Hello there guys! This video will be an in-depth examination of how our modern Bible was created and written and how it differs from the ancient texts of thousands of years ago. You will learn how the Bible has been "changed" or "altered" over time and what these changes mean and why they were made - everything from Goliath's Height to Jesus's sayings.
Hope you enjoy and learn something new!
Edit:
I have since realized that a significant amount of the information in this video should be more properly cited to their original authors, to avoid taking credit for their hard work.
Much of this video would not have been possible without the research of Biblical scholar Bart D. Ehrman across his various works and lectures and I have since recognized that portions relied on him a little too much.
Here are some points where I should have quoted authors instead of paraphrasing or re-wording them.
10:00 (Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus, 2005, pg. 66-67)
11:32 (Ehrman, Misquoating Jesus, 2005, pg. 103)
19:57 (Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus, 2005, pg. 195-196)
Background music:
“Precipice”, “An Evening A Lifetime”, “Looked Back Saw Nothing”, “Not Without the Rest”, “Life in Romance” and "Marxist Arrow" by Twin Musicom (twinmusicom.org)
"Blue Feather" by Kevin Macleod
Citations:
Reddish, Mitchell (2011). An Introduction to The Gospels. Abingdon Press. ISBN 978-1426750083.
Burkett, Delbert (2002). An introduction to the New Testament and the origins of Christianity. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-00720-7
Duling, Dennis C. (2010). "The Gospel of Matthew". In Aune, David E. (ed.). The Blackwell Companion to the New Testament. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-1-4051-0825-6.
Hays, J. Daniel (December 2005). "Reconsidering the Height of Goliath" (Portable Document File). Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. 48 (4): 701-2.
Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus: the Story behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. New York: Harper, 2005.
Ehrman, Bart D. Whose Word Is It?: the Story behind Who Changed the New Testament and Why. London: Continuum, 2008.
Epp, Eldon Jay. Junia: the First Woman Apostle. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005.
Ben Witherington, “The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the ‘Western’ Text of Acts,” Journal of Biblical Literature 103 (1984): 82-84.
Ehrman, Bart D. “The Historical Jesus.” (Course No. 643) thegreatcoursesplus.com. Accessed April 9, 2020. www.thegreatcoursesplus.com/t....
Harris, William V. Ancient Literacy, 1991.
Sanders, E (1995). The Historical Figure of Jesus. Penguin UK.
Hitchens, Christopher (2007), God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, New York: Twelve Books, ISBN 9780446579803 .
"I am a peaceful man" google translated from english to latin to greek to hebrew to greek to latin to english is "I have an airplane ticket"
I tried this and I got “For peace”
So the part where Jesus goes on an airplane to the Bahama’s is fake??? 😳
I tried the same, I got this: "I am a man of peace."
I got "go in peace"
I got i am a man of peace
I once got into a rather heated discussion with an acquaintance who insisted that Jesus spoke Elizabethan English. Never mind the fact that English didn’t even exist then.
So Jesus basically invented English. :0
Didnt he invent english in the tower of babel?
Ratbat 1986 You mean he invented a language before it existed, wut?
@@beepboopbeepp you didnt get the joke..
@@beepboopbeepp Yes, like how Tolkien invented Sindarin before it existed.
Sidenote: The story of David and Goliath leaves out that David did the prehistoric equivalent of bring a gun to a knife fight. When even a moderately skilled person uses a sling you can hear it break the sound barrier. The rocks move at over 200 km/h, there's an account of the Romans in 123 BC being repelled by slingers at a port landing, having to retreat due to hull damage, armor their ships and go back. That scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark where Indiana Jones just pulls out his gun and shoots the guy? David is Indiana Jones in that scene.
Didn't really leave it out as most people in ancient times would have known that. It's more about a poor boy defeating a wealthy warrior elite.
@@christophersnedeker yeah they would have, but you and I both know that's not the modern take on the tale.
200 kph sound barrier...hmmmm
@@jamesfriesen5576 read it again, the sling does the snap, same as a tip of the whip, the rocks go 200kph(citation needed?)
Baeleric slingers were snipers. Thank you for making this point. The average speed of a solid rock moving at 100+ mph was deadly. They started using slings as soon as they could walk. That was the tool of the trade for herdsmen and was given as much importance as horse handling was. Not the range and accuracy of a bow, but when you are dead from a rock or dead from an arrow it doesn't really matter at that point.
i grew up in the Australian Presbyterian church. We were encouraged to learn the bible, and question translations. We were also ecouraged to know the difference between a story used to teach and actual one used to relate history...
I was taught you must believe, proof is unnecessary....
but still you're told that the Bible is the word of god, huh? so they do realise the book is plain wrong when talking about history, dates, years, it's wrong about biology and space, but still it's the best book from all existing ones, right?..
@@kwakagreg The bible itself says to study and show your proof for faith. Who ever said to just believe and not seek truth and study all things is wrong. If someone makes a truth statement or something illogical see what the bible says instead.
@@joeshabe What exactly is the bible wrong about? You’re saying something is wrong without giving an example of whats wrong, it holds no grounds and is a baseless accusation.
Yes so did I and was told at about 13 to stop asking so many questions and asking for proof to just believe it.....I must have faith, it was not for us to know all.....I was disruptive ...
Imagine being the guy who is only remembered because he made a grammar mistake in the bible.
More legacy then I'll ever manage to leave, I'm sure!
today people are for less faults in tv culture! ✌😁
Could be worse, could be because you sold bad quality copper
@@lordmagot And kept all of the customer complaints in your house...
@@darthzaida1881: "More legacy then I'll ever manage to leave, I'm sure!" -- The vast majority of man will never, ever be known after their death. And according to one historian of ancient times, that means you didn't exist!
Imagine being a "Christian", never reading the Bible, and get upset at a video like this that is based on the factual work of Bibical scholars.
@charlie rivera you know who wrote the bible?
Oh look, the devil has KZhead!
I logged in just to tell you.."You are the smartest person" THAT'S CHRISTIANS IN SUMMARY. Yep dunce, even to whats written in the bible.
I was tracking with him till the Gospel authorship. No manuscripts, biblical or otherwise had titles at that time. They were not written anonymously. The early Church (2cnd and 3rd century) ascribed the authors and Mark as the testimony of Peter.
@@savebyj Bull.
The Greek text is the LXX. The Masoretic text is an edited Hebrew text done with certain goals: addition of vowel points to the consonants; choice from among Hebrew variant readings to help in debates with Christian apologists; standardization of the Hebrew text. I’m sure this comment at approx. 6:21 of the lecture is just an oversight. I find your work well done and clearly presented. Thank you for doing this.
Hell does not exist. It isn't real. You are under mind control.@@SoyebAkhtar1918
James I told his translators to use the “Bishops Bible” as their primary source. He wanted a version to replace the Geneva Bible, which had notes throughout explaining the text.
“This fandom is so toxic” - Martin Luther
IS THAT A JESUS REFERENCE?!
"The Pope is pretty cringe and deserves to be cancelled my dudes." Martin Luther 2016
"U wot m8" - Judas
@@diegodankquixote-wry3242 - 🤣😂
Martin Luther, probably: "The catholic church is CANCELLED and that's on periodt, I mean, look at the pope sitting up on his white horse draped in finery while jesus wore a sack and rode a donkey smh i am diSGOSTED"
It's very difficult (for me at least) that there are American Congressmen who believe that the first Bible was written in English. That's extreme ignorance...
maybe the kingjamesbible XD
One truth I learnt from life is that people whom we believe to be the most learned people, including scholars, can be wildly, blatantly ignorant when asked anything not sitting in their field. My PhD mentor, a very famous guy, was with me during a trip to Rome. When visiting the Castle San Angelo, he looked at metal poles that were used to hold marble blocks, which were original and still intact, and said: "That's not historical. Romans didn't know metallurgy." No, I am not kidding. He actually said that. I was so flabbergasted that for long minutes, I tried to figure out how someone so highly considered could believe such insane things. Part of my apprenticeship.
I just thought it was weird to for Trey to call Ted Cruz a congressman. It's a weird thing to call a senator
christian nationalists literally think jesus was the same nationality as them
@@raminagrobis6112 Indeed, we are only knowledge on a handful of things, there are little to few people in this world who are good at everything they do or say, most of us only do good on certain things
I come back and re-watch this video and part 2 all the time. This is the kind of information I've craved since a child. Thank you for such amazing work. I can't even imagine the sheer research you did for this video. It's incredibly admirable.
