Five Myths About The Bible (And How We Got it.)
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 07. 2024
- There's a lot of strange stuff out there about the Bible. So I interviewed Bible scholar and historian Wesley Huff to give some clarity on this topic.
Timestamps:
03:59- Myth #1: The Bible was put together at the Council of Nicaea, where books were taken out.
09:39- Myth #2: The Bible has changed over time, especially with books being taken out, texts changing, and the Catholic Church having a different “Bible” than we do.
32:23- Myth #3: The Roman Catholic Church gave us the Bible.
45:50- Myth #4: The King James Bible is the Best and Most Accurate Bible.
56:51- Myth #5: The Book of Enoch Belongs in the Bible.
👀WATCH👀:
●Which Bible translation is "best?": • Why are There So Many ...
●Is the KJV superior?: • Is Every Bible "Demoni...
●Cultish Interview about the Book of Enoch: • Cultish: The Book of E...
👇Info for Wes👇:
●Website: www.wesleyhuff.com/
●Instagram: / wesley_huff
●CZcams: / @weshuff
●First Episode of "Can I Trust the Bible?": • Can I Trust the Bible?...
●Apologetics Canada: apologeticscanada.com/
📚RESOURCES📚:
www.amazon.com/shop/melissado...
🤗DONATE🤗:
If you are led, consider donating:
paypal.me/MelissaDougherty77
📲FOLLOW📲:
Facebook: / newagetochristianity
Instagram: @melissaldougherty
Twitter: / meldougherty77
My Website: www.melissadougherty.co/
💡SEMINARY💡:
Looking for a solid theological education? Look at Southern Evangelical Seminary: ses.edu/melissa/
The more versions of the Bible I read, and the more I explore Scripture, the more certain I am that God can - and does - preserve his Word. I offer the words of Shakespeare: "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves for we walk about as underlings."
It baffles me that thirty years after I first heard these fallacious arguments, people are still spouting the same nonsense and thinking that they are disproving the authenticity of Scripture. Next, some "smart" guy is going to discover the "secret hidden " gospel of Barnabas, I guess.
Do you mean the Gospel of Barnabas or the Epistle of Barnabas? Those are two different books.
@Doris1888 I was using a random allusion to a writing that no one believes is legitimate but seems to get people who know nothing about Biblicall History excited when they first discover it. And while one is superior to the other as a document, neither is accepted as Canon, but I am not going to dialogue about that here. Blessings.
@@Just_a_Reflection Well the Epistle of Barnabas which was probably written late into the first century didn't make it into the Bible but was referred to often by the early church so it's history might be considered legitimate historically but not inspired. However, the Gospel of Barnabas was written about the 15th or 16th century and basically discredits Christianity in favor of the Muslim religion. Hardly a gospel about Jesus Christ.
@Doris1888 You are exactly right. Clement of Alexandria reportedly accepted the Epistle, and it is important because it gives a view of how early Jewish Christians segued from Rabbinical Judaism to Christianity, though it was later investigated and found to not be sound and not inspired, primarily due to it's Gnostic undertones, similar to the Shepherd of Hermas. The Gospel of Barnabas is Gnostic garbage written in the Middle Ages with absolutely no real value. My point is that I was making an offhand allusion, which wasn't central to my offhand comment.
@@Just_a_Reflection Gotcha!👍
keep em coming Melissa! I want your long form content! If you could, also give us your full talks! Ive seen your youtube shorts and the speech clip is phenomenal and I want more. Please keep giving us long stuff - whether its conversations/podcasts or just you going on a long speech. 30 minutes to 3 hours is fantastic and keep doing this great stuff!
The longer, the better!
Apocalypse Apocrypha has a boat load of information on this.
@@andrewbrossman9902 Who Im interested in is Melissa. She clearly has been given Wisdom and an articulate mouth from God. Her view is what I want more of rather than information.
@@circle4962 Nothing against Mellisa. I like her channel. I was mentioning that you want to know more about the deutercannon, there is a CZcams channel called the apocalypse apocrypha. The New Testament cannon is closed. The Old Testament cannon, not really.
@@andrewbrossman9902 What did I say about the deutercannon or scriptural cannon? I didn't speak about it. Yet you come to me telling me to check out someone I never gave interest for. My focus has been on Melissa, not the content. My focus is on a person, not ideas.
Go away and stop being a fool. Come back when Wisdom is on your lips. You do not listen to advice as is clear when you come to me and tell me what to do. You do not care to understand my words, you only care to air your opinion.
I am so excited to see Wesley Huff as your guest! Thank you. His knowledge has always impressed me. I learn so much each time. :)
I am never disappointed with your content and interviews. This was fascinating and will be watching at least one more time.
