The Stupid-Short History of Higher Criticism and Liberal Theology (and Why It Still Matters)

The title says it all. Make sure to check out the first half of this little series on higher criticism here: • Four Ways People Quest...
You know who rules? The people who support this show on Patreon. You can join them at patreon.com/tmbh if you'd like, or you can not which is also completely cool. Thanks a ton for being here whether you support the show or not.
Thanks to top supporters: Chris Nolte, David Coutcher, JR, Jake Purvis, Christian Grover, Damon Easley, Tyler Reed, Paul Vermeulen, Frank Phillips, and Sarah Sims.

[@DerekPlace]

"I'm Matt and you're getting biblier every day. "

[@Christopher_Wheeler]

More like "every week," amirite?!

[@RobertBeckk]

Derek Place oh man, I didn't even realise the background. Lol

[@megmomster]

And the next lightly controversial subject-the influence of Greek philosophy on the Western church’s understanding of the world and the afterlife!

[@obi-wankenobi9200]

It may be lightly controversial to many, but it a very serious matter. Augustine of Hippo incorporated Plato's philosophy while Thomas Aquinas incorporated Aristotle's. Yet the Bible warns against men's philosophy, let alone trying to incorporate men's wisdom into it. Besides, it's an insult. Why do we need philosophy to "complete" the Bible? Is the Bible, Christianity, not complete in itself?

[@doublethebenjamin8185]

@@obi-wankenobi9200 when the apostle Paul warns about the philosophies of man, he is probably speaking of things such as stoicism and epicureanism. The idea behind the phrase "my philosophy is ____." It seems very unlikely that the apostle Paul was telling believers to never learn about and practice philosophical disciplines such as epistemology, ontology, classical logic and reasoning, etc. The Bible truly does give us everything that we need as a foundation, but the Bible does not speak to every possible situation that can happen in life, especially while living in the modern, western world.

[@loridennis6979]

I have never heard anyone discuss the fact that several of the stories in the bible come directly from Greek mythology (including the ark).

[@brianjbarker]

I recognize that room...

[@Matty0311MMS]

I do too. (Sorry, I know it's an old comment. 🙈)

[@EmethMatthew]

Super interesting! I come down with you on the basics, but I love evaluating and examining these details and criticisms that I was taught "just don't worry about that" while growing up. Thanks for this series!

[@Buster1Horizon]

Hi Mat, I enjoy your show very much, it's so well thought through, and informative. Please don't stop as I'm sure many others also feel the same as I do.

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

Thank you very much for saying that Reverand. I hope it comes off as fun useful and charitable, and it's always encouraging to hear from people who work in the same field and find my videos to be any of those things.

[@MindlessDude]

Was gonna comment about you being at Destins but there's already like 5 comments. Love the video on nuts and bolts. Keep em coming :D

[@TasJess]

I'm going to have to watch this again a time or two to chew over the details but you did a great job of packing in a lot of sense information while still making the overall arch very clear and accessible. Good video.

[@TasJess]

Also, I think you forgot to link to that slide in the description but I'm in need of coffee so I may be missing something.

[@personjfreak]

Finkle is Eichorn. I understood that reference. Seriously man, I can't get enough of your videos. If you ever want to move to michigan, we are looking for a youth pastor.

[@alexlemna7456]

This is an awesome video that clarifies a lot for me, and that I'm saving so I can rewatch/investigate this stuff myself.

[@Minnowonsay]

I decided it was time to find out about higher criticism in response to a challenge from my friend. This video and Wikipedia are great starting points so thank you. At the moment I agree with your conclusion and what is so nice about this video is that you actually say that it is helpful to find out about other people's points of view, which is not a line very often taken. Indeed, I think it is a mark of true faith to go boldly into uncomfortable territory, trusting that if we are open minded we will discover new truths and almost certainly end up with a stronger faith.

[@Tabatha437]

Matt, I look forward to every single of o e your videos ❤️

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

Thanks Tabatha!

[@200378820]

Thanks for helping me get smarter every day!

