Bravo! This is truly a historic presentation! Dr. Robinson is truly generous in sharing his time & the fruit of his labors, e.g. The NewTestament In the Original Greek Byzantine Textform 2018 in pdf format. Thank you for this great video!😊📖🙏

Thank you for these very interesting videos with the great Dr. Maurice Robibson, it is a pleasure to learn with both. His position regarding the Byzabtinian text opened the doors for me to a sound, balanced and pious doctrine. God bless you and waiting for more jewelry like this.

I have to say that as I listen to men of God like Dr. Robinson, it just strengthens my conviction to stay with the KJV.

@RUT812

Жыл бұрын

Me, too!

@RGGifford

Жыл бұрын

Though as Dr. Robinson would say, "Certainly the Textus Receptus had its problems, not the least of which was its failure to reflect the Byzantine Textform in an accurate manner. But the Byzantine Textform is not the TR, nor need it be associated with the TR or those defending such in any manner."

King James version fought papacy ... and still is doing it

Sometimes I feel sorry for Ehrman. He has heard the truth of the Gospel and has distorted this truth to his ruin and with a desire to ruin others. I always remember James White saying how unhappy he seemed and I believe it. I pray God grants him repentance befor its too late. Very thankful for men like Dr Robinson for address these issuses. Do you know of any good books or articles that address his book and goce solid Christian answers?

@nonprogrediestregredi1711

Жыл бұрын

Well, Dr Ehrman stated, in response to Dr White's comments about his mood, that Dr White was actually quite rude to him at the engagement that was being referenced. Dr White has lied about Dr Ehrman before, so it would not shock me. Dr Ehrman also understands the many problems with Christianity and how it is not epistemically justified for belief.

@chrisjohnson9542

Жыл бұрын

​@@nonprogrediestregredi1711 Bart Ehrman is a wolf who seeks to destroy the reliability of scripture and Christianity. James White seeks to do the exact opposite. He builds up the church and shows how Christians can rely on God's word.

@nonprogrediestregredi1711

Жыл бұрын

@chrisjohnson9542 The "scripture" of Christianity is not historically reliable. Depending on which Christianity you adhere to, there are variations of what "God's word" even is. Mr White is what I refer to as an apoli-scholar-gist. He pretends that there is a higher degree of reliability than what is actually justified. Dr Ehrman is, hands down, the better historian.

@glossypots

9 ай бұрын

I don’t think that is true. His teacher at Princeton was Bruce Metzger, a very prominent, world renowned, Christian, Bible scholar. I think it is often hard not just to come to terms with the suffering in life, but the violence and dissociative but often deliberate attitude of God to suffering in the Bible.

Bart Ehrman's 'reasoned eclecticism' seems to me to be like unreasoned idiosyncraticism.

@BiblicalStudiesandReviews

Жыл бұрын

Haha true

Why did erman use latin

This healthy vegetable soup is only 6% sewage, and most of that sewage is water which your body needs.

@chrisjohnson9542

Жыл бұрын

That's a logical fallacy. Comparing a text that has minor textual variants that do not affect doctrine is not the same thing as drinking contaminated water which contains bacteria that could make you sick or kill you.

@hamobu

Жыл бұрын

@@chrisjohnson9542 My point is that you can't simply say "it's only six percent wrong" Additionally, it's six percent errors that we know of. In other words, if there are things that we know are wrong then everything else is questionable as well. But more obviously, how can something from God have so many errors? The Bible itself claims to be perfect and without errors.

@Caralaza

2 ай бұрын

​@@hamobu where does it say that in the Bible? No where. The Bible is not a book written by a single author with a single purpose, it is a collection of books written over the course of 1000 years. When Christians say it is "from God", they are referring to inspiration and still regard the work as that of the author. Christians do not believe that God possessed the authors and dictated what should be written (that's more of a Muslim belief). Otherwise, there would be no need to have 4 Gospel accounts, as that would be redundant. The vast majority of these "errors" are spelling mistakes or an inconsequential word added/removed here or there because they were written done by scribes and scribes make mistakens. Maybe it's hard to believe, but scribes make mistakes sometimes. Scribal errors have been talked about since antiquity and nobody's faith was shaken because one manuscript read κάμηλος and the other κάμιλος, or that one version has τον υιόν τον μονογενή and another has τον υιόν αυτού τον μονογενή. As a classicist, I find this idea that "if 6 percent is wrong than everything else is questionable" utterly ridiculous. That is not how scholarship works. ALL ancient literature has textual variation (it is UBIQUITOUS) and scribal errors but NO ONE is out there arguing nonesense like Plato's Republic is questionable because some manuscripts read μεν here instead of μην. No one is out there saying Caesar didn't write the Commentaries on the Gallic Wars because spelling adlegit as allegit like in such-and-such manuscript is anachronistic. Et cetera et cetera.

