the Torah *really* says. Ok.

[@sunilambat9982]

I personally belong to a Christian sect from south of India. We were Christian much before even Europeans became. We believe that Christianity started here in AD 52 by the arrival of St Thomas who was a disciple of Jesus. Interestingly we were called Nazarenes before becoming called as Christian. It’s only after Europeans who came during the 15 and 16 centuries identified us as some sort of underdeveloped Christians and eventually they reconverted many of us to Catholics. So Nazarenes we’re an ancient identity for Christian’s . Bart doesn’t understand that the name was a cultural one . So has strong roots. It’s not a mistake

[@simonskinner1450]

So important. As Nazarenes are reported not to believe Jesus was God, I believe that too, as the followers of Jesus were already a people without Christianity. It is known that in the 2nd century Christianity divorced itself from tlits roots, and due to not following the Torah of Abraham Christianity is illegitimate, but the religion of the Nazarenes may be legitimate. Your ancestors may well give been undeveloped Christians, which could be an advantage as they were illegitimate, as Christianity is not true to the NT. I have a Ytube video series called 'Myths in so-called Christianity', and if any of my comments ring true to you please reply to me.

[@Kingrich_777]

PLEASE make another video on all of the issues they discussed.

[@TestifyApologetics]

I'm working on another one regarding Jesus' I am statements and the Gospel of John

[@Kingrich_777]

@@TestifyApologetics ty

[@reaganlecroy7773]

@@TestifyApologetics What about the claims that Bart makes about Romulus? Was he resurrected and did people interact with him? Was he born of a virgin?

[@wayseeker12]

I've seen indeed few but surely some people say that Matthew is using midrashic interpretation for some of the prophecies he quotes. Interesting.

[@garrettelgin4742]

Wow he’s straight lying through his teeth around 3:09 man is straight stumbling. Looks like Erhman might have some shame left.

[@bareit98]

The late James Randi, a noted skeptic, made a video stating that there is no evidence that Nazareth existed. I believe even Dr. Ehrman made a response to that argument arguing for Nazareth's existence.

[@reaganlecroy7773]

Pretty sure it was just a small town, not very important, so people with doubts jumped on a lack of evidence, because there wasn't much to begin with

[@shamounian]

He meant Isaiah 11:1.

[@TestifyApologetics]

I think you're right. Nice to see you here, Sam.

[@Kitiwake]

Pretty cool take on Alex's future.

[@hubertagamasu6283]

How Ehrman's own writings point to Jesus as God Premise 1: The son of man who comes on the clouds, sits at the right hand of God [Mark 14:62] Premise 2: The Messiah sits at the right hand of God [Mark 12:35-37] Conclusion 1: The messiah is the Son of Man who comes with the clouds. Premise 3 (from conclusion 1): The Messiah is Son of man who comes with the clouds. Premise 4: Jesus identifies himself as the Messiah [Mark 14:61-63] Conclusion 2: Jesus, claims to be the Messiah, son of Man, who comes with the clouds. Premise 5: God shares His glory with NO OTHER being [Isaiah 42:8] Premise 6: The Son of Man is given worship that is due to only God! [Daniel 7:13-14, the word for worship here is פְלַח [pelach, Strong's number 6399 ] and is used in Daniel ONLY for deity, not persons [compare Daniel 3:14, 3:17]. He also comes on the clouds, which is an Old Testament motif applied to only God! [Isaiah 19:1, Psalm 104:3]. Ehrman agrees, noting in his book that the Son of Man sits on the throne of God and shares His power! [Ehrman, How Jesus became God, read from p39]) Conclusion 3: The Son of Man is NONE OTHER than God. Premise 7 (from conclusion 3): The son of Man is God Premise 8 (from conclusion 2): Jesus identifies himself as the son of man Conclusion: Jesus identifies himself as God.

[@__.Sara.__]

Thank you, Erik!

[@TestifyApologetics]

Thank you!

[@martyfromnebraska1045]

What’s up with KZbin atheists and British accents

[@nerdyasfuck9440]

There are a lot of Atheists in the UK. The new atheist movement was founded there.

[@achristian11]

Remember that Jesus explained to His disciples after His resurrection what the prophets had said which could include prophecy that was never written down but Jesus (God) knew

[@hglundahl]

1:38 Multiple sources ... comes from a 19th C. school in historiography from my own country Sweden, the so called Weibull school. * Multiple, independent sources * from more than one party (in cases of conflict) can replace being from someone independent of the party * that are documents rather than narratives * and that are contemporary. For a 19th C. AD event, yeah, if only one newspaper ran a story only after the one or those concerned were dead, in a narrative that doesn't cite documents that can be identified ... for a century with so much documentation still left for us to view as the 19th C. AD, that little documentation is fishy. Even with the Middle Ages, this Weibull criterium becomes trickier to rely on, and when it comes to Late Antiquity or earlier, being consistently Weibull = ruling out historicity of Alexander (no sources contemporary) and of Julius Caesar conquering Gaul (while Cicero is anti-Caesarian, his pleas before Caesar - pro rege Deiotaro and pro Ligario - which I have not read, may well have no mention at all of Gallic Wars, and all later ones - like Livy - are as pro-Caesarian as Caesar).

[@hglundahl]

I did an F search on Pro Rege Deiotaro, and it doesn't contain the word "Gaul" ....

[@hglundahl]

@@michaelhenry1763 Yes, basically.

[@hglundahl]

@@michaelhenry1763 w a i t ... I meant for events. Not for assessments. All the things you mentioned are either: * assessments * or "events" but such that no one saw and for which the ancients depended on assessments. I do _not_ take the word of ancients that Siddharta Gautama achieved Nirvana (or whatever) - that's an assessment. I _do_ take the word of ancients that he was a prince who discovered suffering is a reality, state power can't fix all of it, and tried to find an answer, and that his view on things is basically reflected in the text called Tripitaka. As you mentioned Romulus ... "the apostles loved Jesus, because they saw he was God; the companions of Romulus made him a God, because they loved him" ... that's freely from St. Augustine of Hippo, City of God. I e, he took the word of ancients that Romulus was the first of seven kings.

[@hglundahl]

@@michaelhenry1763 Totally correct, yes.

[@hglundahl]

@@michaelhenry1763 _"For example, Romulus is a mythical figure along with all the first Roman kings of the regal period."_ What exact arguments do you have for this position? Btw, I totally disagree with Jefferson, since there the observed events themselves very clearly show precisely miracles happened. For the rest of your modernist views - what exact argument do you have for the positions? In the Catholic Church (at least prior to certain crooks in office now), you'd be pretty quickly excommunicated for what you just said. Since you are obviously not a Catholic, I don't see what effect this could have on you, except to clarify that what you said is a total no no to me, so, let's continue arguing, shall we? You have given a string of assertions, now back them up!

[@simontemplar3359]

Ah Bart Ehrman... the energizer bunny of being wrong. This is the danger of pride. Dr. Ehrman is absolutely smart enough to know he's wrong, and yet...