[@PETE316]

I think all of Twitter should be made to watch this as part of a “How to speak about contentious issues” seminar.

[@stevejensen7539]

Good presentation. Just ran across your channel found this video to be a nice "quick and dirty" presentation of biblical criticism. Biblical Criticism is extremely influential and its existence is almost entirely unknown by the general public. Whether people disagree with the conclusions made by scholars or not, it's important to make them aware of it. As a materialist, Im sure wed find much to disagree about but I'm glad that youre trying make people aware of the field of study. Your presentation is cogent and your conclusions thoughtful, you dont need to pad it out with an abundance of charged words. You're a very effective speaker and really don't need them.

[@jamesaberson8733]

I guess you're visiting Destin. Are y'all collaborating on something again?

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

We keep talking about doing a podcast.

[@azbekavcic3385]

*already has like 25 episodes*😂😂

[@jamesaberson8733]

I guess that was a dumb question.

[@AlexCFaulkner]

James Aberson no, there are no dumb questions.

[@ytbryan]

haaaa I​ wanted to comment that the environment looks GettingSmarter-ish because of the top-right hand clock. Until I saw this comment.

[@baritonejp1]

the whole Destin vibe is really funny ... well played

[@Brother-Louis]

I think he was actually at Destin's place. Unless Destin's minute indicator on the clock is also faulty...

[@d_dave7200]

It's worth noting that the political-religious conflation you mentioned is a largely American phenomenon. Where I grew up in Europe most Christians were socialist-cleaning, with some Christian-specific socially conservative views thrown in. (I.e. Sanctity of life issues like abortion and biblical issues like homosexual sex and whatnot.) Even here in the US, I've never had much trouble finding a church that is neutral or liberal politically, but theologically conservative. Though yes, they are certainly the minority. But then again, there are large numbers of Catholics who fall into this category, like the Jesuits for example.

[@Lorrainecats]

Totally agree. I don't fit in anywhere.

[@jimmycoulson4534]

Matt, I’m so glad I found your channel; I feel like I’ve been on a similar journey.

[@JohnTindale]

I have a tendency to accept higher criticism AND a tendency to accept the supernatural.

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

I'd say I'm with you on 3/4 of the main types of higher criticism. Historical criticism as employed in the German liberal movement seems antithetical to Christian supernaturalism, so I'll be a bit more hesitant there.

[@JohnTindale]

I'm going to "facilitate" a study of the book of Genesis in the fall, and I'm actually thinking about paying for access to Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Criticism and thinking in an attempt to work through some of this. I think the essential truths of the Bible can stand firm against anything we can throw at it, and it seems like there's a trend in the church to shy away from the "tough stuff" in scripture in a weak attempt to respond to this nebulous, postmodern ethos in popular culture. I'd be interested to hear what you and Destin think about Jordan Peterson, Jonathan Haidt, Heterodox academy, etc as they relate to what it means to be a Christian in today's "marketplace of ideas"

[@lukeanderson7843]

Hey, Matt! It’s Luke - I had the pleasure of meeting you in the candy store in Custer about a year ago. I really enjoyed your video. I find myself to be in the shades of grey you mentioned at one point in the video. I find that understanding biblical context and looking at it from a historical and cultural lens enriches the text profoundly. I, however, still hold to the belief that the Bible is Divinely inspired. I think intellectualizing the Bible too much is a detriment while blindly reading it completely literally is also a detriment. I think there are valuable things to be learned from both camps. Thanks for such an informative video done in such a respectful way!

[@robelliott4985]

You’re very kind in your approach. Keep it up!

[@briankling5694]

“Finkle is” I just about choked on my Mt Dew!

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

That sensation means it's working!

[@nwilson6745]

Love your Channel, love it so much I've been all the way through it and some of it twice.... it would be great if there were other KZbin channels out there posting Christian content that you enjoy watching if would link to them ..... thank you again for your time, effort and love of understanding Christ's word

[@jupitermadcat]

Really love this video

[@leonardovaldez-soto1466]

As I read my bible I am always surprised by how Skeptical I become,but then I bump into one of your videos and I’m like oh that was easily explained. Keep up the good work brother. I am sharing your channel with all my family. Your great at teaching this.