Love your content, Melissa! Thanks for this! Always great content to share with my people!
Melissa, this was soooooo good, thank you. I actually will watch it more than once as there is so much info to absorb!!!
Thanks for this Melissa and Wesley. This video is super helpful and informative. I'm enjoying watching.
This is so good and so useful! Thanks Melissa and Wes!
Great respectful way of explaining the KJV! I was a KJV only person until around 2010ish I taught myself Greek to prove the pastor wrong fortunately I learned it's good and other translations are not for the most part wrong! The study turned me to ESV
😂😂
That's strange as I learned Hebrew and Greek, and my professors edited the ESV.
After 28 years and several translations later, it only confirmed of how accurate the King James is.
@@michelleadams5609 you're absolutely full of it😂
Thank you addressing those myths/points, which I’m sure to hear one mentioned everyday.
This is a fascinating discussion. Fantastic video!
Great video!! Let’s do this again real soon 🤓
Gregory I, who lived from 540 - March 12, 604, was the first monk to become pope. He was known as Saint Gregory the Great, and was the 64th Bishop of Rome, from September 3, 590 until his death in 604.
Thanks! Wes Huff is great!!!
Thank you for this video. I didn't even know some of these things. God bless you ❤
I am a relatively new Christian so only read the bible for the first time about 10 month ago. I chose to read the KJV version as I like the old English language. But, the LORD made me switch to a modern version, NKJV for the New Testiment. Up to Mathew I had no problem understanding the text, if anything it made me think more about what I was reading. But when I got to Mathew it simple wouldn't go in, I doubted my understanding. So I reread it in the NKJV and although my understanding was correct {in basic terms of the words used - clearly true understanding is more than readimg the words} it was clear the LORD wanted me to process the text differently to the Old Testament. As a result I have a very clear separation in my mind in terms of the Old and New Restaments. The LORD is so great! By the way, I can know read the New Testiment in the KJV without any problems. The bible truely is the living word of GOD. 🙏
I love what you do. Thank you. Great show.
This was very interesting ❤ thank you for this
Excellent content!
Thank you all for this.
I've been reading the Church Fathers and how the early Church functioned. I can see how the claim that "the Catholic Church is reading these things into the past" can work. But honestly though, something that seems clear to me is that back then there was apostolic succession. The bishops had authority. Rome had kind of a primacy going on. And the Church was this united church where the bishops were constantly looking after and defending it against heresies. The councils were made to fight them and define important things about the faith. It seems to me that there was an authority going on in the Church...
There was government in the 1st century church, but there is NEVER a such thing in the Bible as apostolic succession. Idc what the "church fathers" had to say about it. The Bible shows how the early church functioned, and IT is the only reliable source for what the 1st century church believed and practiced.
In the 3rd-century Church Fathers, have you noticed the influx of platonic influence & how how platonism began to influence their theology?
One church had a tendency to take people they didn't like and tie them to a bundle of sticks and fire them..... Probably safe to say they also burned a lot of paper too. So if a lot of church writings seem to support the church that liked burning things and people, there might be a reason why.
@@IndianaJoe0321 Hello! Yeah, I've seen how some were extremely knowledgeable in the philosophy ideas of that time. However, I would like to hear more of your reasoning.
Before Paul was an apostle and had a conversion he was a scripture scholar 🎉❤ definitely love some facts though❤❤❤
One of the best interviews on scripture! Loved it, although I'll need to watch it again and take notes ;p thanks!
The lds people frequently contend that The Trinity and the Bible both came out of the Counsel of Nicea. I appreciate this clarification . Blessings.
Great video
My favorite Canadian on CZcams! Next have him debunk the myth that American peanut butter tastes different than Canadian peanut butter.
😊
Fantastic interview from fellow Canadian! ❤
Great vid, thanks.
Thank you, very helpful.
So, so interesting! Thank you both!
"At Parbar westward, four at the causeway, and two at Parbar."
~ 1 Chr 26:18, Authorized Version
"As for the court to the west, there were four at the road and two at the court itself."
~ modern translations
I'm sure the KJV onlyists already knew what parbar meant, because they always know everything and they are always right about everything too..... Let me know if you hear one of them admit they were wrong about something. It will be a first and should make news headlines.
Melissa, thank you for this information, This was so interesting and eye opening
As an Orthodox Christian ☦️ I have never heard that the Bible was given to us at the Council of Nicea
I have never heard of it either, as a Protestant.