[@lostfan5054]

If an author makes 9 claims and they're all true, that doesn't have any bearing on the truth of their 10th claim. Each claim should evaluated on its own

[@TestifyApologetics]

Do you evaluate every claim that people you trust make? Even when they're telling you mundane things, like where a guy moved?

[@lostfan5054]

@@TestifyApologetics No, not if it's a mundane claim like that. Especially if I know the source to be generally reliable.

[@TestifyApologetics]

exactly. for more, check out this video by Lydia McGrew. kzbin.info/www/bejne/p6O7h5WsfKygkLM&ab_channel=LydiaMcGrew

[@amazingbibleantiquities7221]

Can you give more information about the trial of Netzar and Buni by the Bar Kokhba government?? I already heard about the trial of the 5 Jewish Christians by the Bar Kokhba government in A.D.133 but the book I have does not say what the source of the story is. Thank you!

[@mastershake4641]

Has anyone else noticed how intricate sceptics have to get analyzing words and grammar and all sorts of things to try to find contradictions in the bible, while every other religion anyone can find contradictions without even trying. Its like watching a movie or reading a book you have to suspend disbelief because its so easy to pick apart anything, yet the bible they have to literally argue over if a prophecy comes from a scripture describing the word for a root or whatever. Yet these atheists think its some kind of gatcha that disproves everything.

[@simonskinner1450]

I notice. It is as though everything Bart says he believes to be a 'silver bullet', yet Christianity itself may argue two hundred different interpretations of one verse. However irrelevant an Atheist view happens to be, there is alot of false teaching and doctrine attributed to the NT. It is good to critique the NT for the truth, so as a so-called Christian I have made a Ytube video series called 'Myths in so-called Christianity', that the NT repudiated false teaching.

[@simonskinner1450]

I notice. It is as though everything Bart says he believes to be a 'silver bullet', yet Christianity itself may argue two hundred different interpretations of one verse. However irrelevant an Atheist view happens to be, there is alot of false teaching and doctrine attributed to the NT. It is good to critique the NT for the truth, so as a so-called Christian I have made a Ytube video series called 'Myths in so-called Christianity', that the NT repudiated false teaching.

[@georgechristiansen6785]

Ehrman made my eyes roll so hard in that video when I frst saw it that I might have pulled a muscle.

[@morefiction3264]

Well, I like the bookcase O'Connor was shooting in front of.

[@thisutuber]

Jesus knows how and when to reveal himself to each person...

[@trevoradams3702]

Not a big deal but I wish people wouldn’t make statements like “the future Christian apologist who just doesn’t know it yet”. Let’s not give him any reason to be more resistant to it than he already has been. He seems to be genuine in his assessment of things so let it come along in its own time. I have no clue where he will end up but let’s just encourage him rather that make snide comments toward him.

[@DarkWolf-407]

Who Ehrman? His goal is to destroy Christianity and all followers of Jesus. So I'd say he's no apologist. People just say that to get under his skin.

[@ballasog]

@@DarkWolf-407 Apologetics is a grift that gets money from stupid people by telling them they're smart.

[@ShmoeBoe]

No not Ehrman, the guy he's talking with, Alex O'Connor.​@@DarkWolf-407

[@carminefragione4710]

Because the European Jews claiming Napoleon Bonaparte was their real Jewish Messiah , not Jesus, they found out that European Judaism has no prior knowledge of Egyptian Hieroglyphs and ended their fantasy knowing that they had no relationship to the Jews of Alexandria, one of the largest ancient populations of Jews in the time of Jesus and John the Baptist, two thousand years ago. The Jews of Alexandria did know how to read the Egyptian Heiroglyphs, but the Jews of Europe turned out to be nothing more than a MEMORIAL RELIGION CULT, having no continuum of genealogy to the past real ancient history of the Jews and thus Judaism is a fraud, they have nothing to do with the real Jews who lived two thousand years ago. The Bible has a passage "OUT OF EGYPT I SHALL CALL MY SON". prompting the New Testament to show a story of how Jesus and his parents escaped to Egypt when Herod the Great was trying to kill any Jewish new born baby that might pose a danger to his own reign. Jesus had relevance, the Jews of Europe have nothing at all. They went down to Israel with Napoleon to have some skirmish along the Jordan River, and then went to Egypt with Napoleon, who used a cannon to blow the nose off the Sphinx. But the Jewish Rabbis , circa 1794 A.D. had no idea how to read the Hieroglyphs , and that proved they had no connection to the actual Jews of Alexandria who did know how to read the Egyptian symbols. So Judaism is a Dark Ages invention or reinvention of a religion , like the Mormons, with no real history proven . It is what they believe as they were inculcated for the last 800 years as a Cult found in Europe. There are no such Hebrew scriptures written in ancient times, the most plausible thing is MOSES knew Canaanite or Egyptian or maybe Sumerian Cuneiform, where the Finger of God would be a REED impressed in soft clay tablets and then fired in the Kiln Furnace as the language used in Moses time. So the top of the Mountain of Sinai was all AFIRE when God wrote the Ten Commandments with the Finger of God, it sounds like a Babylonian Cherub Tradition, which explains why fire was used in giving the Law. So , the actual Law was Cuneiform Script using REEDS on soft clay tablets , and baked in the OVEN, thus the people saw FIRE on top of the Mountain. That would explain allot of things. "HEBREW" is only a Canaanite Script, matching Phoenician Alphabet of all Indo European Languages, but you see the Babylonian style Cherubim and Seraphim were idols or images found in the Temple of Solomon. FACTS ARE STUBBORN THINGS. Moses never said "JEW" anything, and probably wrote using Cues and Marks associated to Babylonian traditions. Cues and Marks, are like Cuneiform impressions made by REEDS. Of course this is speculation but no ancient Hebrew writing dating to Moses has ever been found. But clay tablets for Cuneiform, are everywhere.

[@carminefragione4710]