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

I'm happy to be of use my friend, and I saw your comment about the parable of the shrewd manager from another video. that one makes a lot of sense to when you look closely at it, and I'll explain it in a video soon.

[@leonardovaldez-soto1466]

The Ten Minute Bible Hour I’ll try to do some of the leg work myself but I can’t wait to see your take on it. As always keep it up

[@thewordshifter]

It was a full minute 5 seconds before I realized Matt was in Destin's background.

[@MonaLisaHasNoEyebrows]

Did anyone else first read the title as The Stupid, Short History of Higher Criticism and Liberal Theology 😯😂

[@user-zw5xh6qf1c]

very nicely done

[@mikeainsworth9861]

Very nice and balanced presentation. Where I would disagree is your statements about knowledge of authorship and your positioning comments at the end. Many devoutly religious people are proponents of Higher Criticism. This theory doesn’t negate authors of Biblical texts being inspired. Most of the advances in this field have come in the last 50 years with the archeological discovery of ancient codecs that support it.

[@TrailRider]

Who got the Ace Ventura reference?

[@DenNavnlos]

Aaah, Johann “Finkle is” Eichorn. I still remember the day he stole that dolphin (I forgot the plot, but I think that’s it.)

[@tripp9821]

Laces out Matt!

[@Teuts2000]

Bumblebeetuna.

[@randyturtlefly7]

Any chance you might discuss any of the more famous higher criticisms here?

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

For now, just the main characters and the basic intro, but more about this is bound to come up as we go along.

[@dabeamer42]

Ummm, he did. JEDP theory. That's the big one.

[@J40JesusIsLord]

The more I hear about it, 'criticism' sounds more like 'conjecture' to me!

[@origamitraveler7425]

More like hypothesis, an educated guess based on certain key assumptions. Now, what those assumptions are and their validity is the real question!

[@TudorGeorgescuNL]

@@origamitraveler7425 „Claiming that historical criticism is passé may suggest to some that conservative biblical scholarship has won the “battle” against historical criticism and is now finally vindicated. This may sound appealing in popular circles, but it is not true in academia.” -Peter Enns, 3 Things I Would Like to See Evangelical Leaders Stop Saying about Biblical Scholarship

[@tripp9821]

So I am behind on viewing your videos. :( but I just realized where you filmed this from. :-) Does this mean that Destin will be filming from your office?

[@tripp9821]

I’ve learned nothing here. I’m so freaked out by your Destin impression. I’m gonna need to watch this like three more times.

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

Destin's not mentally prepared for my office.

[@tripp9821]

Well.... you did convince him to get a bidet..... even if he can't figure out the temp. :^) How is it a rocket scientist can't figure out how to set the temp of a bidet?????

[@WilliamFAlmeida]

This is so helpful

[@danstaifer2028]

Good overview Machen's Christianity and liberalism is a good breakdown on this written at the height of the battle (I know Matt is aware of it, I'm commenting for the other commenters)

[@scotttiede]

Excellent video.

[@ivtch51]

Thanks for that clear picture. I was perplexed though that you left out Albert Schweitzer (1865-1975). He is such a major person in this debate. I am one of those who in my early twenties went to seminary and had historical textual criticism lectures for only 5 hours. Our class nearly ended in fist fights with the lecturer. From that day till now (71 years old,) I have found it impossible to return to my literal-biblical and dogmatic roots. It is indeed like eating from the tree of knowledge and being cast from the garden of a simpler innocence. Sometimes I wish my faith journey was less complex but I do no regrets about knowing what I do. It has meant developing a more open, sincere mind with a greater measure of honesty and courage.

[@henryreimer8310]

This is a nice-looking set, the room feels like there are smarter things happening in there every day

[@robertlewis8394]

Hot take: Reading Wellhausen, Schweitzer, and Bultmann convinced me even further of the supernatural and reliable nature of scripture. I also got some tools to explain it to those who don’t believe.