Thank you so much for this video! Especially the part about Enoch as well as the very helpful explanation about "there was no more sea" in Revelation. Like his Australian friend, I too hope it doesn't mean what a literal reading means. 😊 Definitely subscribing to his channel also!
I just got smarter listening to this man 🤓
Awesome!
As far as the Book of Enoch, you should get Dr. Loren Stuckenbruck on. He’s one of the leading experts on it and is a professor at the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich
We often quote psalm 23, yet even there the archaic language fails people. I shall not want is not clear, because want currently me and desire or crave-it doesn’t mean need. If you said “I shall not be in want,” or even better, “I shall not be in need” or “I shall not be lacking.” We can easily see the shift in the use of the word, but as is the text doesn’t clearly transmit the meaning it intended. Similar to how people misunderstand Shakespeare when he wrote “Romeo, Romeo-wherefore art thou Romeo?” They think she’s saying where are you, where in reality she is saying “Why did you have to be Romeo?” Wherefore is for why, not in what place.
I want to eat!.....Oh no! I forgot, I'm not supposed to want! Now I'm a sinner.....well, I guess I was already a sinner....now I'm a bigger sinner!!!!
Seriously though, you pointed out a perfect example for why we need to update Bible translations. Another one I have heard is people reading "sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof" and taking that to mean we shouldn't try to save up enough stuff to last until we are dead....... which is not what that means. Even Tyndale's translation that's 500 years old states this in a more understandable way. Clearly each day has sufficient trouble in itself so we need to stay focused on today and not be worrying about all the stuff that hasn't happened yet.
New teachings are being found in the KJV after 413 years because people read it with their 2024 brain and 2024 English, which makes a magical English soup that creates new stuff never before seen!!! So exciting....
Shall not want would mean I won’t want, not a shouldn’t want. In other words, not that we are wrong to desire things, but that our needs will be met. But yes, I was intentionally trying to point out the need to update the language-because people reading archaic language often misconstrue the meaning.
This is so good and really encouraging!
I’m in Alberta, Canada and the Alberta chapter of Apologetics Canada went way off the rails into Nationalism and Legalism so I stopped following. I used to attend their Be Ready apologetics conference so it was really disappointing and I no longer support them. I’m happy to see sound theology coming from Apologetics Canada!
I've always found KJV-only beliefs to be interesting because they have always seemed so bizarre to me. Like, why would anyone think that? My theory is that it comes down to a conspiratorial mistrust of institutions and just being part of a tightly-knit group. I would hypothesize that people who hold strongly to KJV-only beliefs also hold to other fringe beliefs.
Personally, I think that the KJV is good for literature and history, but really not ideal for personal use. I think a lot of people struggle with understanding the Bible and even dislike reading it because they are trying to use the KJV.
I would love to get have a good-faith discussion about this.
I agree, KJV is hard to understand. I prefer reading the NIV but can always refer back to the KJV if a passage is controversial etc
Yes, this would a fairly accurate assumption. I come from this background.. KJV-only-ism tends to be linked to conspiracy and mis- trust of institutions.
Another really good resource dealing with this is Dr. Heiser's interviews with Rick Brannan on TheNakedBiblePodcast episodes 99 and 104. Also episodes 130 and 242 have good conversations concerning Textual Criticism. 😊😊
Chris Pinto released a documentary called "Tares Among the Wheat." The documentary calls into question the validity of the Codex Sinaticus quite compellingly, in my humble opinion. Could you do an episode w/ this same gentleman regarding the argument(s)/claims Chris Pinto makes in the documentary?
Do some research on "Byzantine Priority", by Robinson. It is a discussion of the texts used by Greek speaking peoples since the time of the Apostles. Paul went to Athens to spread the Gospel.
So I'm not the only one that doesn't trust Tichendorf ? 🤨
Can you possibly consider inviting/interviewing qualified representatives from Apostolic churches, Orthodox, Church of the east, Coptic church, Church of Rome (Roman Catholic Church), if possible Armenian Church, Ethiopian Church?
There is no rush, it would really be appreciated to hear what the Apostolic churches have to say on the same topic, instead of listening to protestants talking about the Apostolic churches. After all, the Council mentioned was The Church, not just The Church of Rome, representatives from all over came to that Council.
Politely suggesting this approach to this topic.
That would be interesting.
Suffer the children . . . Confused me as a child. Suffer?!
😮😮😮Wonderful insight on Enoch! So much there I didn’t know! Historically, linguistically, and culturally-fabulous! Same conclusions I had personally come to, but my own were much less backed by those fields, and much more surface understanding! I do believe that it’s actually fairly clear, if you’re looking for the truth, that Enoch is not scripture-nor any serious historical document that can be trusted-just by reading it and thinking about it a little bit. However, these points he brings up are fantastic!