There is no such thing as handwritten ancient Bible. The Bible was an Oral Tradition like the Bards who sang the stories told by Homer, about the Iliad and the Odyssey. These story tellers were Divine Playwrights, making out of the singular mouth the three person tenses of speech, the normal voice of the Story Teller was for Narration , and then they had a special voice for all the actors in the script or story line, and a magnified singing out Voice for God, or Angels. The SONG OF THE ANGELS, is how they carried the tunes, and the ANCIENT STORY TELLER was a WISE MAN , a PRIEST , a SHAMAN FIGURE , who had his own flesh and blood being, but Spirits came upon them to alter their Personna as they did what Alfred Hitchcock did and Shakespeare to change their Person from self to any other character and also speak as the Angels or Speak As GOD. If you read the opening of the Bible in Genesis One, you get the drift that a RABBI or TEACHER is the SPEAKER, to narrate and then shifts his Person of Tense and Character , out of one mouth , to be all the persons necessary to explain the Story , to avoid being monotonous or boring, while CHILDREN were the students gathered around the Old Wise Man , "THE ANCIENT STORY TELLER". under the CHESTNUT TREE, etc. While the parents were out in the fields picking the crops, the children were taught their ABCS of culture and wisdom for life in the Tribe, by the Old Wise Man, who had ARTISTIC TALENT. The real Torah is a STORY TELLER PERSON, who has a title, like "JEWEL OF THE NILE" is a title for a wise poet, then YAHWEH ( I AM THAT I AM) is the MESSIAH or TEACHER , as Jesus was called RABBIS, who did not write any books, but with passion and DIVINE TALENT taught them by PARABLES of MYSTERY. and that was called GOD. "THE WORD OF GOD" is the title for JESUS CHRIST and for MOSES And others who were the efficient STORY TELLERS that spread the teaching, not by reading books, but by the "WAY OF THE LORD" a Processional March and PEDAGOGY styles of WALKING AND SINGING PSALMS, you walk and talk to the rhyme and rhythm of musical pipes and drums and stringed instruments, because MUSIC has a charm that opens the MIND to enable people to sing long epics of Psalms or Stories, that without the Cues and Marks, like Angels in the wings to prompt the singers, on their stage, they would forget their instructions. So then Book writing is like the invention of the Computer to substitute the need to walk in the way of the Lord and just hear transcriptions take the place of really living a life that relates to the stories. Writing is GRAVEN IMAGES and the COMPUTER IS ARTIFICIALITY, making people forget that they came into the world NAKED , as Job said ,and Naked we leave the world, the same way we came, NAKED. So the BABY is born , not with pen and paper to write or books to read. We came by God's DESIGN to CRY OUT FROM THE MOUTH TO BEG GOD FOR MERCY. WE CRY OUT FOR SALVATION and God speaks to us the NATURAL WAY , you hear and listen for God in your SOUL. Handwriting is just a SHORTCUT to know something that the actual People knew by HEART, now you read it and forget it, because you don't sing it out loud and apply it to your life, it is not natural to you and so you RATIONALIZE IT, and make great mistakes. Jesus did not write any books, because he was a genuine Jew in Israel and used the Oral Tradition that you learn to see, and hear and then SPEAK TO GOD. You cannot be saved by reading books, you have to use your muscle and work in a life style that connects to God, as a Natural and Naked Man. Then you know God by the Torah, since it has consumed your life as a culture and you WALK IN THE WAY OF THE LORD. Jesus is the WORD OF GOD by TITLE, He is GOD BY TITLE, like the RABBI IS THE ANCIENT STORY TELLER, like ALFRED HITCHCOCK OWNS THE STAGE AND DOES CAMEOS, and like Shakespeare, who lived in the Playwright, but to this day no man really knows who in the world was Shakespeare, did he exist or was he Divine ?

[@TheLionFarm]

8:18 well done An example for an example 🪔

[@ryanrockstarsessom768]

Thank you

[@rufusmcplaid9213]

Thank-you Thank-you Eric for responding. I do not understand why Ehrman gets so much latitude from IP (example: Barts take on Revelation)

[@sethcaro]

I think that in general who do have evidence that sections (verse or verses)have been added or removed from one or another certain manuscript(can’t say with hidden motive). I could understand why an skeptic would like to test each story. Of course I also believe they go way too far with this.

[@MrSeedi76]

True. The part about the woman caught in adultery is missing in the oldest manuscript of John's gospel (P66) for instance. Doesn't change the message of John's gospel of course. Augustinus claims it was in fact removed from earlier versions so the women won't get any wrong ideas 😂. And later put back in.

[@christiang4497]

Thanks for this!

[@miroslavmatijevic6185]

I am still perplexed why are you sparing Bart? He obviously made a mistake when talking about root of David in Isaiah 9:1? Root is mentioned in 11:1! If some Christian apologetic would make such a mistake he would be mocked undoubtedly! Let us show clearly that he is forgetting the Bible, and will become more and more unreliable...

[@Tzimiskes3506]

Alex has yet much to learn. I'm still happy that he is much better than woodford who got refuted many times and still never learns.

[@darkwolf7740]

That's because Alex wants to search for the truth, Woodford just wants to find things to suit his narrative and reject anything that doesn't suit that...

[@carminefragione4710]

I said it before as it is truth. The only kind of language arts that would be known to Moses is Hieroglyphs or Cuneiform , which used soft clay tablets , impressed with a Reed instrument, "Finger of God". and then baked in a KILN FURNACE to make it durable as a tablet with instructions. The Temple of Solomon was chuck full of Babylonian IDOLS , the style of CHERUBIM AND Seraphim Angels, "GRAVEN IMAGES", from Babylon and Chaldea. Moses forbade the making of GRAVEN IMAGES, meaning using human invention of handwriting to copy the Law from the Oral Tradition to a "CHEAT SHEET". to bypass the Word of God ( THE SPEAKER OR PRIEST) and think they can see God "FACE TO FACE" when this is GRAVEN IMAGES. The only meaning to the fiery top of Sinai and the Tablets being written with the finger of God, is that a Cuneiform is made only by a REED pressed, it is not images, it is more like DIGITAL, and then you had to place the CLAY TABLETS in a KILN FURNACE OF FIRE, to BAKE IT INTO A PERMANENT STONE. So the Hebrew writing is only Canaanite Script , that Moses never lived in Canaan and would not be able to read anything written in HEBREW. You know nothing at all, you do not pay attention. Jesus as a Nazirite Priest is called the WORD OF GOD as he was taught the ORAL LAW IN TEMPLE ISRAEL and never wrote any books. I , as a true Catholic , have total respect for Temple Israel, the SPEAKER who is anointed to recite and interpret the Law, HIS TITLE IS "THE WORD OF GOD". Just like the title of 'THE JEWEL OF THE NILE" is bestowed to a Poet as a man who is wise, the WORD OF GOD is the MESSIAH who stands in God's Place to MEDIATE between the letter of the Law and the Spirit of the Law to show Mercy and Compassion for Humanity. Jesus Christ is the WORD OF GOD, his title, ( ISAIAH NINE ) "EL GIBBOR" means Jesus is GOD. MIGHTY GOD. REPENT you are all running out of time.

[@carminefragione4710]

A couple examples of first writings. The STAR as drawn as it appears to the human eye, the sign of a STAR meant "HEAVEN". So in the writing, the appearing of a star , as you see it as a sign, meant the subject matter was Heaven. To see a human FOOT or sign of a foot, roughly made image shaped like a foot, that meant "GOING" as VERB , not a Noun subject of a Foot, but it meant the people were "GOING IN THE WAY OF THE LORD". So a STAR sign and a FOOT symbol, was read "GOING IN THE WAY OF THE LORD TO HEAVEN". Modern Hebrew is just GIBBERISH, the evolved invention of Phoenicans and Canaanites that spread to all Indo European handwriting, and the inverted Hebrew is a sign of the craft of Metal Engravers, who had to write inverted upside down bronze cylinders that produce like a printing press the positive reading that the Greeks had.

