How Do Christians Sort Out the Conflicts In the Bible?

Here's installment number 9 in the Nuts and Bolts of the Bible series. This time around we looking at how Christians have reconciled the New Testament manuscripts throughout the centuries.
You can support TMBH if you'd like at patreon.com/tmbh

[@gh0rochi363]

Peace be upon you. I'm a muslim and I love this channel it helps me understand my Christian brothers and see how similar we really are. Thank you for your knowledge.

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

You're awesome! Thanks for being here, and for the kind encouragement.

[@chitownagnostic7150]

Your disgusting Quran tells you to hate an "infedel"

[@claireh4414]

@@chitownagnostic7150 you're silly

[@gh0rochi363]

Chitown Agnostic you should try reading it one day. I can tell you haven’t because that is nowhere in the book.

[@Oilersman]

@taaj howell so glad you’re hear. I’m a Christian and learning about Islam myself. :)

[@PotatoFi]

Dude you are *really* freaking good at this. Love it.

[@tylersy1427]

I don't share your faith but I appreciate these well-thought out videos. Also the toothpaste bit was very funny.

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

+Tyler Sy Thanks Tyler. I'm going for candor, so you're getting my honest take and I appreciate the kind words regardless of whether we see everything the same way or not.

[@user-xi8sf8xl7r]

0:39 cue Vsauce music

[@iannnebbe4789]

underrated comment of the century.

[@rabidhamper7]

Thank you for doing such an in-depth and thorough job with this series. I appreciate that you present it in such a way that you aren't shoving it down anyone's throat, you are just presenting the historical evidence in as clean and unbiased way as you possibly can.

[@200378820]

I love the wide open facts! Also love the podcast! Keep it up!

[@AndreVieiraguitarist]

Awesome and blessed content brother! God bless!

[@telecasteroil]

This is a great way to make a way towards what is truth, I can't wait for your next installment!

[@blep301]

super cool info in this one. cant wait for the next vid

[@juliekovacic]

Thank you for all of this research, Matt! I´m looking forward to the next installment. I´m interested in knowing which translation you prefer.

[@Samsonebug]

Excellent video Matt.

[@nolanpalmer5181]

Your videos make my laugh so much, and it feels good. Thank you for that.

[@arturkvieira]

You merited my appreciation through the button shaped like a hand with the raised thumb

[@lclyd]

your intros are the best

[@thewordshifter]

Oh this video is so timely! I just started reading Metzgar's The Bible in Translation. Can't wait for the next one.

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

+Alicia Costello wow! What prompted you to read Metzger? He factors prominently in the next episode.

[@keksimus__maximus]

I just listened to 100 episodes of the tmbh on Spotify and realized I didn't know what you looked like. Also wanted to check out the manatee Destin wanted to buy. Keep it up man! 👍🏻

[@FlamenLion]

Hey Mat. I like your work and I really enjoy the technical, nuts and bolts videos that you do. Even here in this several-year-old back catalog, I figured this video warranted another comment for an algorithm boost. Keep up the good work.

[@lisaroster5855]

awesome! awesome! awesome video

[@CodyDWorks]

digging the soundtrack!

[@BreakChannelZero]

Brings back good memories of college.

[@drc97086]

This series is phenomenal, for me. You are reading my mind, and filling in all the blanks for me. Thank you.

[@jgoble100]

Your translation music is the best

[@tnyeager]

First of all, awesome job! You really are a gifted teacher. I basically knew all this info before, but your presentation really helped me sorry it out and organize it in my mind. Props to you for that! Keep up the great work! Second, some thoughts about the eclectic method you describe. As a method of textual scholarship, you are right, it is the surest and most reliable way to get closest to what the original specs may have been. But here is the problem. As you allude to, it takes a TON of very serious, very careful, very tedious research by highly educated and intelligent people. Only a pretty wealthy and technologically advanced culture can do this kind of work on this scale, the sorry if prosperous cultures we have had in the West since the 19th century. But here is the problem. If THAT is what it takes to have confidence in the text of Scripture and, by extension, in the Word of God, what happens to Christ's promise to guide His faithful in all truth? What's up with all the Christians in the 1800 years between the Ascension and the Advent of 19th century Biblical text criticism? Are they out in the cold, relying on faulty versions (Greek, Latin, or otherwise) of the NT? I mention this primarily because this is one reason (among many) that Catholics place primacy of authority on a living Church, rather than sola Scriptura. All this said, (a) so you get a look at the Catholic view of this, because I know how intellectually curious and genuinely respectful you are, and (b) if be curious to know how traditional sola Scriptura Protestants deal with this problem--the late advent of a textually reliable and widely distributed text of Scripture, if THAT is what is necessary to know the authoritative Will of Good. Thanks. God bless!