What these people don't teach just like today we have different denominations who write their own version of the Bible they had them existing 1800 plus years ago hence why you find different texts. The Torah and the old testament are basically the same. The new testament be what version it be all testify about Jesus Christ and who He say He is. I am a king James version believer God will not corrupt His finally word. I learn this after I died in 1990 came back to life believing in something different than what I was thought knowing the truth for it set me free the day I came back to life after dying. I had stage 4 osteosarcoma cancer. That day I was totally heal never took medication since. Jesus Christ is Lord. Hope the same way the Holy Spirit lead me to know the truth He will lead you as well. Have a glorious and bless day.
@@angelgoindoo4518no at the beginning I’m pretty sure he explicitly stated that there are multiple different versions of the bible from different communities and time periods and that it’s not one linear path. Like he very explicitly stated this, repeats it throughout the bible, and shows a graph that’s a web of how all the different versions are connected. Granted this graph is just for the old testament but he says the new testament is in the same situation
5:28 this is misleading. These are not strictly translations of translations. While some bibles will maintain a lineage such as this, the manuscripts that are used for the original translations are still consulted abd used to translate directly from when needed. It isn't a translation of a translation of a translation, they are still using the starting manuscripts to ensure accuracy.
I dong get it..
@@stevebehindlightshe's basically saying the Bible is a translation of a translation when it's not true
So in conclusion: *_The Holy Bible is the final product of over two millennia of scholars playing broken telephone._*
So basically god’s version of the phone game
Megumin is best girl
three millennia, if you include the old testament
It's a game of broken telephone being played by broken telephones.
if only! its a product of grey cardinals playing "who is on the wrong side of history"
3:37 if that makes you feel better, here in brazil there is a city with the same name of bethlehem (belém) and when i was a kid, i thought jesus was born in the middle of the amazon rain forest. 😂😂😂
imagining the entire nativity story taking place in the amazon gave me quite the laugh, thank you
That is a great story. Thank you for the laugh and yes may our Lord produce spiritual babies in the Amazon. Be Blessed +t+
Kkkkkkk mano
jesus was brazilian
Jesus being Brazilian would make the same amount of sense as him being white
The reasons people are reluctant to engage, debate or participate in conversations involving politics or religions: A lie is still a lie, even if the majority believes it to be the truth; and the truth is still the truth when the majority believes it to be a lie.’ “Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it." -Leo Tolstoy.
In the journey of life, knowing that God goes ahead of us, stands beside us, and walks behind us is a source of unwavering strength. Let's embrace each day with confidence, knowing that we are never alone. Amen. 🌟🙏
Amen, and also, whatever God ordain, men can change their minds, their attitude toward it, but they can't stop, or alter God master plan, because God eternal, and He holds all power in both the spiritual, and physical realm .
Why does God provide evil? Why does God not provide for the innocents? Why were all but 4 gospels suppressed?
@@philipliethen519 it's typical for humans to ask those questions, because we always fail to take responsibility for our own actions, and sometimes push the limits, and when it doesn't work in our favor, we complain, God is of freewill, he does whatever he wants, but he is perfect, and he made us with freewill, but because he is the creator, he has objectives that he sets for us to fallow, and when they are violated their is consequence , now if he did made us as robots, and program us only to do what he desires of us, then we would say he is unfair, and a slave master, not to given us a choice, to act on our own will, but the good thing is, he grants us grace, and mercy, grace is to provide us with the forgiveness that we don't truly deserve, while mercy is to save us from the penalties of what we deserve, because of our sinful, and rebellious actions, and we don't need four gospel to save us, Matthew chapter 5, 6, and 7, is enough, the Sermon on the Mount of olive, that is the condition of the heavenly kingdom principles, which is the difference from the Earthly system that is full of hatred, evil, envy, unforgivenss, Greed, pride, racism, murder, and this system will soon pass away, but to them that fallow after the will of God, will escape from the judgement of destruction.
@@philipliethen519 "At first it might seem that if God created all things, then evil must have been created by God. However, evil is not a “thing” like a rock or electricity. You cannot have a jar of evil. Evil has no existence of its own; it is really the absence of good. For example, holes are real but they only exist in something else. We call the absence of dirt a hole, but it cannot be separated from the dirt. So when God created, it is true that all He created was good. One of the good things God made was creatures who had the freedom to choose good. In order to have a real choice, God had to allow there to be something besides good to choose. So, God allowed these free angels and humans to choose good or reject good (evil). When a bad relationship exists between two good things we call that evil, but it does not become a “thing” that required God to create it.Perhaps a further illustration will help. If a person is asked, “Does cold exist?” the answer would likely be “yes.” However, this is incorrect. Cold does not exist. Cold is the absence of heat. Similarly, darkness does not exist; it is the absence of light. Evil is the absence of good, or better, evil is the absence of God. God did not have to create evil, but rather only allow for the absence of good." "God did not create evil, but He does allow evil. If God had not allowed for the possibility of evil, both mankind and angels would be serving God out of obligation, not choice. He did not want “robots” that simply did what He wanted them to do because of their “programming.” God allowed for the possibility of evil so that we could genuinely have a free will and choose whether or not we wanted to serve Him." www.gotquestions.org/did-God-create-evil.html
It's funny, how some people forget that Jesus was middle eastern.
it” 😂😂😂
Yeah not many people state this
Oh nah , not Jeebus y’all
U gotta be sped if u don’t know this
Jesus’ current “image” is Caesar Borgia
People have no idea how painstaking it is to put something like this together. It's a lot of serious work.
@Stephen Valus The word actually is Vaticanus
👏 For sure!! A project with this much research would take me months to years 😂🤣 . This guy is a hero!
@Stephen Valus so what?
@Stephen Valus bruh you wrong
The video or the Bible?
Very informative. Thank you to the person who snuck in the frame from Life of Brian.
this is wrong teachings we have the original bible 350AD preserved until today and King James version Bible is the first translation to English and this translation is still available until today to ( everybody ).
@@aymanseder5887 we dont have the original bible, as the bible itself is just a compilation of various semi related books. you can have the original books sure, but the bible as we know it today has had many books either removed or added depending on your denomination. im also pretty sure that the oldest gospel wasnt written in 350ad as some of the new testament were supposed direct eyewitness accounts of christ himself, and the old testament were of stories that were shared long before christ. source: i study at a catholic institution in a very catholic country
Great interesting info, thanks for your research efforts
It is worth noting, there is a big difference between "the earliest copy" and "the earliest surviving copy of which we're aware". It is hard to infer too much from what has survived today.
I think he talked about that
It's like some vids: "This is the earliest [insert ancient item] in the world!" No, it's just the earliest one that e know about at the moment. As science progresses, the "earliest" will get pushed further and further back.
@@christaime9812 link please?
@@angrydragonslayer KZhead blocks my comment when I paste links. So search on KZhead : "4. The Reliability of the New Testament (Authorship & Dating)" by Inspired Philosophy.