[@AJBernard]

It's all good, man. SOMEONE needs to respond to Dr. Ehrman! That man is dangerous.

[@CKennethBauer]

Bart dose this to me alot when I ask him questions. Last time he told me when I challenged his interpretation on matt 24:39 he said, “well if you think matthew is interpreting gen 7 wrong that’s an interesting view” Saying im not wrong but, matt is. Ha

[@aaronjames7266]

Party Barty back for another round.

[@CynHicks]

Man, I love how Alex is being referred to as a future Christian. 😊 I'm sure many Christians that were athiest for a long time love this sort of banter ... I mean prophetic speak. 😅

[@carminefragione4710]

I answered the question many times. It was "GRAVEN IMAGES" to use the Paleo Hebrew script, which was really CANAANITE SCRIPT, not something that Moses or Aaron ever read or could write . Moses grew up in Egypt and would have written in either Hieroglyphs or the Canaanite Script, but there was no such thing as a written language art as HEBREW. The Priests of Aaron and then Phinehas , and the Sons of Zadok , later in time only used an ORAL RECITATION OF THE LAW OF MOSES, using their MOUTHS, not as Scribes carving images on stones. The Dead Seas Scrolls are the earliest attempt to capture the Oral Tradition using Canaanite alphabet iconic or runic symbols of script. It came as called ARAMAIC for the fact that Semites lived in Canaan, and they had their own DIALECT , distinct from Canaan, but the people could talk to one another without the need of translators. Abraham sojourned from the Banias or Panias River in Armenia down through Syria to Damascus to Canaan to Egypt, and had no problem speaking to all those people. So there is no such thing as a written Bible in ancient times, it was sung like the Bards of Homer sang the Iliad and the Odyssey . They were Oral Reciters , but the figures of speech moved to say Books or Scrolls or Finger of God writing or GRAVEN IMAGES. So the Septuagint Bible by the Hellenic Jews were written in Greek directly from the Oral Reciters or Karaites ( like the Koran is a term similiar to Jews of the Karaites, the RECITERS , they learned to march in a formal Procession of the Lord in the Way, and recite the whole Law of Moses and the Psalms as they marched to flutes and drums and stringed harps or zithers, , and so "David and the Levites " were in a processional march from the Mount of Olives to the Gihon Spring doing what is known to the Greeks as "PEDAGOGIC " walking and talking to fulfill an ORAL TRADITION OF SACRED SONGS. They did not read scripture, when human handwriting became popular then the Jews put their Oral Tradition into Greek, which was the "APOSTLES BIBLE" in the early Catholic Church. Judaism Jews never had a written Bible , until the formal invention of Judaism by Ram Bam, in the 10th Century A.D. they took the Oral Singers' method of Memorizing the Law and wrote it in what they then called "HEBREW" a form of CANAANITE SCRIPT but added "VOWEL MARKS" to control how any reader might interpret the lettered Consonants they wrote, which limited the possible interpretations , because the TEMPLE ISRAEL was destroyed and no man was justified to be a SEER of GOD' S VOWEL INTENTIONS to "LEAVEN " or fulfill the Law to make it fully understood to have a specific interpretation done so by a PRIESTLY MESSIAH. So Jesus was ISRAEL , circumcised by the Temple Priests as in the Oral Tradition , Jesus never wrote any books but daily in the Temple Courts carried on a conversation of a qualified Priest, as he was so, with the Jews. At the time of Jesus' TRIAL by the Sanhedrin, the Jews used SCRIBES to follow Jesus and the Disciples around and report to the High Priest of Temple Israel, everything Jesus taught and all the intimate personal conversations, such as you read in the New Testament, that Jesus had many supporters in the Temple itself and many Scribes issued by the High Priest Caiaphas, did so write the COURT RECORDS of the entire TESTIMONY relating to Jesus being condemned by the Men. When you read the New Testament, must of the COURT FILE RECORDS you are reading , which were preserved by the early CHURCH who gathered many materials to make the 'Journalistic " records of Jesus Christ' s ministry , for three years, beginning to end, and what was reported was used in the great TRIAL of Jesus , in Jerusalem. The Gospels happen to be in part the authentic TRIAL RECORDS, the Jews were then a literate people, using Canaanite Script or Greek, or Aramaic, and lastly Latin. But in the ancient times the Governance of Temple Israel was a RECITED PSALMIST TRADITION , not that they read books out loud, they memorized the BIBLE.

[@stevej71393]

I find it absolutely astonishing that these modern agnostics think they know better than 1st century Jews on how to interpret the Hebrew Bible.

[@ChristianStuff256]

It’s funny to hear Dr. Ehrman say stuff like this when he mistranslated John 2 for his book Misquoting Jesus.

[@AbhiDaBeatTheSecond]

I pray God would give you more than a 100 million subscribers! Keep it up Erik!

[@nonfecittaliter4361]

Yes! Ehrman is trying to distort things as much as he can and sow suspicion where there is none. And he has gullible listeners.

[@kurtdvet]

Why is “God’s Word” so ambiguous that scholars can’t even understand it? Seems like an omniscient being would know how to make his words quite clear. It is quite obvious, man was responsible for Biblical scripture.

[@TestifyApologetics]

seems like what is necessary to know for salvation is incredibly clear to me and maybe people who don't like God tend to obfuscate. What is difficult about this?: "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved"

[@kurtdvet]

@@TestifyApologetics obfuscation is the Bible’s specialty Religious zealots have used it’s obscurity to dupe people for centuries

[@simplybaker.]

I can see why as a person of faith you've come to these options but i can't say that they are good refutations of what Bart is talking about as a biblical scholar. Much of your justification seem more to come from church culture following Jesus' life ie things written 40-70 years after his death whereas bart seems to be looking at this more in the context of the writers

[@johnred1483]

What does this comment even mean?

[@simplybaker.]

@@johnred1483 ... It's all in the comment. Real scholarship vs religious vibes

[@johnred1483]

@@simplybaker. no your comment is nearly incomprehensible because it seems like a conclusion that someone could only come to by not having watched the video

[@simplybaker.]

@@johnred1483 aight, let me help you out then. What part/ words don't make sense to you? How can I clarify the position?

[@johnred1483]

@@simplybaker. second sentence

[@sunilambat9982]

Bart is looking at God with his lens and trying to teach us his own imagination after 2000 years.

[@Hanshotfirst6688]

I think Matthew was just quoting something that the prophets spoke but didn’t write down.

[@Hanshotfirst6688]

@@michaelhenry1763 Because all scripture is God Breathed (2Timothy 3:16). God wrote the Bible through men (2 Peter 1:21)

[@Hanshotfirst6688]

@@michaelhenry1763 Does God know everything?

[@Hanshotfirst6688]

@@michaelhenry1763 how do you know that

[@Hanshotfirst6688]

@@michaelhenry1763 Well which is it? Does he exist and not know everything or does he not exist?

[@Hanshotfirst6688]

@@michaelhenry1763 how do you know God doesn’t exist?