[@bbgun061]

I believe that God has preserved the text throughout the centuries, and in many cases, used the Catholic church to do so. It was often Catholic churches and scholars who faithfully guarded the ancient manuscripts and carefully copied them. Of all ancient documents, the Bible is by far the best preserved; with the most surviving copies of early manuscripts, and the most quotations by other authors. Also, it's important to remember that the various manuscripts are far more similar than they are different. Most of the "errors" are changes in spelling, but a few have slightly different wording (synonyms) or a few missing verses. It's clear to me that the *message* of the Bible has been accurately preserved. No one would have been "left in the cold" with a version of the Bible that would fundamentally alter our understanding of God or salvation.

[@Wordsnwood]

That was a huge amount to cram into 11 minutes! Wow.

[@Sincyn241]

I have to admit, it was a little confusing at first, ‘cause the toothpaste metaphor is not one I’d ever heard before now. But I’m with you now, Matt. Thank you for the thought-provoking video.

[@EmethMatthew]

This is amazing! Thank you for explaining all this!

[@ROPname]

Awesome :D

[@adrileemput8514]

Just 1 little thing: Erasmus did all of that at the University of Leuven (no Belgium), not in Rotterdam. The building of his "Three Languages College" (Hebrew, Greek, Latin) is still there.

[@sagemorrison360]

You had me at the toothpaste

[@manuelescoto100]

Well Matt you just pointed at something very interesting. All of the "scholars" you mentioned were protestant in the sence that they rejected the church interpretation of the bible and started to make up their own interpretation, 2 Timothy 4:1-5. God bless you all

[@bbgun061]

The reformers merely insisted on going back to the Bible, and only the Bible, as the basis for all doctrine. Luther's '95 Theses' spoke against things that did not originate in Scripture such as: the selling of indulgences, the infallibility of the Popes, the restrictions on translating the Bible into common languages, the idea that priests must mediate between Christians and God, and so on.

[@jasonpratt5126]

Who else was singing the title card at 11:00 with the 70s disco? -- or anyway trying to?

[@kikin_likin4192]

I love that

[@aprilmartin7998]

I like it

[@davidwatts1453]

Matt, as someone who was raised solely with the KJV, I can agree that there are clearly issues with translation. I believe it would be disingenuous to say otherwise. However, with the ever evolving etymology of any language, does retranslating every century or so not pose the risk of adding errors that would not have occurred in the past? For example, words such as apple, cloud and tweet have very new and very distinct meanings in today's world. With each new translation being farther in time from the original events, how do we overcome the continual loss of our understanding of the cultural context of any situation as we try to adjust for greater relative timescales? Your videos are quite good at helping me to understand the "context" of the Bible. I look forward to watching more and thank you for your time and efforts.

[@johnteds4761]

Retranslating, or better, simply updating translations, exists at least in part for that very reason. Because language shifts and changes, it's helpful for our translations to adapt and along with a language. If word's meanings change, then what a translation is communicating can actually become misleading. Words exist to bring understanding of an author's intended meaning, if a translation's age is leading people to confusion, then it is worth updating.

[@Sethgolas]

I think the potential translation errors are going to change with the language. I don't think that present day English is any further away from Koine Greek than Elizabethan English, since neither is particularly closely related to Greek, but there are differences that need to be taken into account in the translation. Ideally, you have as direct as possible a translation from the Greek, to adjust for how society conceptualizes the words being used. Elizabethan English is pretty understandable today, but there have been some shifts in how we understand certain words. A more modern translation can adjust for that.

[@TULIP.1689]

People should take it upon themselves to have an understanding of the original context imo. I was also raised with the KJV almost exclusively and the usage of masculine pronouns in reference to all people (as an example) never was an issue for me or anyone I knew. I went off to college and I met people who where actually bothered by that. Not only that but I had friends who specifically didn’t like KJV because they thought it was “too traditional” or “archaic” instead of any sort of coherent textual criticism. And yes, these individuals thought it was hilarious that I memorized the Bible in KJV.

[@opajohann]

But why did the reformation not just translate the extant Greek Bible as used by the Orthodox??