[@sjappiyah4071]

Great video again

[@RipRoarLB]

Would you be willing to do a video on Dr. Erhman's criticism of the Bible, such as to his book "Misquoting Jesus"?

[@duaneschultz9230]

I agree with you. God bless you and your family. Duane.

[@davidburghardt8155]

What do you make of the influence of HL Mencken/Scopes Trial casting the divide between the two groups (superstitious and not sure why we do/don't believe the bible...) so firmly? Seems to me that was a time when their might not need to have been such a division cast - a great squandered opportunity - and a shame that we see seem so far apart now.

[@kristospheros]

That was one of the first thing that popped into my head when he was talking about the early 20th century as well. I think you're onto something.

[@ccyr429]

Super interesting video about historical context of biblical criticism and all… but that Ace Ventura reference though….

[@karenwood2928]

Ha I was going to comment about Finkle but then I saw you referenced it!

[@TheMrMKultra]

why did I not realize that you sat in Destins room until way after the video when I read the comments on here?

[@jeremiahsaxton8967]

WAIT A SECOND!! I recognize that office!

[@johnskinner1282]

Interesting point on tribalism. In my neck of the world it seems that the tribes are more divided over where people fall on the socialism-capitalism spectrum than on religious considerations, but I’ll admit my social circles are probably skewed.

[@darkcisum3384]

I already got used to the Smarter Every Day background.

[@murattanyel1029]

What's that gadget that flashes different colors on the wall?

[@Hall102]

Have you read Jesus and the Eyewitness by Richard Bauckham? Really interesting refutation of higher criticism

[@Zatoichi82]

Do you know two good books that describe what you say in this video?

[@misseli1]

1:13 Is that text a reference to Anne of Green Gables?

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

:)

[@kauffner]

In the 1920s, Fundamentalism was associated with the political left and with the politics of William Jennings Bryan. Jimmy Carter was also liberal and ostentatiously Christian. It was only in the 1980s that a "Religious Right" developed with Jerry Falwell.

[@judeemert3406]

what is the red and green blinking thing

[@kauffner]

The video doesn't mention Darwin and evolution, but surely this is the most controversial question in Biblical interpretation. As for the JEPD theory, it claims that each of the four authors of the Pentateuch had different opinions. J was from Judah, E was from the Northern Kingdom, and P was a priest. Somebody who didn't worry about all the contradictions redacted the four sources together.

[@eligillispie1206]

obligatory comment about Destin's clock

[@Brother-Louis]

Was I the only one who noticed his clock's minute indicator is faulty? The top middle LED must have fused. Tell Destin to fix it.

[@Nomen_Latinum]

What's faulty about it? It seems to be functioning fine in this particular video.

[@Brother-Louis]

Nope... look again at the minute indicator

[@Nomen_Latinum]

Oh my bad, I was looking at the tens place for the minutes. You're absolutely right!

[@mattfromeurope]

Funny that halfway around the globe there's another Matt seemingly asking himself the same questions I do - with the only difference that he's talking about it on KZbin ;-)

[@nathanprindler]

Off topic here, but I'd love to hear your review of the latest Avengers film.

[@truethinker221]

Historical Source Criticism is one of the best ways to Learn the reason the stories were written. It is not about whether the method is true or not. It is a system for learning the source. Considering the source is a very important thing to do when looking for the meaning of a thing. Ihe information is the result of two hundred years of the most dedicated Biblical scholars known to man.

[@michaelb2912]

Thanks Matt - could you do a video about marcionism? I have friends asking me about this, would love to send them a video of yours

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

Great suggestion. I'll see what I can do.

[@kevinlove4356]

Here is my take. The Prologue to Luke's gospel (Luke 1:1-4) reads: Since many have undertaken to set down an orderly account of the events that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed on to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, I too decided, after investigating everything carefully from the very first, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the truth concerning the things about which you have been instructed. Note the first phrase. Luke has "many" written sources. The Greek word translated as "many" means the same in Greek as in English. We would not use the word "many" if there were only one or two. Luke had at least three written sources, maybe more. If we assume that two of those three were Matthew and Mark, then there must be at least one written source that Luke had and we do not. If we call that source "Q," then it must exist. Luke says so.