@@christaime9812 oh shit waddup
0:07 - Introduction 0:44 - A Few Basics about the Bible 4:37 - Example of a Bible's lineage (crude example) 7:35 - Archaeological Findings & Old Manuscripts 9:07 - How do we know the Bible has been changed? & Textual Variants ----------------------------------------------- 13:04 - #10 - Goliath's Height (1Samuel 17:4) 14:58 - #9 - Gospel Titles & Authors 19:11 - #8 - Women Omitted (Romans 16:7, Acts 17:4) 21:59 - #7 - Forgiveness on the Cross (Luke 23:34) 24:18 - #6 - The Johannine Comma (1John 5:7-8) ----------------------------------------------- 27:08 - Closing comments
Goat
The Dead Sea scrolls that have been verified dated and looked over for years shows there are no changes made to any part of the Bible
*This video is full of errors* and his own opinions, it's not near the truth and not scientific at all. *Inspiring Philosophy* has a video on that subject, make sure to read it and *stop the misinformation.* *"4. The Reliability of the New Testament (Authorship & Dating)"* by Inspiring Philosophy Edit : Since there is popular demand : This is how to know who wrote the gospels. 1- John John is a direct eyewitness. And he faithfully gives a detailed account. An easy way to identify John as the author of the Gospel of John is through contemporary witnesses. One of thoses witnesses is Polycarp, John's disciple, who identifies John as the author of the book of John. John also speaks in the first person and identifies himself multiples times in the book. --- "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling *AMONG US.* *WE have seen* his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:14) At the end of the Gospel of John, John identifies himself in the first person : --- "Peter turned and saw that *the disciple whom Jesus loved* (John) was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, “Lord, who is going to betray you?”)... *This is the DISCIPLE who testifies to these things and WHO WROTE THEM DOWN.* *WE KNOW* that his testimony is true." John 21:24 John's words 'WE know that HIS testimony is true" while putting himself in the "WE", is a clear proof of what I was saying up there, that he was purposely avoiding the first person, to show that it's not about him, and that it's about and authoriative, true and attested account of what happened. John had a closer relationship with Jesus than any of the other disciples. Jesus and John were essentially “best friends.” Jesus entrusted John with the care of His mother, gave John the vision of the transfiguration, allowed John to witness His most amazing miracles, and later gave John the Book of Revelation John 21;24 claims authorship of the gospel by the "Beloved Disciple". If the "Beloved Disciple". A study of the New Testament, the other Gospels, the letters of John and the book of Revalations, clearly points to John the disciple as the one who is called the Beloved Disciple. It's no brainer. www.gotquestions.org/disciple-whom-Jesus-loved.html John always identifies himself that way in the Gospel of John, because he knows he is writing a book about the story of Jesus, the Son of God, and he is the closest to Jesus, so he must be humble and objective, in order to write an authoritative book. "Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing *a sudden flow of blood and water.* The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe." John 19:34-35 "After the spear was thrust into Jesus' side out came what appeared to be blood and water [19:34]. Today we know that a crucified person might have a watery fluid gather in the sac around the heart called the *pericardium.* John would not have known of this medical condition, and could not have recorded this phenomenon unless he was an eyewitness or had access to eyewitness testimony." - Craig Blomberg, Historical Reliability Of John's Gospel" I bet you never heard of these passages before. 2- Luke Luke is not a direct eyewitness as he said it himself. Luke, while not an eyewitness, claims to have constructed his book from eye witnesses sources. Luke is not a Disciple of Jesus. Luke is a companion of Paul. So it's normal if Luke doesn't say "WE" as John said. But he does speak in the first person and from the book of Acts and the letters of Paul, we easily identify Luke as the author of the Gospel. Luke said : --- "Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. With this in mind, since *I myself* _have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught._ Luke 1:1-4 Luke excludes himself from those who were eyewitnesses of Christ’s ministry. He indicates participation in the Pauline mission by the use of the first person in the “we” sections of Acts. They suggest that Luke shared in instructing persons in the Christian message and possibly in performing miraculous healings. References of Luke in the Pauline Letters has regarded him as a very educated physician and a Gentile, and Paul indicates also he was with him on several missionary journeys, matching the "WE" passages of Luke in the books of Acts. Don't forget the book of Acts is an extension/continuation of the Gospel of Luke. And this is also direct proof* that the Gospels were already written even before Paul wrote this letter to the Galatians, because before Luke mentioned the meeting of Paul and the disciples in Jerusalem in the books of Acts, he already wrote before that the "Gospel of Luke" very well before 70 AD. And Luke did not tell us how Paul died in the book of Acts, that means Paul was still alive when Luke wrote the his his adventures with Paul and the Acts of the disciples. I the beginning of "Acts", Luke writes : " *In my former book* , Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen." - Luke in the book of Acts. 3- Mark The bookendjng of mentions of Peter in Mark's gospel is called an inclusio. This is a literary device that denote an eyewitness source. (The Apostle is the first disciple mentioned in Mark and the last one mentioned after the Resurrection in Mk 16:7). Biblical ethics in both Testaments called for multiple witnesses to be retained for testing truth claims (Deut 19:15) Also, the principle of giving a testimony orconfession was a virtue of the early church. It wound be difficult to persuade Jews if Sinai teaching was ignored or if they were shown to be men of poor character. ' According to the 2nd-century theologian Irenaeus, Papias had known the Apostle John. Pappias, quoted by Eusebius, explained that "Mark became Peter's intetpretet and wrote accurately all he remembered". This is Papias quoting presumably the Apostle John ! So your Trey got nothing on Pappias who knew John himself. So if Pappias tell you that Mark and Peter wrote the Gospel of Mark, then Trey is a liar. So Mark, writing as Peter's interpreter writes his account matter-of-factly with details that seem like on-the-scene recollections. Examples: Mark 8;23-27 or 5;2-5. Scholar and historian Colin Hemer identified 84 facts in the last 16chapters of the Book of Acts. Items included deal with correctlynamed ports, correct languages used, landmarks, political titles, etc. Things that would be known by those who were there. Those in the know without access to Google or maps. John also mentions numerous historical details that would only be known by a personnal witness living at that time, details possibly irrelevant to a later audience. John correctly described the Pool of Bethesda as having five porticoes. The pool unearthed, critics discovered that they were indeed five. 4- Matthew - Patristic tradition is unanimous that the author is the Apostle Matthew. - The earliest manuscripts that we have of Matthew are titled "The Gospel according to Matthew" where it is appropriateto have one. There are no untitled manuscripts where a title is appropriate. - As a book universally ascribed to Matthew, to name anyone else as author is to affnm that the true author o'f'tAe gospel was forgotten in a comparatively short amount of time (50 years). - The Apostle Matthew, as a tax collector, needed to be fluent in Aramaic and Greek. - The Gospel of Matthew contains more mentions of financial transactions than either of the other Synoptic Gospels. A solid reason to consider a tax collector as the author. - The Apostle Matthew was not a member of Jesus' inner circle and a relatively unknown entity in scripture. If one desired to make up a title for one otjne gospels, Matthew, instead of Peter or James (brother ot John), would be an unlikely choice.
@@christaime9812 it’s rlly not ur just trying to defend ur religion
@@Yt_watcher12 It's really not him trying to lie on my religion. I'm a scientist and I wouldn't be defending my religion if I didn't notice how this video is full of inacuracies and his own biased opinion.
Thank you. I've wondered about these changes for years after first hearing that there were changes from a reliable source.
I’d be interested in your opinion of the “best” Bible. For me, it’s the Douay Rheims. Way too much of a gap without the books of Maccabee’s, Judith, etc. I could read the Vulgate given a Latin dictionary and several months to struggle with it, but what’s the point?
"lets go finish my biology homework" nah lets watch a guy talk about the history of the bible for 27 mins
XDD hell yeah
Fr I have a essay 😅
@Apuss - The Adopted Son Bah, only a half reader instead of reading the full story. Keep quiet
Lol😂😂😂
@Kevin Belgrove j is in geez alfabet spoken by adam.preserved in ethiopia amharic language.Janhoy Haile Selase defends melkesedek order.many names many languages of god.jews denied him but we believe on him by His Power of the cross.heart word breath.trinity of God father son holy spirit.jews allow greeks to big up Jesus.the word remain the same.is not symantics.not polytricks.is believe.faith.is ethiopia.she stretch forth her hands unto eyesus kiristos
I like how he gave us facts and didn't say anything bad about the bible but people still got mad. Edit: watch out for the war in the replies
@The Jazeera Channel huh.
@The Jazeera Channel What do you mean?
@The Jazeera Channel aint no one reading all that
@The Jazeera Channel ..... it feel like you said something and nothing at all. Give more info and contex, if not people will never understand what your are saying
@The Jazeera Channel so in short it's not up to the people to think about religion, but we should just believe?
Bro, thank you so much for your effort; very well done. I gotta say, though, at time 12:26 - I am totally digging the scene from the Life of Brian.
this is wrong teachings we have the original bible 350AD preserved until today and King James version Bible is the first translation to English and this translation is still available until today to ( everybody ).
This is why i seek Spirit of the Lord when reading the Bible. I ask that my mind and understanding will be increased.
Trey: (sees that one meme of Jesus holding a dinosaur) Trey: "This. This shall be the basis of my entire channel."