[@wrybreadspread]

This is a very worthy question. Steve Anderson, the independent Baptist pastor from Phoenix, Arizona, who is on KZbin, makes the same point in a certain video...but then is careful in other videos to assign Eastern Orthodoxy to the same apostate legallistic formalistic status as Roman Catholicism.

[@horsekid98367]

Wonderful discussion as usual. Couple of things that I've heard over the years regarding old vs new texts. It that a lot of the people copying the new testament in the early years where jews. And the jews when they copy scripture, have a bunch of checks and balances as they do it (word counts etc) and then when they are done, they destroy the original (like burning an old us flag). Also, a group of gnostics in Egypt copied a lot of texts, and may influenced what's in some of the older texts that came from that area. All that to say, older may not always mean better. Just another rabbit trail for discussion :)

[@benvids]

So is the NiV or the passion translation series (if youve heard of these) a result of the eclectic approach?

[@silk1311]

As far as I know, The Passion translation is the work of a man with ulterior denominational motives and little linguistic background. If you want to learn more about how problematic it is I suggest you check out Mike Wingers videos on TPT, he interviews several scholars about it.

[@Laura-qp9iw]

I don't think I've heard the toothpaste saying before

[@jongeiser7569]

Hey Matt! I have a question about the Bible that I hope you could discuss. Can you explain the difference between the various translations of the Bible? Meaning the difference between the King James and the NIV, the NASB and the ESV. Obviously the wording is different. But why are there so many versions? Which is more accurate? Is there one true version? And all other questions around the variance in versions. Thanks!

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

Jon Geiser Thanks for the question. I'll gladly make a video about that. Stay tuned.

[@opajohann]

LOL!!! Funny and smart and cute...a rare combination...

[@pumpknhd]

I think the plural of "codex" is codpieces.

[@thagotaberry]

Whohey, that's nice. I right now have to apply what you regularly discuss, to understand what you even talk about. Because I have to assume, that the toothpaste thing is a commonly known picture in your mother tongue, which it definitely is not in Germany... And as I am able to apply common sense and understand what your point is, without thinking, you have a literal problem with toothpaste, I hope I, and all people who care, learn more and more to apply our brains to reading the bible. Thanks for triggering that thought, Regards, not your mom.

[@sunnywiz]

First.. thank you for what you're doing. I came over from NDQ. Second.. your music volumes relative to your voice -- (my opinion) possibly too high. Drop music by about 20%. :) Keep on being you!

[@markcarey4894]

would be nice if you would give examples of what you claim. Example might be one of the ecclectic model did with one of the apparent errors compared toone of theother models.

[@Pandaemoni]

Cool toothpaste demo. Now if you can just uncook an omelette...is there a tool for that?

[@palrob1714]

Hi, Matt. I have an unrelated question. What do you think about professor Jordan Peterson and his ideas on psychological significance of biblical stories? If you never heard of him, Mr Peterson is a Canadian psychology professor, who came under a limelight around a year ago amidst some political controversy. His series of lectures on the Bible explore its archetypical narratives from the viewpoint of Jungian psychology. It sparked my interest towards the Bible even though I do not share Christian worldview. Just curious to know your opinion.

[@andyjones7121]

PalRob I love JP. Its a more abstract/ philosophical view of the bible, especially his take on old testament bible stories. The free speech stuff that gets everyone protesting and calling him a homophobic Nazi is always fun. Not sure Matt has time for those LONG videos though. He's got a new book coming out too. 12 rules for a better life or something?

[@ravissary79]

He likely has an opinion.

[@theolegrod4282]

Copyright 2018? Are you from the future?

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

+The Olegrod yes I am.

[@chicken_punk_pie]

The Olegrod I'm glad I wasn't the only one to notice that.

[@wrybreadspread]

The KJV Only Purveyors (seem to) assign the same status of plenary inspiration to the KJV that the Church Universal assigns to the original generalized Sacred Scripture itself. Hence the English is as inspired as the original Hebrew or Greek. Their contention is that the piety of the KJV translators trump the free-thought and skepticism of the 19th century translators. To complicate things, I think I also recall reading search that Roman Catholic scholars assign to the Latin Vulgate the same degree of inspiration. But I could be mistaken.

[@robertunderwood1011]

One reason i love and prefer science as a means of finding out the truths of the universe is that things can be discovered independently of revelation. Two experimenters can do the same experiment and ( supposedly) get the same result. One might hope that if God were accessable to all any understanding of Him(?) Would not be based on the accounts of ancients but could be found directly. Persuing any ancient religious text might be a distraction. But how to gain focus on God for each and every individual?