Concerning "The Book of Enoch," I recommend "The Book of Enoch, second edition, compiled and edited by Ronald K. Brown.
I watched my pastor make a minor error because ye Olde Englifh doesn't mean what you think it means. I've weighed the cost and benefits of mentioning somethibg and it seems the cost outweighs the benefits, but it still happened, the KJV causing a misunderstanding due to being outdated.
This is so interesting. I have studied and written papers on all five of these topics.
A frustration comes with talking to people about them because most have heard something, but are not well studied.
I don't get very deep into converations with those who either have a vague, or no idea, what is in different bibles or how they came about.
Some talks devolve into an exchange of talking points. Infrequently, someone gets really mad if you bring scholarly sources into it.
I won't carry on a discussion where someone wants to duel with bumper sticker slogans.
Pearls before swine.
Mr. Huff is fantastic ❤!
Wish he'd debate Bart Erhman!
I loved this video! Looking forward to doing a deep dive!
Why did he not mention that the early Church disagreed on some of the New Testament Scriptures such as 2 and 3 John, James and Revelation? This is historical fact.
Enoch 1 is most likely the first comic book ever written. Ironically, Stan Lee stole a lot of material from the scriptures: The Creator, The Watchers, "With great power, comes great responsibility (to whom much is given, much is required)". I agree that reading Enoch is a good idea because it is referenced by Peter and Jude, but that's about it. Great interview, Little Sister!
How can it be comic when there are verses in scripture that reference the book of Enoch and quote from it just like how they also reference the books they decided to take away without proper permission or authority because none of them prayed for guidance from the Holy spirit who inspired the letters and also non of them asked God for confirmation they went based on their own understanding for the sake of peace and destroying the truth in the process
@@adeclipse_sa to suggest that scripture quotes from the book of enoch is to assume that the book of enoch is older than those books in scripture, which is a massive assumption. sure, its written as though it is older and the character is older, but as stated in this interview the oldest compiled book of enoch is from the 15th century.
there are also things stated in enoch which are directly against scripture, so theres that
@@junk3996 , it is not scripture. Most scholars think that the first sections of 1 Enoch were written 3 centuries before Jesus ' birth. Scrolls of Enoch were found at Qumra (Dead Sea Scrolls), which are thought to be from 2 centuries BC.
@@adeclipse_sa my point is, that it is like a fantastic work of fiction like a graphic novel we would see in the realm of comic book literature today. I'm not sure to whom you are referring, when you mention books being taken out?
Enoch 🙄
Good video, but a little confused at 1:13:45. Something about the Messiah??? Help me out please...
Whiois this guy? Excellent teaching.
Check out Micheal Heisler, a top Bible scholar, about Enoch and the Red Sea scrolls.
Real, honest doubt searches for the Light. Mere hardened unbelief wants and remains in the darkness.
Hi Melissa, I'm looking to study the Bible in a very serious and disciplined manner but I can't really afford going to school for it and I am wondering if you have tips on any resources where I can start learning apologetics beyond just the basics. I also wanted to learn a biblical language on my own but I'm unsure if I should learn Greek or Hebrew...any tips? You're one of my favorite Bible scholars along with Mike Winger and I just am in love with The Lord and I wanna learn as much as I can...I just wanna be sure I'm learning from the correct sources.
Pastor Chris Rosebrough is fluent in both.
I myself would start with Koine Greek simply for the reason that's the language used for our new covenant that we're currently under. But there's also starting with Hebrew to better see the poetry involved.
There's the interlinear Bible that is in the original language, but has the English equivalent words written above. That has been quite interesting.
Definitely learn Koine Greek! It doesn't take long to read it phonetically and will be rewarding with less time invested into it.
I think if a person listened to every single Mike Winger video he's ever made......that has to be equal or better than a bachelor's of theology degree....
I love theological books, but I have expensive taste and I don't have the budget to buy all the ones I want. That said, building a theology library is worth it!!!
Enoch is an important topic right now. i see it everywhere, people wanting to revere this 'book' because it justifies and seemingly confirms their beliefs in "nephilim", what they are and what the person wants them to be and represent. its a very dangerous and deceiving text which steers your mind throughout unscriptural topics and concepts.
peoples understanding about what nephilim are will drastically altar how they understand the relationships between humans and created angelic beings. and if i could post a link here i would post one to a comprehensive article absolutely debuking the idea that nephilim are some type of demonic-human demi-god hybrid being that existed before the flood.
another thing about enoch, where it says "and he was no more". Wesley says "so theres an indication that he was taken up to heaven". he rightly points out it doesn't explicitly say that, and this is important. Enoch surely died, just like all men who are descendant from Adam, because the bible DOES explicitly say that. Rom 5:12, 1 Cor 15:22.
lets also put a stop to the myth that Enoch and Elijah didn't die. they did.