Ass: The Legend of Ass you quite possibly might have the best username I’ve ever seen.
Barking Mad and jojo icon
oh my god im the 420th like i feel so special
Mista is into paleontology?
Just curious who would you guess are the wolves in sheeps clothing are
Monk 1: *crosses out and corrects word* Monk 2:"You are a fool and a knave, do not change the text" The first social media fight due to a grammar Nazi happened 2000 years ago.
Might be an urban legend, but I've been told that the oldest text ever recovered is a customer complaint. So there...
Wait til they meet Trump and what he's gotta say about it... Trump: Fake News Scribe: Sorry Mr Trump but it's actually Gospel meaning Good quality news so there 😇
This brings all what I know and more into one place, thank you.
Thoughts and Prayers for the lost to be found. And the blind shall see. Amen.
Amen 🙏🏻
Amen.
Better than thoughts and prayers is actual action.
@@user-wu8sj3ee3d what “actual action” do you suggest for the lost to be found and the blind to see?
@@johnnyfettslem7439A miracle or two, maybe?
Those Greek scribes were having an OG Wikipedia edit war.
Look up Dr.James white for accurate information kzhead.info/sun/o7BpgJqrf2KZfYU/bejne.html The Gospel kzhead.info/sun/et2rYsObjF-fmK8/bejne.html The esv was translated from earlier greek manuscripts not from other english translations
I grew up in Mexico and I went to a Catholic elementary school. When I was in middle school they made several changes to the Catholic bible in Spanish, which bothered me because I was raised to believe every element in the bible was there for a reason. One of the changes was in John's gospel, they changed from "In the beginning there was the verb" to "In the beginning there was the word". I remember the priest at church saying that the change was correct because Greek, unlike Spanish, was more precise and one word has only one meaning, so the word "logos" had one, and only one meaning. At the same time in school I was learning that the word logos had many meanings and it was the source of "logic" as it use of "reasoning" or "thinking", and the source of the word "biology" where "logos" meant "science of", "knowledge of", "study of", "about of". I was expecting some of the adults raising their voice to correct the priest, but they either didn't bothered, or worse, they believed him. Most of the changes weren't major, but I didn't see anyone else mentioning in public any argument for or against any of the changes, just an attitude of "this is what we believe now"
And Jesus spoke Aramaic now imagine how many changes took place in the Greek language itself
The WORD in John 1 is a verb. It doesnt become a noun until its formed or begotten in you as a son of God. James 1:18, I Peter 1:3, Romans 1:3-4 give important evidence. Tyndalls' translation actually got it right when the WORD was translated as "IT" and not "him". There are many pivotal errors like this that led the church congregations into apostasy of worshipping a man as God Almighty. The abomination and strong delusion we were warned about. The 1st commandment never changed to include anyone but the Father Alone. Deut 13 is a very good chapter to read. as is Jer 16:19-21 which clearly states that at the end of the age during our affliction, we will discover we were lied to by our fathers. That prophecy is happening now just like it says.
TruthShockTv on KZhead tells more changes
Son ovejas de dios
“In principio erat verbum” is the Latin. In English it is translated as “In the Beginning was the Word.”
Thank you so much, you have earned yourself a new subscriber.
You should know that the authorship of Luke is not under contention because it is written in first person one of two volumes along with Acts in which the person of Luke is present himself for part of. He was also a physician and capable himself of penning the words.
Well, you are technically correct in that it's not under contention. It's close to universally accepted that it's anonymous by scholars. What you and preachers think really doesn't matter.
Okay, but all the Monty Python pictures are hilarious
Minecraft Jesus cracked me up
Dude wtf, why no spoiler warning? I didn't know Jesus died??????
WTF MAN. I read this comment and you spoiled that shit for me.
Wait what? Im still on the beginning of the new testament!! Spoilers dude!
Jesus! Dont spoil genesia please! Im up to the 4th day....
Its okay. He ends up resurrected. Ugh, this is sooo anime.
Hayden Walls Darth Vader was his father all along.
I appreciate this. I always knew, but haven’t been able to read them all. Shukran ❤
It doesn’t matter how many versions you look at. The issue is to read and study the Bible. Most people try to avoid this.
What kind of logic is that... different versions equal to a different context. Also if there are many versions of the Bible, which of them should a christian use to rely on and read in the first place. Also if the authors are unknown, how are you supposed to trust if those are the words of Jesus himself. Add the fact that the earliest manuscripts are 300 years after Jesus and in greek.. that's putting a big leap of faith in something where the evidence is speaking against it. That's like you writing a letter in english and in 300 years a chinese person writes a letter in chinese saying it's from you... doesn't make sense
@@flashhtony2948 your 100% incorrect on this statement. The Bible has still been preserved. Even though different translations use different wordage to suite a specific audience doesn’t mean that the Bible is inaccurate because in every Bible the main point of it is to prove that Jesus is the messiah. Thus meaning that all the Bible’s still are preserved because they all push that ONE MESSAGE
I appreciate a close look at the semantics and history of the construction of the Bible without any obvious religious or anti-religious motives.
its nice
Agreed. Not going to stop my relatives from shouting "Blasphemy!" though.
which (Edit: some) religious people will brand as anti-religious anyway because facts which don't agree with them are "anti-religious"
@@Robert399 Do you always over generalizes?
@@Fakan They sound like OKJV only?
Bruh why the Bible didn't say that Jesus was a part of the Steel Ball Run
Cuz that happened after the bible
They didn't mention it cuz it would've been spoilers.
When they tried to explain who shot Johnny Joestar, it was too complicated. They cut it out because most of the medieval peasants didn't take any napkins.
So the bible 2 is steel ball run
It's a spin-off
Fascinating! Thank you very much!
You are the coolest... I truly enjoyed this today: Kudos..
Wow, monks were the original fathers of 'comment section' arguments.. "...Fool and knave leave the old reading and do not change it.."
Hahah it say a lot about it
Well, I guess for Abrahamic, that's Rav Ashi and Ravina II, and the eldest, from those who's was recovered, Adi Shankara for Vedanta.
favorite line - bravo
The worst thing you can do is change something. This has been the down fall of the Catholics. Christianity originally had no priest. Bishops were several bishops over one congregation not one bishop over many congregation and that's just the start.
@@bobgordon1754 But, there were priests in the Bible right?
You know it's sad how it's the actual religious people who seem to be unwilling to analyze the history of their holy texts for changes, because you would think they would be the ones who would most want to go back, re-analyze everything, and create a new version of the Bible that is closest to God's word and original intent.
Exactly. Unfortunately what is taught in churches is to believe without question. Not only do we grow as people by challenging our beliefs, not challenging them and blindly following is a recipe for being manipulated.
Well, no. The really religious people are more than willing to analyze the Bible truthfully. The more religious they started, the deeper they went. Then they realize it's all crap and fall out of religion. Bart Ehrman is the perfect example of this.
@@hirisquvidson7625 I don't understand this self-righteous and insulting attitude, from someone who I assume wants to follow in Jesus' footsteps. I used to think comments like this were just from trolls who wanted to rile people up. Problem is, I see it in the real world just as often. And it always leaves me scratching my head, because it's the exact opposite of Jesus' message of compassion towards each other. I'm serious when I ask this question - Why? Why is this your approach?
@@hirisquvidson7625 dude...chill.
This makes me appreciate one aspect of Islam I always liked anyway: you're not supposed to translate the Quran. The original Arabic text is believed to be the literal word of God as given to mohammed, not for any special reason other than that's what the prophet spoke. Translating it makes it NOT the word of God anymore, and while helpful for non speakers of Arabic, a quran in English for example is technically not a quran. Doesnt make their book any more or less factual or convincing, it's just cool in a historical context to still have the absolute original text of such a massively important religion.
Great information.
Thank you. I can't tell you how much I enjoyed this. Very educational.
The idiocy of this video has already been debunked. kzhead.info/sun/pJaEqs1up2d8nXA/bejne.htmlsi=eOc0Zka5j9ueUuS3
As a person who grew up in the church but has since fallen away from it, I find Biblical history to be absolutely fascinating. It's like everything I was taught when I was young is either misfounded or outright historical revisionism.
I find that there's a defining reason a lot of people leave the Church, It's so they can justify pulling little "pranks" on their friends that are more like assault. Trust me, I used to think that harassing people was "freedom". Jesus for life.