[@zachhecita]

But is truth only found in experimentation?

[@robertunderwood1011]

@@zachhecita Convincing others of truth is found in experimentation when it is an experiment they can replicate. Truth may exist without there necessarily being any proof. But if you want others to believe you ..experimentation helps.

[@U1TR4F0RCE]

When it comes to agnostics or atheists who want to be well informed what do you personally think is the best English version to use KJV, NIV or one of the many other ones?

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

+U1TR4F0RCE That's a great question. I think the NIV is an easy to understand common sense translation that doesn't indulge a lot of Christian lingo. The KJV is likely to frustrate you because it uses such unnecessarily archaic language, and even though I respect its value as an important piece of the grand story of figuring out the New Testament text, it just isn't the best translation in terms of accurately reflecting what the original actually must have been.

[@U1TR4F0RCE]

yeah, the KJV when I first started thinking about doing this(finished the main gospels of the NT and maybe all of the letters but I forget and am on Exodus doing an audio book) but when I started I tried initially the King James and it reminded me of an old Dante's Inferno translation I tried to read in high school because I am half italian, most of my family is catholic and the Divine Comedy is an important piece of literature, albeit one that a ninteenth century translation has a bit of a less well written Shakespeare problem.

[@reepicheepsfriend]

If I may chime in, I used to read the NIV but grew to dislike it more and more. It tries to put things in modern language but sometimes goes too far in that direction and misses some of the poetic value of the original. I've heard that NASB is one of the more literal modern translations, and I do like it, and also a lot of people like ESV now too.

[@IamGrimalkin]

I think that really the idea of a "best translation" misses the point that you want different translations for different purposes. In some cases you want a literal translation like the NASB, but in other cases you may want a thought-for-thought/paraphrase translation like TLB, since you may end up missing something in all the Greek/Hebrew idiom. That's not to say that there aren't right and wrong ways of translating. For example, as I was saying in another recent video, based on context and what I heard about the Greek, I think NIV's "the evil one" is the better translation in the lord's prayer than the "evil" of KJV, ESV, NASB, regardless of literalness (well actually perhaps in a more thought-for-thought translation it would be better rendered "the devil").

[@U1TR4F0RCE]

I understand that there is no best translation in totality which was why I specified for agnostics or atheists to be well informed about what is considered the bible by english speaking believers in north america so that discussions can be had with people and not using a translation that makes things seem a bit different in a way that while it can seem like a good discussion on apples what me the atheist is calling an apple is actually a potato(pomme de terre in french) but because in cooking you can use both for the same thing(I know this isn't a great analogy but I couldn't think of a good one.)

[@ChongFrisbee]

Eclectic approach = Wiki approach!

[@GunFunZS]

Fábio Reale it used to be unfortunately somewhere around 2010 Wikipedia alter their methodology to make certain people arbiters . These people get to delete the notes that other people put and decide what information is worthy . Previously their standard was basically if somebody cared enough to write about it it was important enough to have an article on . And if it'd been corrected by multiple people and had a reasonable mathematical relationship of citations met some minimum threshold of credibility. Now their standard is some neck beard decides it's notable and therefore worthy and this opinion is right and deletes the track records and the notes to anything that doesn't meet his standard . Frankly I think it's a shame . Nerd rage was a powerful force not necessarily to show you what was true but to give you a running start at finding out what the reasonable arguments were over, and what is established.

[@TallesMariano]

Mat, i'm brazilian, i don't have an english bible in front of me.

[@dimesonhiseyes9134]

Question: Why the emphasis on the KJV in your video? Or I should say why was it given a milestone when the Geneva bible predates the KJV as an English text and in many ways was more influential. Although the KJV definitely has had more staying power.

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

+Dimes On His Eyes You answered your own question as you went along. The Geneva Bible is not a source of controversy nor did it shape the scholarly discussion about text criticism moving forward. The King James Bible certainly continues to do so.

[@dimesonhiseyes9134]

The Ten Minute Bible Hour can't argue with that.

[@IamGrimalkin]

The Greek*/Hebrew textual basis of the KJV and Geneva bible is almost identical, so it doesn't really make any difference. The vast, vast, majority of differences between the Geneva Bible and the KJV are down to translation choice and differing marginal notes. *Actually, a large proportion (perhaps most) of the differences in source are because KJV uses the Latin text some parts rather than Greek.