[@jasonpratt5126]

Actually, Origen back in the late 100s - early 200s invented text criticism. (Not just Biblical text crit either, though that was what he used it for of course.) Jerome was a major Origen fanboi until later in life, when some church politics led him to disavow Origen quite publicly -- while still totally following Origen's methods (and conclusions about universal salvation, and trinitarian arguments) in practice. (Jerome's friend, with the awesome Latin name of Rufinus Tyrannus, who had helped Jerome translate Origen into Latin, got into an epic mail-correspondence fight with Jerome over the hypocrisy of denouncing Origen for dumb reasons while still following Origen in Jerome's own work. It was a sad breakup to this super-influential Latin team. :'( ) Anyway, Jerome was putting Origen's text critical methods into practice when working on the Vulgate.

[@livingpicture]

On 4:30-5:15 - thus, my favorite saying about politics: Nothing is *inherently* political, but anything can be made political. Yes, my social media bios say I'm a Christian, and yes, I speak on "political" issues, because for me, they aren't political, they are moral.

[@nicholasdasilva9]

Freidrich Schleiermacher was an incredible theologian and spiritual writer

[@dabeamer42]

I didn't start to realize that he was filming in Destin's room until 2/3 of the way thru. Duh. I'm just used to the sight of that room, and the fact that there's supposed to be a friendly face talking at me...a face I recognize. My first thought (at 2/3 of the way thru) was "Cool -- Destin gave Matt a copy of his famous wall-clock-with-square-lights thing. Ummm, wait, there's a rocket on the ceiling..." btw, for those of you who don't follow the podcast that Matt & Destin do together (No Dumb Questions) -- I highly recommend it. Matt has been travelling during a sabbatical he's taking, and spent some of that time in Alabama.

[@MasterTop100]

I see you did not pack your sea cow...not sabbatical material? --Great video as always!

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

Look closer.

[@MasterTop100]

oh my gosh! Top-left corner. Tehehe!! I never thought you would have risked it. XD

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

Internet high five.

[@navion426flying3]

Haven't even started watching the video yet... Why are you in Destin's office?? We need the backstory!!!

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

He and I are long-time friends, and my family and I were in town staying with him for a few weeks when I recorded this video.

[@navion426flying3]

@@MattWhitmanTMBH Awesome! Two of my favorite channels combined :)

[@navion426flying3]

You guys should combine for some content.

[@riverjao]

It seems like Athanasius said in “On the Incarnation...” that Paul wrote Hebrews. It couldn’t even something else 🤷‍♂️ But I think that’s the one.

[@kcaleb]

Hey, I know that room, that's not your house! It's the KZbinverse!

[@zachell1991]

About half way through the video, I thought: Wait a minute that's Destin's office!

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

Same here. Stupid fugue state.

[@zachell1991]

HAHA

[@zch7345]

packed tonnes of history condensed into less than 10 minutes of what we now come to know as the root cause of all these theological dissonance throughout these past centuries that ultimately have bearing on our eternal salvation. We are suffering from the consequence of touching & feeding from That forbidden tree of reason of Eden.

[@ehaslage]

It took me until 3:35 to realize that you're in Destin's office.

[@lisraelson12]

Great video Matt, would have been better if you were wearing Destin's hat, just saying.

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

I've seen that hat up close, and I don't trust it.

[@whiskeyandagyro3135]

the q? like from startrek? mind blown.

[@bromponie7330]

Despite liberal tendencies these days, I'm still pretty certain that Mark, Matthew, Luke and John are the authors of the four canonical Gospels.

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

Me too. People might reject what their documents say, or even question the accuracy of all the details, but to argue against their authorship looks increasingly silly as time goes on.

[@bromponie7330]

Couldn't agree more. Especially in comparison to other ancient writers. Wow, I feel blessed today, having you respond to me. Well, I guess everyday is ultimately a blessing ...