Bee your experience is not universal
The funny thing is, my bible teacher from the Christian school I went to in 8th grade was strongly against historical revisionism. We had multiple lessons talking specifically about how society has revised historical events, and how that relates to Christianity. Yet he never once mentioned the historical revisionism of the bible, but instead claimed that it’s all God’s original word and said we should follow everything in the bible literally
@@SweetTodd what
My mother raised me to be vaguely aware of the revisionism (admittedly I’m Jewish so this applies to the Old Testament for me). Not aware of the exact revisions but with a vague idea that it wasn’t the original text. She is an archeology nerd. My synagogue usually didn’t take the words literally but instead as metaphors for how we should be nice to others and stuff. I know of people who step away from churches and synagogues but still have faith (just not in the texts). It’s always surprised me how few people knew about the translation errors since I figured people understood that people (who like anyone else) make mistakes while translating. It is genuinely shocking how some people try to force people new to the faith to believe that the text is literal (because metaphors didn’t exist in ancient times or something 😒). I understand why it works when someone is introduced to the literal interpretation while they are young but it just seems really shady that some people seem to be trying to keep people from knowing about the revisions. It’s not common knowledge despite it being important information in enlightening people to your faith. Sorry for rambling but it really bugs me when people try to misinform people on purpose.
Yes, I know I screwed up saying “Vanaticus” instead of “Vaticanus”
I have dyslexia and I forgive you
hehe
Still waiting for that Mokele Mbembe Cryptid Profile.
@@justdamon25 that titanus from Godzilla?
Venerate the Immortal Emperor.
great video!
Great video!!!!
Help I can’t stop watching these two videos. Idk why. It’s just so hard to find actually good videos on the Bible that are neither trying to prove or debunk it. Why aren’t there more good channels on this site that look at the Bible from an objective, academic pov?
Because the people who can generally make those videos are being paid in a university or seminary.
religionforbreakfast is a wonderful channel that talks about religion academically. his videos are really interesting
Cause bias friend unbiased shit is hard to find now sadly cause i like these vids to
@@ballmunch6714 nothing is truly unbiased
@@ussinussinongawd516 yep but atleast this one doesnt shit on everything man and thats a good thing it causes less conflict against the creator of the video
There's a difference between wholly inaccurate, and holy inaccurate.
Underrated comment
@Ivan Walker Matthew 5.22
I always think of that book of lies, fantasies and mythology as the Wholly Babble.
@@mehrcat1 you should read your girls diary...
Holy n' accurate?
I want to respectfully point out that a substantial amount of scholarship disagrees with this video on the authorship of the gospel. The fact that the oldest copies of the gospels do not include the names is absolutely normal. Hardly any copies of literary work from that period names its author. And the fact the letters themselves do not contain the name of the author isn't surprising at all. How many books have you read that tell you, within the body of the text itself, who wrote them? Exactly. Instead, we have abundant early church attestation (I'm talking second century) most everybody was in agreement that Matthew was the work of Matthew (who would have been literate in Hebrew and Latin, so why is Greek surprising), Luke (a doctor, who likely was highly literate), Mark (Peter's scribe, so also literate), and John (who writes in a very simplistic Greek, implying it was his second language). Paul, another Biblical author, repeatedly informs those receiving his letters that he isn't actually writing them, but dictating them to his scribe. Why would this also not be a safe assumption for the gospel writers? Furthermore, if someone were to invent the authorship of the Bible, Matthew, Mark, and Luke would make no sense. Someone pretending to be an eyewitness, or somebody pretending to know who the eyewitness was would have picked Peter, James, or John before the others. The fact they picked the rarely mentioned (outside of his own book) Matthew, the unnamed (except in Paul's letters) Luke, and the even more absent Mark is a strong indicator that they *did* know who the authors really were. The conclusion that the gospels were the work of anonymous authors is based only on half-baked textual criticism. They have their reasons, yes, but those reasons do not instantly lead to the conclusion, they only make the conclusion probable. What most likely happened, using Luke as an example, is that the Theophilus addressed in the first verses received two scrolls addressed to him by Luke, his friend, containing the story of the gospel and the Acts. Luke's signature would have been on the packaging, or on the outside of the scroll, or perhaps a seal upon it, and as such it was not included in the text itself. The scroll would have circulated, along with the word of mouth attestation that Luke had written it, as copies were made and distributed. This word of mouth testimony became widespread enough that multiple church fathers, from Lyon to Alexandria to Jerusalem, could agree upon it and declare officially that it was indeed the work of Luke. The problem with declaring them anonymous, and worse, that they were "definitely not" written by the authors attributed to them, is that this is based on 1. an argument from silence, and 2. based entirely on the textual contents of the documents, and *nothing else,* ignoring extratextual evidence to the contrary. It's *possible* they were not written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, but the weight of evidence leans the other way. There is room for skepticism, but not that much. That said, as a Christian Bible teacher, this video is otherwise very well researched, and friendly to the faith. I will recommend it in my future Bible lessons. Edit: I forgot to mention that narrating in the third person, even when the story is about, or involves the author, was an extremely common practice of the day. Even Josephus (yes, that Josephus) was known to do it.
King James the Second, is the bible that we use. One thing I remember being told that was changed was, "Thou shalt not kill", used to be, "Thou shalt not kill illegally". At least they previously admitted to supporting WAR as Legal Killing. I was taught that the current bible is SOME of the books of religion that were available in the far distant past. Several were left out, unknown at this time why.
The word is murder. Premeditated murder, not kill.
That Minecraft Jesus on the timeline graphic 😂
Look up Dr.James white for accurate information kzhead.info/sun/o7BpgJqrf2KZfYU/bejne.html The Gospel kzhead.info/sun/et2rYsObjF-fmK8/bejne.html The esv was translated from earlier greek manuscripts not from other english translations
@@greatanswers410 So you're saying there is no such thing as Minecraft Jesus? 🤔
@@greatanswers410 Hey, quit spamming with that link already. Why are so many christians so insecure to feel the need to do stuff like this?
@@girlkisser69420 You know, fanatical evangelists are like that.
@@paul6925 Yes there is a minecraft Jesus But He can only be accessed Through the world of warcraft Blood of the lamb
Here's the bible. We're gonna do a dinosaur vid next. Lmao, love the range as always.
A resource that might be of interest - Wikipedia has a good page called "List of New Testament Papyri", which lists all the know extent manuscripts, with their dates and further details. Sorry, I can't put a link but it's easy to find. The earliest extent is the "Rylands Library Papyrus P52", a tiny fragment containing only 7 incomplete lines of text on each side. It is dated between 100-175 CE. There are only 3 other papyri dating from the 2nd century and these are also just small fragments. One must get into the 4th century before finding close to complete manuscripts. Codex Sinaiticus is probably the earliest and may have been created on commission by Emperor Constantine.
i find it funny that they wanted to make goliath 9ft tall as if a 6ft 9 guy isnt a monster even by today's standards
Man this Evangelion analysis is taking too long...
@TRAV AVIS tbh I've sat through an 8 hour analysis of pokemon omega ruby/alpha sapphire without ever touching the games, so I can relate on some level
Rawov Un Lupin I know exactly what video you are talking about
@TRAV AVIS I too am a man of culture.
@TRAV AVIS Bruh same. And before that I watched a three or four hour-long video about Darksiders.
@@rawovunlapin8201 Damn, that sounds great.
As an atheist who recently started growing an interest into Christianity and it's history, this is nice
Me too!
Lu Marquesb True, i am a horror fan and it is very fascinating to see some of the almost Lovecraftian creatures that were dreamt up in the ancient days.
@Wade Haden - Master Jedi Engineer Goth Atheism is a claim that I can't particularly sympathize with for being such an arrogant claim. I particularly respect agnostics however because they simply do not know, atheists on the other hand completely deny anything outside the material world including the idea of a god which is completely unsupported by things like quantum physics. It's interesting that you speak of metaphysics... because I wrote an essay breaking down the evidence for god with quantum physics and neuroscience called the quantum god. You might find it interesting, you also might have to challenge some presuppositions you may have about reality being entirely material, the consensus of physicists agree to the idea that the material world is a fiction of conscious observers so you might have difficulty with that aspect but it is quite fascinating.