[@DAYHOMEONE]

There are great number of Ehrman's opponents who are far more charitable to the man than he deserves. It seems clear to me that uses his credentials as a scholar of antiquities to offer up distortions of truth he knows to be false to audiences who are not knowledgeable enough to challenge him. This business about Matthew just making things up and citing as an example the "prophecy" that Jesus would be a called a Nazarene is a perfect illustration of the kind of sleight of hand he uses deliberately. Between Matthew 1:23 and 2:23 there are five times Matthew ties an event to prophecy (Matt 1:23/Isaiah 7, Matt 2:05/ Micah 5, Matt 2:15/Hosea 11, Matt 2:18/Jeremiah 1) and only in the last (Matt 2:2) is there no verse in the Old Testament to go back to. But here is what Ehrman does not wish you take note of. Only in one of those instances (Matt 5 about Bethlehem) does he say WRITTEN by the prophet. In each of the others, he says SPOKEN by the prophet. And in the one about being called a Nazarene not only does he say spoken, not written, but it is also plural "spoken by the prophets." This is important and Ehrman knows it. He is thoroughly aware scripture aside, the culture of Israel and the world at large then was oral, not written. There was no printing press. Not a lot of people running around with books. People relied heavily on what they heard verbally and also had greater oral recall because of it. That it was spoken that the messiah would be a Nazarene was something that readers of Matthew would have HEARD and recalled. Additionally, those prophets who enjoy a textual inclusion in the Biblical Canon were not the exhausted list of prophets any more than the accounts of what Jesus did are exhausted in canon (John 21:25)

[@csmoviles]

Thank you for your ministry 💖🙏💖🙏💖🙏💖🙏💖

[@juhadexcelsior]

why are people assuming that the Bible HAS to record when a prophet said he would be a Nazarene? It could have happened and it simply could have never made it to the canon Bible.

[@erichodge567]

I got two words for y'all: Zombie. Apocalypse. Matthew 27:50 The saints get out of their graves, walk around Jerusalem, and are seen by many. Except no other evangelist knows anything about it, or somehow deems it too insignificant to mention. So all of you who consider yourselves superior to Bart Ehrman, please: make it make sense.

[@TestifyApologetics]

I've already covered that. Not the own you think it is kzbin.info/www/bejne/r4XTm3qhqaeMms0

[@FilthyXylophone]

A lot of coping in these comments; strawman arguments abound. The Bible is not univocal, and you can objectively see the evolution of the texts over time (both in the NT and the Hebrew Bible), none of which can be dated to their purported time-frames, let alone written by whom the texts claim (or imply) wrote them. The New Testament authors had plenty of time and motive to retcon the life of Jesus and shoehorn his story into 'fulfillment' of several Hebrew Bible prophecies regarding the Messiah, but when you analyze each individual 'prophecy', the whole thing falls apart (and the Jewish scholars are none to pleased with the blatant co-opting of their scriptures, and rightfully so). I'm really sorry, but it's all just a fairy tale wrapped up in two millenia of historical and cultural reinforcement. With some small historical exceptions, none of it is true, and deep down, I think you all know it. You're just terrified at the thought of there being no God, and the dread of realizing that death and chaos have the final say in our lives. I didn't want to be an atheist; I'm terrified of death. But the truth gives me no choice, and every day, Biblical scholarship and the march of scientific progress chips away at the few remaining gaps a personal diety could potentially exist in. I really hope I'm wrong, even if if means eternity in hell, if only so my religious friends and family could enjoy eternal paradise, but the evidence is so clear, belief becomes a willful choice of disconnecting from reality.

[@angelferreira1746]

So the neurochemical cascades going off inside of the skull that the illusion of you calls your own is superior to the neurochemical cascades going off inside of the skulls of believers? If you are going to go the atheist route, then materialism is all you can subscribe to. In which case there is no such thing as free will. You don’t choose to not believe, because fundamentally there is no self to do the believing. You cannot be terrified of death when “you” don’t even exist. If you are going to be consistent with materialism, you give up on objective morality, free will, truth, and even on the self. Your points seem like accusations. “You are just terrified at the thought of their being no god” Even if this were the case, what difference would it make when there are no differences to be made? Its all just atoms and the void. It is all pure indifference. All the fighting against theism will yield to nothing becaude there is nothing to yield towards. All the “progress” we are making is no progress at all because there is nothing to progress to. Atheism also relies on miracles. The ressurection of an individual seems like a small miracle when compared to a universe bringing itself into existence for no reason whatsoever. Most of the universe is made up so called “dark matter” which might not even be matter. Of the planets that have been observed, only one has life. Of the large amount of species that exist, only one has the capacity for rationality that humans possess. Matter evolving to the point where it is self aware and is able to comprehend the laws that govern it is quite a miracle assuming there was no driving intelligence behind it. You have to ask yourself if you are willing to go against common sense. You live as if you had free will. We love as if love were more than chemistry. We think. We use numbers, which exist in what realm if not in minds. What is interesting with Atheists is that the moment they reject the religious ideology, they make the purpose of their existence to convince others that existence has no purpose. They spend their days like Cervantes’ quixote, fighting monsters that they don’t believe in. And they can’t help wanting to “convert” people into non belief, as you have shown by your comment. You say that “the evidence is clear”. Where is the clear evidence that there is no god? “Scientific progress chips away at the few remaining gaps a personal deity could potentially exist in” Allyster mcgrath, Karin oberg, John lennox, Jonathan Lunine, James tour, and quite a few other scientists would like to disagree with you. “I hope that I am wrong?” Do you really though? Seems like you made up your mind that all believers are just too weak to handle the truth already and that makes them cowards in your eyes. Imagine a blade of grass calling another blade of grass a coward. Most people throughout history have believed in that which is beyond us. Are “you” really braver than most people throughout history? Is one cup of water “braver” than all cups of water throughout history? Lets for a second recall why “Pride” is the worst of all sins.

[@jamescummings6703]

Matthew had a clear understanding of the Hebrew texts? Why did he use the Septuagint when writing his book?

[@dylanschweitzer18]

Future apologist 😂

[@TestifyApologetics]

a guy can hope. I like the new Alex no matter what though.

[@darkwolf7740]

Testifylogist

[@dylanschweitzer18]

@@TestifyApologetics Testify declares a new prophecy. Alex O'Connor becomes... COSMIC CHRISTIAN

[@achristian11]

🤣 great video brother

[@danaharper9708]

Hmmm...so Alex O'Conner is going to become a Christian apologist. Can you put a date on that?

[@TestifyApologetics]

it was a joke. a guy can hope. I like Alex.

[@danaharper9708]

​@@TestifyApologetics Fair enough. I think for most atheists it would take new information. They just are not convinced by the arguments on the table. I do wonder about Mike Licona. If any well know Christian apologist was going to come out as a "former Christian", I'd bet on it being Licona.

[@johnwick2018]

So according to your explanation, If I replace "Nazareth" with the name of any other shady and poor town in the same area, it would still make sense right????