[@dabeamer42]

Yay for Textual Criticism!

[@Beleeuer]

Information on the kjv is not correct. They used more than what you say.

[@fergusdenoon1255]

is it relevant though ... logical fallacy after logical fallacy doesn't get you any closer to the truth.

[@markbennett7797]

I don't sort out anything! I just read and believe.I have a great Teacher. His name is the Holy Spirit!

[@scottmcloughlin4371]

a) Human errors in authorship. b) Human errors in copying. c) Human errors in translation. d) Human errors in interpretation. e) Contextual (when/where) human misapplications. That last one is very important. Look up PHRONESIS. What do we 1) Usefully and 2) Skillfully 3) Say and-or 4) Do 5) When and 6) Where? Phronesis is that specific kind of "wisdom." You have to satisfy all those constraints 1-6. Jesus turned water into (painkilling) wine for a (hymen busting) wedding at the request of his mother. Jesus didn't make wine for blind or lame people. See? Now you see!

[@RodMartinJr]

I don't have much confidence in the skills of the translators and editors. Many of those people did not have the Holy Spirit working with them fully. NCV talks about one verse that was *_changed_* in the Latin Vulgate to support the new rage -- the Trinity. More modern versions leave out key words which cripple the meaning and don't allow readers to see the *_spirit_* behind the "ink." We each and every one of us need to remain *_humble to God,_* not to the interpretations of man.

[@murattanyel1029]

Codices

[@44hawk28]

One needs not concern themselves with the conflicts that seem to appear in the Bible. The Bible does that for us. To everything there is a season.

[@richardmycroft5336]

Jesus from the King James Bible: Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. Seems to me that anyone from 2000+ years ago is well and truly dead and no magical kingdom has shown up. Doh!

[@getdrvasu]

IF Bible is God's words, why does it need to be corrected by humans.

[@richardmycroft5336]

Has anyone found a talking snake in a zoo? Also Jesus did not say anything about homosexuality - and it is not as if that did not exist in Roman times - so why not?

[@Xenotypal]

the Bible mentions homosexuality multiple times, if you are familiar with the doctrine of inspiration, you should know that Christians treat all of the Bible on equal ground as far as commands go. and the serpent in the garden was meant to be an unusual event, it would have much less impact if it were just something that happened every day. the same goes for all miracles mentioned in the Bible, it's supposed to be an unusual thing.

[@nosuchthing8]

So its a total mess

[@nosuchthing8]

Unicorns

[@pumpknhd]

Rhinoceros

[@guitaoist]

Hate the music bro its loud and pointless

[@RodMartinJr]

You forgot to mention Tyndale and how the church kidnapped and murdered him for his creation of the Tyndale Bible. But the 2nd, 3rd and 4th century church scholars were corrupt in their lack of humility and lust for a "sophisticated" and *_fixed_* meaning of the *_ink_* of scripture, crippling the *_spirit_* of its true meaning. That's when the Latin Vulgate introduced at least one HUGE corruption of the Bible with their promotion of the "trinity" heresy. Reference: *_Trinity Treason: How the church betrayed their flock with the only unforgivable sin_*

[@foolishdrunk2181]

Ancient writers were sloppy. Get over it

[@anthonyjohn9000]

If the bible is a copy, then what is original, can any one on this earth make out what was written in the original bible. I think there is no one, then what is the use of your effort of saying that they are copies and what is the use when you cannot prove whether it is false or true, I think you are wasting your time don't you. Prove what is false and what is true then it will be meaningful otherwise it's of no use and it will never end.

[@chitownagnostic7150]

Challenge to ANY of you... I'm an Agnostic Atheist...what is your BEST EVIDENCE of gods existence? I do not care if YOU believe it...why should I? Btw...ill be destroying any logical fallacies you use. Good luck! You're gonna need it.

[@northoftoofar3772]

It's pointless to ask that question, since no one can prove or disprove God's existence.

[@rodgermilner7800]

Why do you believe in macro evolution (I assume you do), have you ever seen it with your own eyes? I hate how you worded your question

[@theautisticpage]

Why not just accept that the authors worshiped different God concepts just as Christians do today? The authors did not worship one Godhead but had different ideas of what god was, so they way they depicted him was different according to their beliefs and the story they wanted to tell. Was that so hard?

[@brotherivy7694]

The KJV is the perfect Word of God in English, purified 7 times. The Alexandrian texts are forgeries, and anything translated from the is corrupt.