Keegan • to me, god may or may not exist, and no it is not because I “do not know,” it is because there is nothing that can prove or disprove the existence of a god. I don’t think I’ll ever believe in a god(s) until I see them with my own eyes.
@@juno7424 I'd agree with the first half of your statement, and by definition, may or may not exist is a netrual ground, you are fundamentally claiming that you are not convinced of either sides and reject both, you are not sure. The idea that you cannot prove or disprove god is simply a false dichotomy of evidences since not all evidence can be found on a purely scientific basis, god by definition cannot be "proven" with the scientific method because god exists outside the material world, so nothing can be used as a control, there are many other forms of evidence that can apply to god however like logical or empirical reasoning in ways of explaining the universe, assuming the only evidence that is useful is scientific evidence is faulty by all measures.
In my discussions about the Bible with other believers, i am sometimes attacked for even suggesting the Bible has errors, and that at one time it was correct as it came originally.
I also believe in Jesus but not the doctrine of inerrancy, I came to that conclusion from spoting self contradictions in the text. I was following a cycle of finding a contradiction, leaving the faith, finding a way to reconcile it and rejoining. I was on the unbelieving part of the cycle when an event happened in my life that made me realize I still deep down believed in the gospel. There are actually a couple Christian authors I respect that don't/didn't believe in inerrancy.
The fact that adult americans exist who believe that the Bible was written in one piece, in English is the most shocking thing I’ve ever heard. That really put me in a thought spiral.
As a Atheist, i love your more scholar and historic approach to the religion than outright bashing them like most atheists do.
@Timbo Dewabem That's free will after all
Oops I wanted to say that in more of a joking manner, but accidentally sent it
To be fair, silly things are easily mocked
I've always been under the impression that if you just dismiss any holy book by denying its realism, it's just as idiotic as dismissing a fable by denying its moral. No one goes around telling people that the Tortoise and the Hare is foolish because sometimes you need to act fast. Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and say I don't think forest animals came together to have a footrace, but neither did a man face a wall of flaming swords trying to return to Eden.
Exactly. Let the inconsistencies in “god’s word” speak for themselves.
Hey as someone who was born and raised in a Christian church, even went to Christian school, I appreciate the research you've done. The truth is so much more interesting than anything we were taught in Sunday school! Keep up the good work and awesome videos.
That being said are you still a Christian?
@@therougechipmunk8058 Fuck. No. That was my point. The truth is much more fascinating than "what we were taught in Sunday school". In fact, as an adult, churches still make me uneasy and I have nightmares about some of the things I was taught. Like Carl Sagan said, we are all made of star stuff. Much more interesting to me.
CatFaceFaces I tried to find evidence for god’s existence and all that exists is the fact that people believe in god
He leaves out half of the evidence he doesn't like so he can reach his predetermined conclusion, don't trust these videos.
@@jb0433628 then why do you watch?
Yo Thank You! This was really cool! I have a a question about Paul. In your video, you kinda hint at Paul being more for wemon roles within the "ministry"; however, there are several scriptures supposedly written by Paul, separating women from the "ministry" and putting them under a heirchy. Would you assume they changed all of Paul's words, in regards to wemon? 😊
Yes. None of the earliest copies of Paul’s writings have all that sexist stuff
@@maxwellmaxwell3042 Yoo Thank You Sir!! Could you point me to the sources if possible? For long time, I have pitched a case against Paul. I do believe in changing minds as new and accurate information is presented. If what your saying is true, and the material is correct, then I need to change a few thing within my mind. 😊
paul made up the fact that jewish law had been abolished, he is not to be trusted@@sheldonmurphy6031
God is love.✝️
11:01 lol It’s like Wikipedia before the internet. I have to add that it might seem very unprofessional to some to have that extra text in the margins from the scribes, but I absolutely love that they did this. It reminds us that these were painstakingly copied by hand by actual human beings and we get to see a side of them and their sense of humor that we otherwise never would know about. I think it’s wonderful.
Ya that genuinely made me laugh🤣 it’s not often that you get to see people from ancient times in a natural light you know?
Yes! It’s a reminder that history isn’t just stories, but people. They got annoyed just like us, which (to me) is weird to think about for some reason
A greeting video..!
False equivalency fallacy! Be careful your argument is anecdotal. The Bible was translated directly from the scrolls with teams of scholars and translators that cost millions of dollars. Don’t be fooled from smooth talking words.
Yes, and these are the "words of god"? More like the words of men, who despite being allegedly guided by the holy spirit, changed, omitted, amended the words of God. Errors errors everywhere
Honestly guys, the movies are better than the books. I mean have you seen Life of Brian
Mudly I kinda disagree.
He’s not the messiah, he’s a very naughty boy
Fun fact, that entire arc was just filler. Yeah it never actually happened in the manga
Oh please Jorge Joestar is the best book that was ever written
🤣
Very very very enlightening !!!!!
This is fascinating.
Thank you for including citations. Everyone should be required to do this.
You should, but the Wiki isn't a good source. It is often half right, half sourced, & can be altered one day, corrected the next. So, you might site it as a work, then when I check it to verify that, you are wrong, as it now states something different. And I don't mean a few words off, I mean complete changing of meaning. The wiki isn't a legitimate source for this reason alone. Second, I wonder if he got some of those other quotes from the wiki also, not the original source. In that case, his cited source is incorrect, but should be the wiki citing the source so you know where he got it vs where it originates. That is an issue. Example (not saying it is real). His Quoting Bart. This would be legitimate if he got it from that book, but what if he got that quote from the wiki? Then it is an improper citation & you would have to check the quote against the book to know that. As presented, it would have be directly from the book or incorrect. So let's say I did check the book & it's fine? Good. I can go forth happy that the information is legitimate. What if I didn't have the book or access to it, but know his quote is on the wiki, then what? Since he used the wiki, it is reasonable to assume he didn't have the book, but I couldn't conclude that, since the wiki can be changed. So I end up saying I don't know, but I trust this guy because of his other citations & presentation. This is given it isn't just a synonym change, because that isn't of interest unless you are professionally doing the work. There is the problem. Just the introduction of the wiki as a source causes issues. Maybe he is honest, but doesn't know. Maybe it came from the wiki & is wrong. Maybe he had the book & Bart is the source. I just have to end like Bart there. If it fails to jive I have to deny & if it jives maybe it is true. This isn't properly sourced even if properly cited. The Bible is markedly different in that though. I felt that needed saying. Edit: Just talking about his cite in the video, as a place to find things, not his list in the description.
@Mike Z scientific scripture 😂 now that's an oxymoron... Do you drink dry water too?
@Mike Z you notice the it too huh? 🤔
@Nadime Rivero I am a Muslim already bro haha Thank you though.
@@mackdmara thats why you go to the bottom to the works cited and use that
I really appreciate your approach to this, not patronizing or belittling Christians. I loved to learn about all of this, and will certainly look for more. I believe Christians shouldn't be afraid to learn this, as at least so far none of these changes jeopardize the fundamental concept of the Gospel.
I really, really don't want to give you any reason to stop investigating your beliefs, but how do you get to any fundamental concept in the Gospel. I haven't read the 60 something library that is the bible but from what I've read I do not see any concept they share unless the words GOD and GOOD count even when they are described as polar opposites. And just to clarify it's okay if you don't have an answer, it doesn't mean I "win" by default or anything childlish like that, I get that you're investigating for a reason.
@@Zancibar Why not read the whole bible so its easier to explain to other people why they should or shouldnt believe in it? To many people on the internet have who have a strong opinion about the bible but have never read the whole bible. They believe something because a youtuber, friend or family member said something.
@@MrTahref I read the motel version, I don't like it, I am not going through the whole 60 books if I have no reason to. And I don't have a strong opinion on the bible, it's a book I did not like and if I try to talk to people who do believe it's true (or metaphorically true) it's because I truly do not understand how do you reach that conclusion without taking it as an axiom.
@@Zancibar Its a guess, but atleast 50% of christians or people that call themselves christians have not read the whole bible. i cant force you to read the bible but to get better answers i think its better to read it yourself. If you dont wanna read, kzhead.info is a channel with some cartoons about the bible but doesnt cover everything/enough.