What do we make from the quote from the New Testament The book of Jude?
If you're referring to the mention of Enoch, Jude was speaking of a _future_ personality. He was +not_ referring to the Enoch in Genesis. Check the genealogy. He was not the seventh from Adam. Matter of fact, the "Adam" Jude refers to is not the one from Genesis either. He is talking about the second Adam, Jesus Christ(1 Cor. 15:45). "The seventh from Adam" concerns a personality who prophesies about Christ's return in the 7th era of God's Church.
See my point exactly people don’t even know that the Bible directly quotes from the book of Enoch 🤦🏻♀️
@@OkKo-ux2xvNo, the Bible 'does not quote Enoch' Two writers referenced it. As you might any historic document. That doesn't infer any sort of credibility. And consider Paul's address on Mars Hill. He referenced other documents as well ..
@@toolegittoquit_001 Wait! Does that make those poets inspired too??? LOST BIBLICAL POEMS CITED BY PAUL FOUND IN ATHENS DUMPSTER OUTSIDE MARS HILL...... Someone will start a whole new denomination from this and retire a millionaire....
Very interesting, as always. Some of Wes' reasoning is definitely open to historical and Scriptural challenge. Truth is we can only hypothesize because we weren't there as eye or first person witnesses? To deny this logical fact is to tacitly admit to cultism - unquestionable authority of scholars whose hypotheses are always open to some measure of question, missing or ignoring some fact or possibility? I find it safest to start with and focus on Jesus, working backward and forward from Him, God, as core. Who is God according to the NT? The Spirit of Love. What is the Supreme, single Law that fulfills everything and anything required of us and of anything and everything applicably written pertaining to God? The New, not the Eleventh, the New Commandment to love one another as JESUS THE CHRIST loved and loves us. Whatever is contrary to this singular, Supreme Law, the Constitution of Heaven and as such God Himself is loveless, therefore lawless and Godless. We should just note, not our contemporary perversion of love but True Love, God. To understand this see Romans 1:20, look how nature and the universe works to see True Love: birth and death, catastrophe and providence, harsh and gentle, etc. opposites in perfect balance and our Genesis 1 dominion over the earth should strive to create, promote and maintain such balance? Our world is falling apart because we do the opposite: we are loveless, lawless and Godless whilst "professing to be wise" we have become fools. Our forebears understood these principles much better than we do, their world and lives being much less cosmetic and synthetic.
God bless you! ❤️🙏
Also: your focus, Melissa, is commendable. I see your subtle reactions as Wesley speaks. The way your eyes move, the way your head moves, the way your lips move (without speech). These are markers to prove your intentional attention. These markers are evidence of your wisdom and controlled observation. Keep doing this because your laser like focus, your extreme sensitivity to light, is beyond strong. Thanks be to God that Wisdom has been given to you
The first one has even been acknowledged to be debunked but secular scholars
This was so interesting. Especially the book of Enoch. Thank you,both of you, for getting truth out there.❤
Excellent interview.
While the council of Nicea did not debate or decide what the canon should be, the canon that did come later was in large part based on the doctrine that was agreed upon at Nicea. So the books picked or excluded were in fact based on what took place at Nicea.
The fact that the council referenced and quoted some books does not mean they were recognized by all as authoritive. And these two in the video also do not take into account that books considered to be authoritive by many at the council may not have been referenced or quoted.
Just because you can find 2nd or 3rd book lists does not mean they were agreed on, but rather you found a list that a few, or some people agreed on. And you discount books that some people included.
It simply is not true that all Jews agreed on which books from the OT age were considered scripture. The Christ and the apostles reference and quote more non-canonical books than they did canonical ones.
Why would you adopt the same canon as the Pharisees?
References for your claims?
What is a new thoughter/new ager
Speakers of English should not be required to look up English words in a Bible translation when commonly known equivalents are available. A good translation will do its best to use language by which the unbeliever can be convicted.
There is a danger in looking up some KJV words because the dictionaries don't have the correct definition as it was used by the KJV translators in 1611. It's actually worse than that because the KJV is a revision of the 1568 Bishops Bible, and the KJV left a lot of it the same. And some of it goes back to the 1520's Tyndale New Teatament. So in reality, you need to look up how the words were defined in the early to mid 1500's....... And no Websters dictionary (1828 included) is going to have all the correct definitions. You need something like the massive Oxford dictionary (very expensive) and other expensive resources to really figure put how all the words were used..... You can buy a KJV only cheat sheet to learn some of the definitions, but those are not exhaustive and will still be missing words that you don't know you don't know. Like when "study to be quiet" doesn't mean grab a book and figure out how not to make noise.....