[@DarkArcticTV]

No because Nazareth was notorious for exactly how it's described lol

[@TestifyApologetics]

So basically, what you're saying is [enter something absurd that the OP didn't really say] ???? This is doing the Cathy Newman thing.

[@johnwick2018]

@@TestifyApologetics You are missing the problem in his explanation This is the verse : "He went and dwelt in a town called Nazareth, so that what had been spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled, “He shall be called a Nazorean.” 1) You dont have to be from nazareth to be the fruit of david. 2) You dont have to be from nazareth to be from a poor/shady/bad town in the region..

[@michaelbabbitt3837]

A play on words. What a concept! Who would have ever conceived such a notion? Oh yes, a scholar who wishes to demonstrate the NT is unreliable - no matter what the evidence to the contrary. That is so disingenuous of a scholar. I can't imagine any of my Comp Religion professors years ago not roasting someone for such poor work. It is called working in bad faith.

[@williambillycraig1057]

While Ehrman does good work, he often reminds me of a computer or android from the original Star Trek episodes where to defeat them, one has to throw out a simple paradox or some riddle, after which the computer short circuits. A common question is, "Was there one angel at the tomb or more?" Ehrman, "Illogical!!!!!! Does not compute!!!!! Christianity is false...." 🤖🤯

[@feliperodriguez4187]

There's a pattern amongst non believers. They all treat the gospels as if the writers were sitting in front of a computer, copping, pasting, cropping and manipulating scripture to manipulate people. Just a bunch of nonsense.

[@feliperodriguez4187]

@@michaelhenry1763 but they contradict each other. How's that possible? So... What is it? Make up your mind. If they were copied,they should all say the same thing not "contradict" each other. Now thanks to technology, if you read each gospel side by side, anyone can clearly see they compliment each other telling the same story from different points of view.

[@feliperodriguez4187]

@@michaelhenry1763 there's also "contradictions" in the Torah of which don't bother me at all. In Genesis alone are several. Did God made them first male and female or did the female was made from the male's rib? What was Moses father in law's name Jethro or Hobab? And many more.

[@CJFCarlsson]

I wonder if they think the gospel writers were sitting in their chambers making the gospels, and then went on tour. To me it must have been the other way around, Jesus sent them on mission immediately and the gospels are condensations of their teachings, meaning the content would have been weeded, questioned and criticized for 40 years before being put to pergament, And papyrus, as letters and gospels. Some of the Ehrmanesque arguments make some sense if they believe the gospel writer is like Agatha Christie or for that part Richard Dawkins; write a book, go on tour, but not, not, not in view of what acts and gospels tell of the writers careers.

[@trustmebrobro]

Let's start with who is Mathew? We don't know. All we have is a bunch of work, done by a bunch of scribes. The fact that all manuscripts are not 100% identical says some scribes are making changes.

[@TestifyApologetics]

It's almost like I have videos about the authorship of the Gospels and no scholar says we have no idea what was originally written.

[@Peter-wl3tm]

Eric are you planning writing a book, refuting Bart’s claims ?

[@MikeyJay00]

Writers inventing things to serve a theological purpose? Didn't Joseph Smith have something like 11 witnesses who saw the angel Moroni or the golden plates? How are the Gospels, written decades later by men who were not eyewitnesses and whose names we don't know, somehow more reliable?

[@simonskinner1450]

Bart looks for 'silver bullets' to seed doubt, but I look for the truth and have found errors in doctrine not NT. I have a Ytube video series 'Myths in so-called Christianity'.

[@dougbendo8817]

The problem with people Bert ehrman is that they don't know prophecy because they have not been given the Holy spirit. I encourage you the viewer to consider just looking at the claims of Christianity of the New Testament and then looking at the Hebrew Bible does it match” - Rabbi trovia singer challenge Yeshayahu (Isaiah) - Chapter 53 1 Who would have believed our report, and to whom was the arm of the Lord revealed? - Mark 16:6 “Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him.” - Romans 6:9: "We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him." Romans 8:34: "Christ Jesus who died-more than that, who was raised to life-is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us." 2 And he came up like a sapling before it, and like a root from dry ground, he had neither form nor comeliness; and we saw him that he had no appearance. Now shall we desire him? - John 1:46 And Nathanael said unto him, Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth? Philip saith unto him, Come and see. - John 6:42 And they said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How is it then that He says, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” 3 Despised and rejected by men, a man of pains and accustomed to illness, and as one who hides his face from us, despised and we held him of no account. - Matthew 12:22-30 22 Then one possessed with a demon was brought to Him, blind and mute, and He healed him, so that the blind and mute man both spoke and saw. 23 All the people were amazed and said, “Is He not the Son of David?” 24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, “This Man does not cast out demons, except by Beelzebub the ruler of the demons.” 25 Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation. And every city or house divided against itself will not stand. 26 If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. Then how will his kingdom stand? 27 And if I cast out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore, they shall be your judges. 28 But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. 29 “Or else how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house. 30 “He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters abroad. 4 Indeed, he bore our illnesses, and our pains-he carried them, yet we accounted him as plagued, smitten by God and oppressed. - Luke 22 42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done. 43 And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. 44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground. 45 And when he rose up from prayer, and was come to his disciples, he found them sleeping for sorrow, 46 And said unto them, Why sleep ye? rise and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. 47 And while he yet spake, behold a multitude, and he that was called Judas, one of the twelve, went before them, and drew near unto Jesus to kiss him. 48 But Jesus said unto him, Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss? 5 But he was pained because of our transgressions, crushed because of our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his wound we were healed. - John 20 24 Now Thomas, called the Twin, one of the twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 The other disciples therefore said to him, “We have seen the Lord.” So he said to them, “Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.” 26 And after eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, “Peace to you!” 27 Then He said to Thomas, “Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing.” 28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, [f]“Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” 6 We all went astray like sheep, we have turned, each one on his way, and the Lord accepted his prayers for the iniquity of all of us. Luke 23:34 Then Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do.” 7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he would not open his mouth; like a lamb to the slaughter he would be brought, and like a ewe that is mute before her shearers, and he would not open his mouth. - Mark 15:15 Wishing to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas for them, and after having Jesus scourged, he handed Him over to be crucified. 8 From imprisonment and from judgment he is taken, and his generation who shall tell? For he was cut off from the land of the living; because of the transgression of my people, a plague befell them. - Matthew 27 16 At that time they had a well-known prisoner whose name was Jesus[a] Barabbas. 17 So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, “Which one do you want me to release to you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?” 18 For he knew it was out of self-interest that they had handed Jesus over to him. 19 While Pilate was sitting on the judge’s seat, his wife sent him this message: “Don’t have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him.” 20 But the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas and to have Jesus executed. 21 “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?” asked the governor. “Barabbas,” they answered. 22 “What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called the Messiah?” Pilate asked. They all answered, “Crucify him!” 9 And he gave his grave to the wicked, and to the wealthy with his kinds of death, because he committed no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth. - Matthew 27 23 “Why? What crime has he committed?” asked Pilate. But they shouted all the louder, “Crucify him!” 24 When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “It is your responsibility!” 25 All the people answered, “His blood is on us and on our children!” 26 Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified. 10 And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill; if his soul makes itself restitution, he shall see children, he shall prolong his days, and God's purpose shall prosper in his hand. Acts 1:1-26 In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God. And while staying with them he ordered them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, “you heard from me; for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” ... 11 From the toil of his soul he would see, he would be satisfied; with his knowledge My servant would vindicate the just for many, and their iniquities he would bear. - Hebrews 8:12 12 For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more." - Daniel 9:24 24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. 12 Therefore, I will allot him a portion in public, and with the strong he shall share plunder, because he poured out his soul to death, and with transgressors he was counted; and he bore the sin of many, and interceded for the transgressors. 1 Peter 3 18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring [f]us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, [g]when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. 21 There is also an antitype which now saves us-baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him.