[@dabeamer42]

One of the podcast guys I listen to (James R White) notes that you can't get a PhD or get published in the "serious" scholarly journals nowadays if your topic lines up with old-fashioned supernatural Christianity. If you want to get published, you have to come up with some goofy idea (or develop someone else's goofy idea) that the contents of the Bible are not what was universally agreed to for 1700+ years.

[@IamGrimalkin]

Hmm, I agree with your conclusions, but I don't think it is as clear for Matthew and Mark as for Luke and John.

[@bromponie7330]

IamGrimalkin I can respect that.

[@MrJamesLowery]

You forgot Bruno Bauer. Everyone always forgets Bruno Bauer.

[@andrewselbyphotography]

It's almost as if when you don't have the authority of the church, you open yourself up to higher criticism and division in the church

[@kellytillman6489]

I was looking for info on the Tubingen School about theology but this is better. I have the name of scholars I can look up.

[@rogermetzger7335]

Unless I missed it, you failed to mention something about which you could make an hour-long video, namely, that there are people who have no doubt that there is a supernatural dimension to the universe (that the creator and angels - good and evil - are able to perform miracles on Earth and interact with humans) but who reject some of the ostensibly Christian doctrines that are widely considered “traditional” and who reject some of the political doctrines that are widely-held by the traditionalists.

[@truethinker221]

The reason critical historical criticism was dormant for centuries is because the Catholic keep under guard the early Church Fathers writings and any public reading of the bible and that even only Jerome's Latin Valuate.Was allowed. As Monks began to uncover and uncover the hidden books they began to challenge the Church the most factions Martin Luther who is known for busting open the fakes by bringing biblical knowledge to the common man and allowing it to be investigated in the same way as any other ancient documents using the same criteria to test it,.This is was why the Catholic burned and banned all the translations and made Jerome's Vulgate translation the only Original autograph bible to be read or studied. That new system called Higher Criticism. The Historical Method or checking and identifying the most original source is the method of interpretation that turned the world of biblical views upside down and is responsible for the blossoming of biblical scholarship, beginning the period of enlightenment by breaking the strong hold the Papacy had on the people taking the archaic interpretation away from them. The Source Historical Critical Method still is the most important study method for proper understanding of the Manuscripts. It ties the hands of the radical fanatical fundamentalist that are trying to bring humanity under the power of a corrupt religious system . They think they are helping restore some sort of early tine period where every one understood the bible and were unified about biblical doctrines. Never was a time and the biblical wars were much worse when people were ignorant. The continued advancements of Modern Source Study is bringing the bible to life and will bring it back to its position of greatness and serve us for the purpose it is intended for;. Spreading Peace and love, Joy, fullness of life, confront in death and a friend to tell your most secret things to .

[@gobokinje9183]

"The Source Q" . . . . *glares at John de Lancie*

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

Lol. That was literally the first thing that occurred to me the first time I heard about the Q document.

[@gobokinje9183]

Now I'm wondering if that was the basis for the Q continuum XD

[@matthewmillar3804]

Why are you at Destin's?

[@Gisbertus_Voetius]

Liberal theologians often seem to think that their hermeneutic stands somehow at the beginning and determinate all other things. However, it seems clear to me that our hermeneutic is just as part of our worldview we already have. Thus, if we engage the Bible as it if were a book as any other, that is: denying it's supernatural character from the beginning, we start with an anti-christian assumption. Our whole interpretation that follows must therefore be, by necessity, unchristian as its core. This is the biggest problem I see here.

[@joer5627]

Well, I've lived a lot of years living fat dumb and happy on this topic. Not sure I have a high level of concern about it just now. Content knowing, believing, and trusting in God. Don't feel the need to fight every fight to the last man. Will tell others as to how Jesus changed my life and others can go down this path in my place. Be strong and couragious.

[@formerfundienowfree4235]

What's more likely? That the supernatural exists? Or that everything is exactly how you see it?

[@johnblackstar4390]

So basically the same stuff with the sadducees and the Shammai phrases but with christian groups?