I'm very happy that you pursue Godly knowledge! Just be careful with allowing "college cleverness"getting in the way of God's truth
The KJV is the 3rd most accurate translation that we have today. That is amazing considering that it was translated before the Dead Sea Scrolls were found. That was a God thing.
The KJV New Testament was finished before Jesus was born?..... I don't know what to say. Words fail me.
Sorry. I misread that. I thought it said the KJV was translated before the dead sea scrolls!!!!!😂😂😂😂
@@hayfieldhermit9657 That's ok, lol
More than one person has told me that "King James wrote the Bible" 😆
😂😂😂
Good gracious 😂
The KJVO cult is disturbing! I had no idea such a thing existed until I saw it online. Thankfully have not run into them in person.
No he did not
That is very unfortunate. The Bible version (KJV) was done by a group of over 50 men. Doug Stoliker
Way off topic-- T-shirt: Love God
Love ppl
What does it mean to love God?
Jesus promises people will believe in Him through His words and the words of the Disciples He was speaking to below. These are the only men I trust (because this is exactly how I came to believe). No English translation is perfect. The KJV is my study base (being raised when schools still taught Old English interpretation), but I take advantage of them all, especially modern English.
John 17:17,20 NRSV
Sanctify them in the truth; *_your word is truth._*
[20] *_"I ask not only on behalf of these,_* but also on behalf of *_those who will believe in me through their word,_*
When he said that word agast.
I wanted to kiss u. Ma'am. We both thought. Agast ?
Jude 14 quotes from the "book of Enoch"
For the love of God, can we please properly differentiate the ROMAN catholic church from the ACTUAL original, catholic, apostolic church, the Orthodox? They are VASTLY different, and it would be great if people knew it.
Wesley is a genius.
Roughly 100 passages in the NT find their precendence in the writings of Enoch. So why would the Christ and the apostles refence any book they did nt consider to be inspired scripture?
The Qumran group included in their library Enoch and Jubilees. They too were Jews. So why not base the Christian canon on their books instead of the Pharisees?
What does it signify when a New Testament writer quotes non-biblical sources? Does a quotation always mean the writer agrees with all the themes of the quoted source? In Acts 17 Paul quotes Greek writers, yet he makes very clear that his message differs radically from Greek thinking.
@@gregorytoews8316 Is that a serious question?
Would the Son of God - who is the word made flesh reference or teach from anything other than the inspired word?
Do you think it unimportant that he and the apostle quoted canonical books? Do you say it is meaningless for them to quote and reference Isaiah?
@@TrustinJC your questions may be valid in and of themselves, but how do they shed light on why Paul quotes Greek writers?
Also he implied that Enoch was not written in Hebrew sorry but he’s is shady on Enoch
@@gregorytoews8316 It is very different to reference or quote Hebrew writings that many Jews outside of the Pharisee bubble considered to be scripture and referencing Greek philosophers. Not the same thing.
Hola guapa, se ha preguntado como sera la tierra cuando se haga la voluntad de Dios?
Don't confuse Roman Catholic with Catholic. The truth is to be found within the totality of the Catholic Church. The early Church councils were in the Eastern Catholic Church. The West, or what we now call Roman, was there, but certainly didn't dominate.
Read modern translation? Even if all modern translations are base upon corrupts manuscripts 😂!
Wait a second 😒 first I want to be clear I’m not saying Enoch is scripture (or isn’t) I’m shocked that he didn’t talk about how much of Enoch was found in the Dead Sea scrolls or that we have scripture DIRECTLY quoting from the book of Enoch!!! I am sorry but I feel like he set up Enoch in a way that if people didn’t know about it then they would be deceived about it, this was disappointing 😞
There were a lot of non-biblical writings found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, such as military letters, commentaries, legal texts, poetry, religious texts that the Jews did not consider inspired (such as Enoch), etc.
We know Enoch was not written by Enoch nor was it considered inspired scripture by the Jews. It was written around 300-200BC. While it was quoted in Jude, other non-scriptural sources were also quoted in the NT. For example, Paul quotes from Greek literature and Jesus quotes popular sayings common to his time.
