Prophet of Zod | A Fistful of Manuscripts (Voddie Proves the Bible Part 2) @ProphetofZod | Uploaded April 2018 | Updated October 2024, 2 hours ago.
Pastors love talking about how many New Testament manuscripts we have. But what is a "Greek manuscript?" When were most of them written, and by whom? Do the existence of these manuscripts do anything to prove the stories of the Bible? I would say no, and in this video I demonstrate why pastors and apologists are utterly full of shite when they try arguing that thousands of "manuscripts or portions of manuscripts" prove that Jesus was God.
This is the second of a series of videos talking about common arguments for the life and resurrection of Jesus, formatted as a response to Voddie Baucham. You can find the first video at: youtu.be/6ibcKbvlx3I
The chart is from a Patheos article at patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2013/11/25000-new-testament-manuscripts-big-deal
The information it uses is based on a standard Christian-cited catalogue of manuscripts which can be found on Wikipedia at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_manuscript (this page also has a lot of cool pictures of manuscripts I got my picture of the fragment from).
My Facebook: facebook.com/Prophet-of-Zod-786256038184855
My Twitter: twitter.com/Prophet_of_Zod
My Email: poz@prophetofzod.com
A note on my generalization that Christians don't much about where the Bible comes from: I don't mean this as an insult, nor do I claim this ignorance is limited to Christians. Most of the public knows little about this, and that's to be expected on such a dry academic topic. I just single out Christians because that's who preachers are counting on manipulating. I also know some Christians have more familiarity with this topic than others (as I can attest, having been involved in the "King James Only" argument as a Christian). My goal is not to belittle Christians in any way (the topic is extremely complicated), but rather to explain how preachers exploit the public's all-too-expected lack of understating of this topic. Manuscript count, while close to irrelevant when separated from other considerations, is easy to grasp and can sound like an intuitive way of keeping score to a lay audience. That's just one of many problems of communicating specialized knowledge to the public. Also, please don't harp on me about "strawmanning" Christianity. I'm sincerely operating on an observation that, while anecdotal, was gleaned from decades being and observing Christians across many denominations and churches. If I'm wrong, I'm not maliciously wrong.
Pastors love talking about how many New Testament manuscripts we have. But what is a "Greek manuscript?" When were most of them written, and by whom? Do the existence of these manuscripts do anything to prove the stories of the Bible? I would say no, and in this video I demonstrate why pastors and apologists are utterly full of shite when they try arguing that thousands of "manuscripts or portions of manuscripts" prove that Jesus was God.
This is the second of a series of videos talking about common arguments for the life and resurrection of Jesus, formatted as a response to Voddie Baucham. You can find the first video at: youtu.be/6ibcKbvlx3I
The chart is from a Patheos article at patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2013/11/25000-new-testament-manuscripts-big-deal
The information it uses is based on a standard Christian-cited catalogue of manuscripts which can be found on Wikipedia at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_manuscript (this page also has a lot of cool pictures of manuscripts I got my picture of the fragment from).
My Facebook: facebook.com/Prophet-of-Zod-786256038184855
My Twitter: twitter.com/Prophet_of_Zod
My Email: poz@prophetofzod.com
A note on my generalization that Christians don't much about where the Bible comes from: I don't mean this as an insult, nor do I claim this ignorance is limited to Christians. Most of the public knows little about this, and that's to be expected on such a dry academic topic. I just single out Christians because that's who preachers are counting on manipulating. I also know some Christians have more familiarity with this topic than others (as I can attest, having been involved in the "King James Only" argument as a Christian). My goal is not to belittle Christians in any way (the topic is extremely complicated), but rather to explain how preachers exploit the public's all-too-expected lack of understating of this topic. Manuscript count, while close to irrelevant when separated from other considerations, is easy to grasp and can sound like an intuitive way of keeping score to a lay audience. That's just one of many problems of communicating specialized knowledge to the public. Also, please don't harp on me about "strawmanning" Christianity. I'm sincerely operating on an observation that, while anecdotal, was gleaned from decades being and observing Christians across many denominations and churches. If I'm wrong, I'm not maliciously wrong.