@@Zancibar But remember the bible does not exist in isolation. While it contains the word of god, it has been compiled, edited, and studied by Christian scholars and the church for 2000 years . To understand it, it should be viewed from the lens of the teachings and doctrine of the church as well, not the texts alone. If you want to understand its message better, I would recommend watching people like Bishop Barron or other priests who's job it is to explain it.
Very good study and work thanks for your digging for the truth!!
The statement that the English Revised Version of the late 1800s is a revision of the King James version of 1611 misses the point that the modern versions began using the Alexandrian Greek text, while the KJV is the Byzantine text. Basically, the Byzantine text is fuller. Depending on one's perspective, the Alexandrian text omits or the Byzantine text adds quite a few words here and there, as well as whole clauses, verses, and even two long passages (Mark 16:9-20; John 7:53-8:11).
Me: is the English bible really the same as the original bible? English translator: yes but actually no
I mean they translated Latin Bible which itself is translated version of Greek translation of original Hebrew Bible. So... The mistranslations in the book were almost inevitable
God: write down what I say. Humanity: okay, but we have to translate into many different languages for all of us to read. God: Wait what, that going cause mistranslation. Humanity: oh, then who the one that made us have different languages/togues God:.....fair point.
As non- english speaker reading the english bible is like reading a document straight from the middle ages. Like... other languages at least update the bible's grammar & spelling every century or so. For example, the modern german standard language even got created through the necessity of a coherent bible translation.
Translator 1: Yes but actually no Translator 2: Yes actually but no Translator 3: No actually but yes Translator 4: Maybe Translator 5: No actually but yes (Translator 4 is stupid!)
@@jadenk1409 yeah, translations often lose things because of the nature of the speakers and the languages makes perfect translations a far-fetched ideal. Things like pacing, structure, metaphors, sayings, poetry, rhyme, and alliteration doesn't typically translate all that well outside of closely related languages, and that's without even considering human error and people intent on changing it...
10:53 "Fool and knave, leave the old reading and do not change it!" ...and Wikipedia was born.
Ancient greek "talk" pages lmao
Your father wrote a letter about his love for you, and how you can find him if you get lost. the Bible=the Books is about a Message=the Gospel=the Good News---kzhead.info/sun/obGJpMd9f2iqY58/bejne.html
Ancient shit-talking!
And it was good.
@@scourgi5274 [citation needed]
Great vid
A link for part 2 please ?
Just another Christian popping in to say that this is an awesome video. It's still a wonderful thing to dig into Western history by tracing this text back to as far as possible, mistranslations and political modification/sacrilege notwithstanding. Agreeing to disagree regarding the religious debate, I am always grateful to hear more about humanity's history, whether it fits our world view or not. Between you and channels like the Bible Project, it's been an interesting ride to try and decipher meaning from text and culture far removed from our own. Thanks Trey. Have a great Easter.
Hey bible project is my favourite Christian Channel
Have you ever heard of tob skiba or zen garcia.Great read
I can not understand how one can alter original text to fit his view point. Even I would be afraid to do that.
you are right, the more we know the more we can find a closer relationship with Christ
@@andrzejadamowicz3753 It has happened already, so now we know that people are capable of doing that.
So a workplace arguement was left in one of the oldest bibles
ur pfp is cute
A workplace argument on how the text had been altered in the "unchanging text of god". This is obvious proof that the texts are not "Unchanged through the ages" as some people argue. Besides it was in a text later used to put the bible together. In those days there was nothing that can be called a bible yet, just collection off different text collected by the church. No one knows how many of those texts were left out of what became the bible, but we know it was a LOT of them.
11:55 Or it was a later addition never present in the "original". The main reason for this option is the "punishment" rewritings of later Christians to the Bible original text.
During my confirmation in a conservative Christian church, we were also taught the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. Having seen National Geographic specials on the history of the Bible, I often brought up the fact that the bible we know is a translation of a translation. The minister eventually started asking us "Why can't there be any mistranslations in the bible?" when he was testing our understanding of what we'd learned. The correct answer was something to the effect of, "because they always used the best translation." I thought that was pretty weak.
so do you believe in biblical inerrancy?
@@dr.autismgod3538 big nope
I do, after reading the bible in its original languages. If someone is too lazy to do that, he puts all his effort in "disproving" biblical innerancy
@@stamatissavvanis5862 I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not
@@alexnelson7258 There is no doubt that there are so many changes throughout translations and copies, some explained here. However, the statement the Scripture makes that it itself is inerrant because it is the Word of God does hold up, as we can see even though the linguistic words have been changed, the underlying words and messages have not. All *teachings* have remained true to itself and agreed with all references across all books within and outside the Bible. And yes, I agree, your minister's answer was pretty weak lol.
Human clever enough to change the words of God where ever and when ever necessary
Man hates to Gospel bc it is the truth and bc they love living in sin and evil they change Goda words and turn away from him, Sadly many die and dont even know the truth, Get right with God before its too late🙏💙
@@tiana9720 you do know anime is against the word you’re preaching right, Sakura? Might wanna stop living in sin as thou shall not entertain that which permeates violence and sexual promiscuity, at least she chose sasuke in the end💀
@@frankiefrankie1120 guess you haven’t read the Bible
@@abezebethou I definitely have, which is why I’m Atheist. The Bible and the Christian God himself are highly hypocritical, from killing infants to sacrificing women, to destroying a mans entire life for a bet. It took six commandments before “oh yea also don’t murder” while the first 5 are all about worshipping him and not worshipping others
@@frankiefrankie1120 Stop hating on Sakura, There is nothing wrong with her and since im preaching the Gospel i already repented so im not living in sin
There were a group of French monks convinced by a Peter Waldo to translate the Latin Bible to their common language (Franco-Provençal) some time around 1160, ~220 years before John Wycliffe translated it to English.
Some Jews were discussing why there were so many different Jewish beliefs and differences between the groups. They concluded that if they had a prophet as of old, they could solidify the truth. Isnt God meant to be the same yesterday, today and forever? Where is the prophet to unite all Christians? Or has God stopped speaking? Does he care anymore?
Modern bible is the netflix adaption of anicent texts
that explains white jesus
Limey Lassen shouldn’t it be the opposite ?
That explains the poor quality and horrible nonsensical plot lol.
*beats Judas in the back of his head* "LORD JESUS"
No, netflix adaptations are more accurate, the modern bible is the weird bootleg version
God: here y’all go Humans: nah I don’t like that Humans: *changes it to suit them* God: wtf
What in the heaven*
God doesn't sin
Huh*
@@vvjjjio5549 bro it’s a joke if god exists it wouldn’t actually say that
@Uncle KFC okay Uncle KFC
All of this discussion can go back to Dead Sea scrolls that have been matched to the Bible we have today and it's pretty close to be exactly the same. Of course there will be translation errors but it hasn't been changed like people talk about it
But are the scrolls original?
The rapture was added in 1828
It is important to remember that even Bart Ehrman admits that the few changes or misstakes we do see dont change any thing of significance
he belived in forgery in the books
I got a hard cover, signed by the author edition.
*how*
I just imagine how you stand in bookshop and guy who work there just in front of your eyes wrote "With love by God" into it.
Mista Lahey Magic
Which author?
I will gi e u about tree fiddy for it
I really enjoy this series about the history of religious beliefs and how they've been changed and edited over time to fit the narratives of the society to which they belong.
@El-ahrairah holy spirit mate, I did not know about that one. Now that I have so much free time on my hands, I'm probably going to start reading up on this.
@El-ahrairah This error is much older than the King James Bible. It comes from an translation to Greek, where a Hebrew word that mostly means young woman (and sometimes virgin) was translated to a Greek word that mostly means virgin (and sometimes young girl). Maybe to match prophesies in the Old testament. Digital Hammurabi has a lot of videos on that topic.
The irony of that statement is that Christians are perhaps one of, if not the most reviled groups known to man. Just look at all the parodies of Christian literature around you, it's obvious that Christians are outcasts. Not only that, it's even a prophesy in Mathew 5:11
@@SweetTodd Christians are the largest religious group on Earth, how are they then so reviled?
@@obsrvdsplash115 Lol, are you seriously telling me that there's too many Christians to be called oppressed? Please, women make up almost half of the world human population, and you wouldn't tell me they've never been oppressed throughout their existence.