It’s certainly an interesting writing and gives us insight into what some Jews believed. For what it is, I think he handled it fairly.
after jesus started livestreaming and the chat filled up he began to go off saying W to those who aren't thirsty for this mid life for they will have eternal life
W to those who take L's from this life for they will receive an everlasting W
W to those who don't throw hands for they will secure the eternal bag
W to those who want help passing god's vibe check for he will say bet
W to those who don't cancel others for they will not be cancelled by the top G
W to those whose spiritual fit is immaculate for their hearts will be cuffed by God
W to those who turn opps into bros for they will be called CEO's of peace
W to those who catch hands for being valid for they will not be left on read by God
W to you when the ops be cappin hard and do you so very dirty bc you're my fam trust you have crushed it and have the eternal W, for so they did the true bros before you.
Forever, O Lord, Your word is settled in heaven. Psalm 119:89
Thanks for debunking the myth that the Catholic Church gave Christians the Bible at the Council of Nicea.
I like to remember that just because a book isn’t in the Bible doesn’t mean it’s not important and can’t be used to help interpret the Bible. Heiser always said this particularly in regards to Enoch. Jude and Peter both refer to it. It’s not canon but it’s helpful for us in seeing for example, the divine counsel wordview.
Wrong. If a book isn't in the Bible, it's because (1) it contradicts what is in the Bible and (2) God didn't deem it to be theologically important to include it. There are historical texts mentioned in scripture that were used to compile the records like the Book of the Wars of the Lord and the sayings of Iddo the seer, but the Enoch book isn't one of them. What Heisler says means absolutely nothing. He is just another deceived scholar that intellectually lazy ppl flock to.
Wow, pretty harsh words for someone who isn’t a world renowned scholar like Heiser. I’m not saying historical or other texts should be scripture, just that they are helpful for us to know context of the day and how to interpret scripture that was written around the same time.
Pretty harsh way to speak of someone in the present tense who actually died almost a year and a half ago.
@@theeternalsbeliever1779 "What Heiser says means absolutely nothing" - a quote of some dude on a comment thread, who is clearly more superior than someone else.
I like to think this too!
In good conscience someone has to point out that her guest is grossly misstating the truth in several ways that both Catholic and Protestant biblical scholars would call out as obviously false. For example,by saying that by the middle of the 2nd Century there was no disagreement Church agreed that there were 66 books in the Bible. That’s an undeniably false statement. It’s such a false statement that a retraction is due. No serious person could make such a false claim. Not only was
There diaaThe entire reason that Luther and others had to remove books from the Old Testament was the
Church had included them. Similarly, he is misleading your audience by falsely stating the “Jews” had some monolithic view of what were OT scriptures when there Was no primary OT Jewish canon till well after Christ’s death and resurrection. Indeed, Jesus and the Apostles used the Septuagint to Hoch quote from primarily which contained the books removed by Luther.
Please look to true Protestant scholars like Lee Macdonald to see how far off base this guy is when it comes to scholarship. He is sadly misleading folks.
It would seem to me that the KJV ONLY crowd became that way because of "tradition" along with how they were raise in the Church. Then when you factor in the radical changes that was wreaking havoc within the Church in the 60's & 70's on & it's no wonder that many started taking a stand against ANY kind of change.
BTW: They were right in many cases to stand against the world but in light of the fact that it's ONLY by the power of The Holy Spirit that we are saved & it's ONLY by the power of the Holy Spirit that we understand Scripture so if people want to get all technical then we should all be trained to read & understand, Greek, Hebrew & Aramaic!
I do think that Jonah was probably as good as dead....and prior to Jesus' arrival in flesh that there was a holding place... where the chasm couldn't be crossed...but where the unnamed riCh guy wanted to warn others about the upcoming trajectory if people stayed loving mammon and comfort more than God...he was unable to...
I do see that while the flood did probably wash a way and allow a lot of bones from prior graves (Sheol) that there would be a sense of this burial place traveling to the depths of the earth ... but I also see the challenges in making the Bible teach what you want it to teach...
Cuz you can gather the input of others and get a golden calf...
My wife just today informed me that for the last 2 years...all I've done is mocked Calvinism (that in her opinion I just don't understand) and I guess I just have to continue trusting God knowing that if He kept providing for those He loves despite their being sinners...then I should be able to do the right thing by Him and let His Spirit of Truth and love be displayed through me...
It is hard to see how my wife and now daughter have looked at God resource guarding His love for the world and desiring that none perish and sided with a Puppeteering Controlling Tyrant model of God that doesn't allow anyone to actually make a choice that isn't made FOR them...all for His alleged glory....
I'm a Calvinist. That is the worst possible way to frame Calvinism, to the point where I disagree that the statement even describes Calvinism. It's simply insulting to say that's what Calvinists believe.