[@akeelmasih1110]

Who would know Jewish culture and the scripture better Matthew or Bart Erman? When critiquing especially biblical records, it is better not to make stupid assumptions like Bart does.

[@carminefragione4710]

Job said "Naked was I born when I came into the world, and Naked shall I be as I go out from the world". We are born naked in the sight of God with a MOUTH that cries out to God for Salvation. Handwriting is an invention of man, not of God. No Scriptures , "Sola Scriptura" is God or the "WORD OF GOD". Word of God is a title bestowed on the Priest of God Most High , who actuates the Message coming from Heaven to Earth to comfort mankind in his tribulations, by the interpretations of the law through the Holy Vessel , called the Everlasting Father, A PRIEST FOREVER IN THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK. A first born Levite Priest, can be exalted to that order as a Nazirite Priest of Temple Israel, and such special devotion is a MYSTERY OF GOD, a Title of the Word of God can excel the Law of mundane order to ascend to the Glory, and all who enter the Glory are of the same substance of Eternal Matter as is HEAVEN. The Catholic Faith is the genuine GIFT OF GOD by MERCY to the GENTILES, no Jew can substitute anything already done in Isaiah Nine to acclaim the Messiah , Jesus of Nazareth to be "EL GIBBOR" 'MIGHTY GOD". But the Word of God is a Title, even God is a title, but the Mystery of God is a revealed Name yet hidden from all mankind, but asserted in Revelation chapter Nineteen, a NAME WRITTEN ON HIM, HE BEING THE WORD OF GOD, HE BEING THE BOOK OF LIFE UPON WHICH IT IS WRITTEN, these are all Parables of the Mystery, the BIBLE is a TESTIMONY about JESUS, while Jesus is then carrying the Name of God as the WORD OF GOD HIMSELF, the VEHICLE OR VESSEL IS THE MESSIAH, THE MOUTHPIECE OF GOD. We were not born with Pen and Paper to write, God born us NAKED with a MOUTH and so the CONVESATION between HEAVEN AND EARTH IS BY THE MOUTH , not by the WRITTEN GREAVEN IMAGES made from all the Alphabets. The WRITTEN BIBLE IS AN APPROACH , it leads to JESUS who carried TItLE as "WORD OF GOD". meaning He recited the Law and interpreted it in the FULL COMPANIONSHIP OF GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT AND WITH GOD THE FATHER HENCE JESUS IS GOD THE SON, and the connecting mystery is the ETERNAL MATTER OF HEAVEN. What is HEAVEN, but it is the same substance that is of the Father and Son and Spirit, through which then Heaven holds all persons , places and things if they be transfigured into GLORY that they share the same ETERNAL MATTER that is collectively called "GOD". God is singular and also plural, God has no limit, but he SUBSTANCE OF ETERNAL MATTER is what all who dwell in Heaven equally so share and share alike, 3=1

[@ShaunCKennedyAuthor]

This is one of many reasons why I think Matthew was written in Hebrew.

[@ShaunCKennedyAuthor]

@@michaelhenry1763 But it was.

[@ShaunCKennedyAuthor]

@@michaelhenry1763 All of the church historians before 1200 AD say that Matthew wrote in Hebrew. Those that examined the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew such as Jerome noted that he followed the Hebrew, not the LXX. I have been looking into this for 20 years. I have a 25k word blog post on it. If you really think you can go up against me, Google "Shaun Kennedy Did Matthew write in Hebrew or Greek." You'll find my post. Read it and respond to that. But right now, you're using kindergarten stuff that I don't have time for. I didn't come here to pick a fight. If you're just trying to pick a fight, I concede that you are more argumentative than I am. Good job winning! If what you want is iron sharpening iron, show me that you're iron and not sandstone first.

[@carminefragione4710]

There are not such copies of the Bible in "Modern Hebrew" that any actual Jews of antiquity, would be able to read and understand. Hebrew writing with the "Vowel Marks' was invented in the Middle Ages of Europe, not in the Middle East. The Paleo Hebrew writing was not familiar to modern Jews , it was a Canaanite Script, and in a unique way the vowels were not written down at all, and no vowel marks were used, so that interpreting scripture was fully dependent on an ethereal or oral tradition of a common sense, which guide to common sense was not written , but orally communed by a tradition of reciting, not writtten testimony. So the claims of modern Jews that their Hebrew , as written with vowel marks, is genuine Hebrew is just another MAGIC ACT OF WIZARDS. When no vowels are written, then the interpretation is so elastic, you could stretch it any way you wish such as in the idea of a "DIALECTIC" which means it is MYSTICISM.

[@carminefragione4710]

@@michaelhenry1763 When Abraham came along the Harran to Canaan, he was able to speak all along, the same language as the Armenians, up in Assyria to the North to Canaanites and down into Egypt, where Abraham sojourned, there was no need of any special interpreters to enable Abraham to carry on complex conversations with any people along the Way. So they had a unified single language , like Aramaic, and used in early ways a common script known in Canaan and in Egypt and in Damascus, etc. that shows there is no such thing as a unique written Hebrew language Bible, they spoke the same and wrote using a similar or same alphabet lettering system. The Romans invented the letter "J" to wit the Jews , Jesus and Jerusalem are really LATIN TERMS, not Hebrew. The Greeks used the letter "I" and it appears that maybe the Jews used the letter "Y" , but the proof of the Jews having a unique written language arts, is not provable. The Jews may have had an accent style of oral speech , but that was not uncommon, the title "WORD OF GOD" is not about Books or written instructions, it is about how a Man is born from the womb, naked, and he only can cry out to God for Salvation, using his mouth. So word play by scriptures is GRAVEN IMAGES and it is not the Word of God. If you should see God face to face and He speaks to you that you hear the Word, and the Spirit convicts you in your heart, that is then called "THE WORD OF GOD". Jesus is the Word of God, and Jesus never wrote any books.