If there’s anyone on the face of the earth that I dislike, it’s Bart Ehrman. My agnostic daughter hangs on his every word, and doesn’t want to hear anything that’s from a Christian source. She has shot down William Craig, Michael Heiser, Gary Habermas, and all the others. May God have mercy on his soul because he’s leading so many souls astray.

@BiblicalStudiesandReviews

Жыл бұрын

I’m so sorry to hear that. Ehrman has been quite destructive and he is quite good at being bad unfortunately.

@totarambudhoo9788

Жыл бұрын

Seems like your daughter is the one with the brains in the family. Bart Ehrman is a hero to all independent thinking human beings.

@jamestrotter3162

Жыл бұрын

@@totarambudhoo9788 Only for those who have such " open minds" that their brains fall out.

@BDnevernind

Жыл бұрын

Imagine being upset that your daughter has intellectual capacites and the ability to reject dogmatic thinking. You're the one in need of help.

@lostfan5054

Жыл бұрын

It's weird how god's plan to save your daughter can be defeated by Bart Ehrman

Just watch all of Bart Ehrman’s debate and judge for yourself

Host: "Bottom line, [given the 94% agreement, whether you're using Byzantine or Critical Edition] you can have great confidence when you come to your New Testament that what you're reading is what God originally inspired" Say what? No, it means you can have a dergee of confidence that what you're reading is what the original authors wrote, but that says nothing about what God did or did not inspire.

Un luckey development of technology for atheist...

bart ehrman rocks!

@jukar229

11 ай бұрын

On the rocks you meant, didn't you? 🍸

@ranilodicen4460

11 ай бұрын

@@jukar229 bart ehrman did more than all biblical scholars of the last two centuries to let the truth about the bible reach the church pews...

Is the message actually clear? Are those 94 % crystal clear with minor doubts of those 6% or does that actually takes a years of studies to become a pastor so you could present the message correctly? So why does the God Christians talk about feel like totally different deity than the one described in the Bible? So generally why does God of the old Testament feels like entire different deity then the one in the new testament? Jesus didn't renounce the "Law" he actually stated that the "Law" still stands, yet there is no need to follow it. How does that make sense? Yep crystal clear 96% of the data. How come the most important information in the history of the world took thousands of years to travel around the world? God didn't loved the tribes in America? Does our perfect father who loves us all loves some of us more? So it depends a lot on where we are born if we are saved? Yeah God did have his favorites, but later he changed his mind, but not entirely it seems. Yeah crystal-clear instructions from omnipotent God.

@chrisjohnson9542

Жыл бұрын

You are projecting your unclear understanding of God and His word upon His word. It's actually quite clear. There are many things which you stated that the bible teaches that it actually says the opposite. For instance you said that in the new that Jesus said not to follow the law anymore. That's incorrect. There is a moral law that is unchanging in the old and new which is commonly called the moral law and there are ceremonial and civil laws which were intended for the theocratic nation of Isreal. The purpose of the old covenant was to establish a people by which to bring about the lineage of the Messiah who would die for the sins of the world. The old covenant pointed forward to Christ and terminated with His coming to fulfill the old covenant and provide salvation for those Jews who looked forward to His coming and both Jew and gentile after His coming that all who believe in Him will have eternal life.

@ilmt

Жыл бұрын

@@chrisjohnson9542 Yet Jesus specifically sais that the old covenant still stands. My bad writing did make it look like he followed with no need to follow it. That was supposed to be my comment. Which makes the situation worse. The law stands, yet no Christians hold sabbath. Or other commands from the old Testament. But leave that. How is the basic message (that he come to pay for our sins on the cross) clear? It's like I would say: "You owe US government 10 mil. Dollars. I will make it go away and you don't have to care about it if you'll believe me and send me a poem every week. If you fail to do so the CIA will hunt you down. It'll look like an accident so no one will ever know what actually happen." I am not mocking the Christianity or any religion for that matter, but boyled down the message feel like that. And because it requires from me to invest quite large portion of my life I kinda rather examine if the claim as a whole holds water. And then comes the issues. Why the sacrificing himself to himself? Ok, the normal sacrifices prior to that make somewhat sense - you take portion of your best stuff and in a way pay it to the God, but the Jesus sacrifice? The only somewhat rational explanation is publicity and maybe to show the people of the time the equality of the acts (some form of example). Yet still he claims to do so for everyone. Yet the message traveled hundreds of years, so what about those people? What about people who never heard of the old testament either? ( the Americas, Australia and Oceania)? Inconsistent message. It's like the authors of the Bible didn't know about other nations around the world.