We are dead in our sin. Dead. Kaput. Not living. Calvinists believe we are saved when God raises us spiritually from the dead and grants us a saving faith.
Saying God would rather we all live, thus it's man's choice to be saved, paints God as rather helpless and trying desperately to get us to choose not being dead in our sins. Like, since when did God turn over his sovereignity?
God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. If anyone disagrees with that, they are a fruitcake, not a Calvinist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, etc...
Humans want sin. It's our fallen nature, corrupted flesh, that wants it. Pharaoh wanted his slaves. People dying in sin is God turning them over to what they wanted.
God is not a tyrant according to Calvinism. I'm not sitting here, sad that God saved me and now I have to go to heaven. I'm grateful. I used to be dead in my sin, unable to save myself. But God, while I was still a rotten sinner, gave me faith. Praise be to God, because the mind that is in the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law, indeed, it cannot. Romans 8:7
God is not capricious or cruel. He's not going to choose people who won't like it. God is sovereign, however, and a puny human can not thwart his plan. God is also good.
Got Questions is a great source for Calvinist beliefs, seeing as they are four point Calvivists. No, your wife is not a heretic and it would probably be good for your marriage to stop assuming she's stupid.
Well, this is quite the respectful post 😬
I think you're wrong about Enoch. Not canon, but useful.
if it isn't canon, what is it useful for?
useful for confusing your mind into thinking unbiblical things, or thinking about things in a way which are not spoken about in scripture.
just stick with scripture. enoch is interesting, but dangerous more than useful IMO
The Enoch book is neither useful or canon. It is uninspired, Gnostic garbage. The Bible warns us in 1 Cor. 4:6 to not entertain doctrine that isn't explicitly taught or supported in scripture, and the Enoch book fails to meet either requirement. In fact, it's doctrines contradict the Bible in at least half a dozen ways.
It's no myth that the Bible in any contenpory form you prefer to go with has interpolations and additions... Any half decent version will tell you as much and it is the scholarly consensus that this is the case.
Regarding Enoch. As scribes in later generations copied Enoch it stands to reason and is logical that they would change the names of places to the name known by the people living at that time and not the older name or description that Enoch would have used. So the use of the modern name of a place does not support the notion that Enoch was first written in the earlier time period.
Why would I use ancient names that people today would not know when referencing a story from the OT.
Thes two are stuck in church dogma and feel they must defend the present day canon. So they twist the evidence in order to have a reason to reject writings such as Enoch.
Headings in the Bible are not part of the text. Your KJV headings are opinions and commentary, often incorrect. (Heading for Isaiah 44 is "Babylon" but is not about Babylon, but the DAUGHTER of Babylon.) Others more problematic have become mainstream teaching.
The Septuagint includes these books and Greek speaking Jews had these books. To say that Jews did not use these books is not accurate.
All new manuscripts discovered? Which manuscripts? Those manuscripts are corrupted and are very close of gnosticism. Just look at it where all them are found😂
In the 1st century AD, followers of the Messiah understood that Sunday was the day of the sungod of Rome, and rejected it.
That is one reason they were persecuted so viciously.
The RCC, on the other hand, embraced sungod worship 100%.
Emperors portrayed Sol Invictus on their official coinage, with a wide range of legends, only a few of which incorporated the epithet invictus, such as the legend SOLI INVICTO COMITI, claiming the Unconquered Sun as a companion to the Emperor, used with particular frequency by Constantine.
Statuettes of Sol Invictus, carried by the standard-bearers, appear in three places in reliefs on the Arch of Constantine.
Constantine's official coinage continues to bear images of Sol Invictus until 326 AD.
A solidus of Constantine depicts the Emperor's bust in profile, twinned with Sol Invictus, with the legend INVICTUS CONSTANTINUS.
Constantine decreed (March 7, 321) dies Solis-day of the sun, "Sunday"-as the ROMAN DAY OF REST:
"On the venerable day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed."
Constantine worked to merge all of the different pagan religions into his new christian religion.
He and the "Bishops of Rome" took most of the pagan festivals and incorporated them into something that both the RCC leadership and other pagans would accept.
The 'reformers' never changed the basic idolatry of the RCC when they broke away.
Antichrist jesus is the image of the beast.
Short answer.
The One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church did it.
Hallelujah!!!! The daily jesus devotional has been a huge part of my transformation, God is good 🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻was owning a loan of $47,000 to the bank for my son's brain surgery (David), Now I'm no longer in debt after I invested $8,000 and got my payout of $270,500 every months,God bless Christy Fiore 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸..
Should have put a mustache on !
Maccabees is Scripture, along with the others.