It would be excellent if you would point out those possible changes that would be considered important.
Great information, but I have a question. Why do you have music in the background? If you are giving the truth, you don't need to mix it with music to try and influence your listener. Just simply give them the truth. Thank you.
YES I found the music intrusive and totally unecessary - inappropriate
This stuff is MIND BLOWING. It’s just crazy to think about a book that is so old it has only survived the years as a spirit of the original book.
I guess you could say that the current bible is only a Holy Ghost of its former self.
That's what you got from watching this video? Perhaps you need to study textual criticism.
About Jesus being angry at a person in need, according to what I have read, it's more probable that Jesus was not angry if we look back, only one codex had that and there are more things to support this too.
It's exactly the same as the original, to the point that Trey made this 30 minute video and could only find 5 minor variations even after translation
I've been finding myself sharing this video a lot differently. There are some out there who believe that thought the Bible has been translated, the meanings have never, ever changed. There is so much wisdom in the Bible, but it can not be "perfect", no matter how much anyone wants it to be. Thank you so much for this series of videos!
Perhaps knowing that the Bible is only reliable through understanding the narrative and ideas it offers would actually discourage Christian fundamentalists, and at last we would have some rest.
Agreed
First and foremost, it's important to contextualize the sociocultural landscape of the Middle East in the first century, marked by a profound linguistic and cultural heterogeneity. Aramaic was the lingua franca in Judea, being the mother tongue of the apostles, which facilitated direct communication with the local populations. However, the Roman Empire, with Greek as the official language of the East, promoted extensive Hellenization of the regions under its dominion, making Greek a common language for trade, education, and public administration. The New Testament, originally written in Koine Greek, serves as one of the main indications that the apostles were knowledgeable in Greek. This version of Greek, known for its simplicity and broad usage, was accessible to a vast range of the empire's population, including those regions far from the Greek cultural center. The choice of Greek as the language for the Christian sacred texts was not accidental but a strategic decision to reach a wider audience, transcending linguistic and cultural barriers. Moreover, archaeological evidence, such as inscriptions and manuscripts found in regions of Palestine, indicates the presence of Greek in Jewish contexts, suggesting linguistic coexistence. These artifacts, alongside references to Greek schools and the use of Greek in Jewish funerary inscriptions, reinforce the idea that Greek was known and used by Jewish communities of the time. The apostles' ability to communicate in Greek not only expanded the reach of their preachings but also facilitated intercultural dialogue and the dissemination of Christian teachings beyond Jewish borders, reaching Gentiles and converting them to Christianity. This is evidenced by the rapid expansion of Christianity in Hellenistic regions, and later, throughout the Roman Empire. 16:20
If this (and the second video) is the extent of the "changes" made to the Bible over nearly 20 centuries, then I think we're on pretty solid ground to say we have a pretty accurate portrayal of what was in the originals. Most of these "changes" are minor and don't affect any major doctrine of which I am aware. Yes, it's good to know that variants exist, but it's also important to look at the reason variants exist. Most of the reasons are readily seen - a copyist mistake. Even in the very few cases where passages are either omitted or included in different manuscripts, the changes are readily apparent. It would be a different story if all we had was the finished product with no manuscript authority to back up what was produced. That would be very serious and would rightly undermine any presumed authority the work would have. But this is not the case with the Bible. We have everything, warts included, so we can see what was changed and, in many cases, why. The vast majority of the "changes" are immaterial and not intentional. This is not the case with another well-known Middle Eastern religion, whose holy text has been in the control of a very few people for all of its existence. It has changed very little, but this is not as positive as it would appear. It is just as likely that variants of this document did exist, but those in control of the promulgation of that text had every opportunity and motive to eliminate any other copies that did not agree with the one they produced. (look up the Uthman Revision) Which one of these scenarios gives you more confidence? What if the God of Israel decided that the best way to preserve His words was to make sure that as many copies of it existed, with or without errors, and preserve as many copies as to show the history of the transmission plainly? He does not depend on men to determine His words, but the Holy Spirit. He will lead you into all truth. If you are a believer, don't despair and think this undermines your faith. It doesn't. It just means you have to do your homework and learn about these things, and learn how to answer these objections with facts and logic. Again, for a more scholarly and believing answer to these points, please look up Dr. James White's many videos regarding the history of transmission of the New Testament, especially, and how we got our Bible today, in general. He does not shy away from controversy and does a great job of explaining why textual variants are not something of which to be afraid but to learn about as a way to be more confident that the words you read are indeed the Word of God.
I'm Christian but the change in Trinity is quite big that led to number of discussions and schisms. Honestly I always wondered about it and it was confusing but this corrected version is completely in line what would be expected there and makes sense reading it like that "the Kingdom of God is within you"
@@zarathustra498How has the Trinity changed? The doctrine of the Trinity is drawn by inference from what Scripture clearly teaches. The doctrine was not changed, it was not invented. This is a very common canard. Yes, it was a source of great controversy (likewise, the doctrine of the hypostatic union, the teaching that Christ was fully God and fully man in the very same human being), but is not something that a church council invented. This teaching is clearly derived from Scripture, taken in all its fullness. Do you not believe in the Trinity? If not, why not? Do you not believe because you don't understand it? Not a very good reason to reject the doctrine if that's the case. Seriously, though, how could such an important question not cause schism? We're talking about the very nature of God and His being here. Believing that God is presented as one Being and three Persons, and that Jesus Christ was the second Person of the Trinity, is bound to cause profound disagreements. Dr. James White has a very good book, called "The Forgotten Trinity". I recommend it highly. It may answer some of your questions. Or, just look up some of his YT presentations dealing with this subject. You won't be disappointed.
even if the books were fine, not having intentional and unintentional errors, why would one believe in it? miracles don't happen. none are documented. should we believe some old book just because it exists? *you started believing* that the Bible is the greatest book of the world *before you even read it,* didn't you. сonfirmation bias. I was Christian 17 years. not anymore. happiest than ever actually :3
@@joeshabeWere you ever born again? Did you ever have spiritual life? That's an important question. How do you know miracles were not documented? They were written about. That's documentation, my friend. I think you meant, were they verified? Verified by whom? You weren't there, so you have to take the eyewitness testimony as true, don't you? Was every miracle recorded in the Bible a lie? Why? Just because they go against your opinion (confirmation bias). See how easy that is? I was raised Catholic, so I had a predisposition to believe the Bible, that's true. But I was a skeptic when I was in college, so I wasn't primed to believe anything. I believe because I became convinced that true Christian faith destroys human pride, which makes Christianity different from all other religions, and even some versions and denominations of Christianity. All other religions or even sects of Christianity leave some room for human effort and merit, whereas I believe true Christian faith involves the absolute humbling of human pride and, thus, depends entirely on God for spiritual enlightenment and the imparting of spiritual life. One thing I have learned along the way is that men will always find an excuse to reject God. It's in our spiritual DNA. As Paul Washer says, "Everybody wants to go to Heaven; they just don't want God to be there." Men are born with a nature that rejects God and his revelation. We will always find a reason to reject His authority no matter how much evidence we are given. We look at this through the lens of human reason, not realizing who gives us the mind to reason in the first place. I wish you well. I pray that you find peace with God. You current happiness is, no doubt, a very thin veneer.
@@joeshabe It's easy to say "miracles don't happen" and "none are documented" when you discredit all sources that document miracles. There are countless reported and documented miracles (admittedly some more credible than others), the question is where you start off with. Was Jesus raised from the dead? There is no other reasonable historical explanation than a miracle. However, if you consider miracles by itself to be unreasonable, you're left with an unsolvable mystery, which you as a non-Christian might blissfully ignore, as ignorance is bliss. On the other hand, if Christianity is true and Christ did rise from the dead, He is the only one who can bring you salvation and freedom from this earth and your own self-centerdness. If you don't want this, you only prove you were never a Christian in the first place, but someone following whatever you parents tought, until you realized you can think for yourself.
Trey is literally the only guy on earth that can make me watch a video about the bible willingly.
Yeah for real
Same
Same
Came for the dinosaurs and cryptids, stayed for the Bible study.
@@H4rppy same to you. I'm not even Christian myself but trey made me interested in bible history