[@carminefragione4710]

@@michaelhenry1763 In those times of history, as when Homer made the story of Iliad and the Odyssey , it was not a written but oral and sung tradition , it was not written until centuries later when human handwriting became popular, The Oral Tradition of the Bible was also then an Oral or Sung or Psalms types processional oral tradition , not a written book of scriptures, The Bible was not handwritten until about 250 B.C. and in Aramaic, Dead Sea Scrolls. About 700 B.C. some form of a written law book was given to the Temple Treasury and the Priests gave it to King Josiah of Israel, but it was in any recognizable HEBREW . The Jews crafted Hebrew out of Canaanite Script ,during the Medieval Ages for a Memorial Religion they called "JUDAISM" . Jesus was a Priest of Temple Israel, he practiced the Oral Tradition of teaching daily in the Temple to the Jews, but he never wrote any books, nor did the Priests of Temple Israel use written instructions, they memorized the Torah of Moses, by heart, using Cues and Marks to aide the oral memory of the verses , which were SUNG while they marched in a Procession of a Pedagogic style of walking and reciting Psalms, they did not READ A BIBLE. Written Bibles are a modern adaptation of the original method of Oral Recitations and memorizing the Torah. The idea of a written Bible is modern , not Ancient.

[@carminefragione4710]

@@michaelhenry1763 That is why Catholics are right to say "GOD IS A MYSTERY". And that in Revelation , chapter 19 the Lord has a new name written on him, that no one knows except He knows . The name may be called Word of God, but that is a TITLE, not the name. So God has yet a NAME written upon HIM, who is an ORAL SPEAKER, the titled of the Speaker is WORD OF GOD, he has to say what the revealed NAME will be, while we gesture parables or rhymes about what the name is called. "God" is a title, not the Name of the God. So no man knows the final NAME OF GOD, except GOD. The Father knows the Day and the Hour, not the Angels, nor even the Son of God. So the Divine Playwright of GOD ALMIGHTY, is yet to give us a NAME, that is relevant to things yet to be done on Earth, these things are yet hidden, and so you can only go on FAITH, not "Knowledge".

[@carminefragione4710]

@@michaelhenry1763 The Dead Seas Scrolls vary apart from the Hebrew Bible introduced by the Jews in 1008 A.D. There are no other ancient Bibles, none, before the DDS, but those were written by a Sect of the Essenes that the Jews reject, and the Jews had an ORAL MISHNAH recited tradition of their Hebrew Bible , oral, not written before you seen it as presented in the Leningrad Museum in Russia. I happen to be correct, you are misguided by allot of propaganda about the Bible being a written transcribed book. The Septuagint was directly written from the Oral Tradition of Seventy or so , Jewish Rabbis or Priests of the Temple Tradition , who took their ORAL TRADITION to write it down in Greek for fear of the Oral Tradition being destroyed. There was never any written down Bible from Moses, it was a language arts use to say it was a Book or Written , as figures of speech by the later Septuagint writers making the change from a Oral recited Bible to a written Bible. There are no Ancient Hebrew Language written Bibles, the DDS were ARAMAIC, not the idea of Medieval Judaism "HEBREW" as you are led to believe was existing thousands of years ago, they made that sfuff up. But an ORAL RECITATION of the LAW OF MOSES did exist by the Priests of Temple Israel, etc.

[@carminefragione4710]

@@michaelhenry1763 That only proves that the Canaanite Script was the root of those developments, Hebrew was Paleo Hebrew, not the Medieval Jewish Hebrew, they are not the same type. It only proves the Oral Tradition is the true original method of reciting the Law, not written scrolls and books. The Septuagint made by the Jews came directly out of an Oral Recitation , because those Rabbis did not know how to read Hebrew. If they knew how to write in Hebrew, why then write it in Greek, why not write it in Hebrew, except they did not know how to write in Hebrew. And Moses Maimonides "Ram Bam" did not know how to write anything at all in Hebrew, but wrote in Arabic, and then RABBI TIBBIN translated the works of Ram Bam in Hebrew. IT IS ALL A RUSE.

[@someguy1052]

Hello Erik, love your content! I have a question regarding the stolen body hypothesis for the empty tomb. Could the empty tomb be explained by Jesus' enemies stealing the body in order to prevent the tomb from becoming a spot of veneration?

[@whosweptmymines3956]

If this were the case, surely they would produce the body once the Christians started proclaiming the Resurrection a few days later?

[@azrael516]

No, this is nothing more than a illogical theory

[@phineas8532]

Goodness gracious if there were two doors saying heaven and hell these fools would dive into the pits of hell

[@stevepoling]

Word play is one stumbling block that deity places in the path of reprobates. All text is subject to interpretation and texts often admit multiple putative interpretations. Oracles are devilishly hard to interpret and generally presented poetically. If you want to make nonsense of scriptures, just apply non-figurative interpretations as desired. Jesus says he's a door. John the Baptist says he's a sheep. Contradiction! Instead of picking from among the interpretations a set that harmonizes, the reprobate chooses nonsense.

[@raphaelfeneje486]

Bart Erhman has to stay relevant

[@joshuacordasco1610]

was that poison ivy? lol

[@johnwick2018]

If you believe that gospels have absolutely no mistakes, then you will definitely find a way to have an explanation for anything and everything, as demonstrated like this.

[@katjaa4887]

but he doesn't believe that

[@johnwick2018]

@@snackler6102 You are missing the problem in his explanation This is the verse : "He went and dwelt in a town called Nazareth, so that what had been spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled, “He shall be called a Nazorean.” 1) You dont have to be from nazareth to be the fruit of david. 2) You dont have to be from nazareth to be from a poor/shady/bad town in the region..

[@DarkArcticTV]

If you believe the gospels have tons of mistakes, then you will definitely find a way to twist verses for your belief, as Bart Ehrman demonstrates.

[@unknowntexan4570]

Ugh, the Nazerine is the "the branch." Bart just has a bad attitude and way overrated.

[@bigdavexx1]

It's clear in Matthew that Jesus literally living a town called Nazareth fulfills the prophesy. If the prophesy is that messiah will be of low status, would you say that being placed in a manager also fulfills it? Or being born into a family with a laborer as a patriarch? Matthew 2: 19 After Herod died, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt 20 and said, “Get up, take the child and his mother and go to the land of Israel, for those who were trying to take the child’s life are dead.” 21 So he got up, took the child and his mother and went to the land of Israel. 22 But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning in Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. Having been warned in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee, 23 and he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets, that he would be called a Nazarene.

[@mike16apha16]

Matthew and accusing him of mistranslating is such a hoot. the guy was hired by the Romans to be a tax collector. in order to work for Rome and that job he would have to be bilingual and very good at it or he'd be in big trouble even face death if he screwed up as a go between for Rome and the Hebrews

[@piano9433]

Helping Jesus Fulfill Prophecy by Robert Miller is scholarly but accessible. He shows that, among other things, Matthew quotes selectively from the Spectuagint and the Hebrew Bible as it suits his rhetorical goals and that sometimes he makes prophecies up.

[@DarkArcticTV]

You're literally doing the work of God. Thanks for your content. We support you and love your videos❤❤❤ I'm going to pray for you