[@HabashyAngy]

St Mark focused more about miracles that why he show Jesus as servant king. St Mathew and st Luke focused on accuracy and one of the mysterious source was St. Mary and other women who traveled with Jesus. (St Luke took care st Mary's health and draw three pictures of st Mary.) St Mathew and st Luke mentioned the genealogy and the Christmas story. St Mark did not mention them. Of course, the Holy Spirit that guide all three of them. Ask any Orthodox or catholic, he will tell you the same thing. This reason no one question the bible until 17th because it was after Protestant reform happened.

[@HammerandNeil]

NIce blue shirt... Des... I mean matt.

[@jsargentokc]

It is gut-wrenching to watch a modern human defend the profound ignorance of bronze- and iron-age humans. Shouldn't it bother Christians that no one, who wrote a letter/book which made it into the NT canon, ever met Jesus much less studied under him?

[@WadeGlass]

Yep

[@JSW9174]

Why for example does mathew and luke using a Q source that mark didn't have, or believing the first 5 books of the bible were edited together by different authors, mean that God didn't inspire it?

[@MTJLT]

Political tribes. I love it.

[@jamessheffield4173]

If you followed recensions, text-types, process, and now CBGM AKA GIGO, just wait until 2030 for the complete ECM. Then from an ancient garbage dump in Upper Egypt we find a new scrap. Methinks, I'll just stick with the AV. Peace.

[@osks]

Here’s the thing… whatever you believe or what I believe or what anyone else for that matter believes, counts for zip! The ONLY thing that matters, is what IS, and what IS, IS what it actually IS, in spite of what we believe! But… how do we know what actually IS? That’s an important question to answer, because only then will we able to formulate a proper response, not only to the question of ‘Higher Criticism’, but in fact to every other question of whatever propositional nature - ‘religious’, ‘non-religious’ and even ‘irreligious’! The true origin of ‘Higher Criticism’ (and all its derivatives) can be traced back all the way back to Gen 3, when God handed man over to the delusion (2Thes 2:11) of ‘Autonomianism’, the idea that man is able to function as an ‘autonomous agent’, able to come to know for himself what actually counts as ‘right’ and what does not, apart from God and His revelation… Now, it can easily be shown that, what actually IS, can be known ONLY if God reveals it (to His own) - every other attempt (empirically, rationally, scientifically, intuitively, experientially, traditionally, mystically…) ineluctably and unavoidably ALWAYS results only in what Paul refers to ‘knowledge falsely so-called’ (1Tim 6:20), or as ‘foolishness’ And since ‘Higher Criticism’ (Q: ‘Higher’ than what? A: Higher than God and His revelation!) represents an endeavour that proceeds entirely from the mind of man rather than God and His revelation as the Christian’s ultimate epistemic authority (as THE TRUTH, not ‘merely true’ or even ‘probably true’ as the so-called ‘scholars’ aver) it must be dismissed as foolishness - as nonsense… And so, don’t be impressed by the fact ‘Higher Criticism’ claims to be the ‘findings of scholars’ - those who “are always learning but who are never able to come to a knowledge of the truth” - 2 Tim 3:7!

[@7eardstapa7]

I think starting with the presupposition that the Bible has to be supernatural in origin is a leap that many of us just don't feel comfortable taking. That's the problem...

[@amisbreakthrough5064]

Biblical Criticism is 100% true!

[@marknovetske4738]

Thanks for the video... actually the "higher critical " way of looking at the bible and questioning the traditional teachings handed down by the church are the logical expressions of the protestant mindset. Thats my take on it anyway. Its actually just a throwback to satan's first temptation of Adam and Eve.... "did God really say..."

[@isaiah2810]

It’s not just a Protestant thing it’s prevalent in Catholicism as well unfortunately. Your last sentence is so accurate though! I’ve always said the exact same thing. Planting doubt in the minds of men about the authenticity of God’s word is the original sin that led to the fall of the entire creation.

[@danielponder690]

Spinoza was awesome indeed! One of our great "Yid Thinkers"