First, these video's are a joke and it poor taste at that. It's much better when you use your own line of reasoning. Moving on.
So much for a perfect historical and factual book. Can't even get Jesus' geneology straight.
Yikes. Understand that Mathew and Luke were two very different people, and their expressions of the geneology would be displayed in their very writing styles. The same way everyone in a class may do a book report on the same book, but in their own way. Some will include more facts, some will dumb it down to get to the point. Mathew, begins his breakdown of it, starting with Abraham, While Luke traces all the way back to the garden. Either way, they both show that Jesus was born in the line of David the King. Mathew was a tax man, Luke a doctor. Hmm, it's easy to see why Luke's account would include more finer details, than a tax man's account!!!!!!!! Tax man, or doctor, who's thesis would you expect to be more refined?
Mathew started his this way. Mat1:
1 The book of the history of Jesus Christ,
son of David, son of Abraham:
Then he proceeds to start it after Abraham.
Luke starts his first letter to Theophilus like this. Luke1:
1 Whereas many have undertaken to compile a statement of the facts that are given full credence among us, 2 just as those who from [the] beginning became eyewitnesses and attendants of the message delivered these to us, 3
I resolved also, because I have traced all things from the start with accuracy, to write them in logical order to you, most excellent The?oph?i?lus, 4 that you may know fully the certainty of the things that you have been taught orally.
So Luke was stating here that he has the intention to trace things back as fully and accurately as possible. Much diff than Mathew, who was just stressing the point of the Davidic time line. They both show the timeline correctly. Just differently.
And what about when Adam and Eve were made? One version says they were made at the same time, another version says Adam was made first and Eve was made from the rib of Adam. Which is it?
Where does this folly occur to you?
And what's so great about Matthew 24:14??
And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
Clearly the end has not come. So the prophecy has not come true. And people have been preaching the gospel for about 1,000 years, so nothing new there. So remind me again how this is such a great and true prophecy?
How are you missing this? The Prophecy is two fold. First the Kingdom message has to be preached earth wide. That would have to mean according to Jehovah's satisfaction, and then when it has been accomplished, THE END WILL COME.
The first parts of the prophecy has happened. Increase in wars, lawlessness, pestilence, poverty, hunger, Father vs son, Mother vs daughter, no natural affection. Meanwhile, while those things take place, The Kingdom message with be preached in the midst of things. And as the world worsens and the preaching work increases, eventually, Jehovah will say it's time. And then, the end will come.
All one needs to do to see the verification of these things, is click on CNN, local newspaper for the daily tragedy, and then wait for the doorbell to ring one sat morn with 2 well dressed bible students with very good news to tell you.
Only thing left is the end. That is why I keep saying I LIVE IN PROPHETIC TIMES. Because all of those things are happening!!!! We're just waiting on the finish. That is how I am bewildered you say Prophecy is hogwash... You clearly lack basic biblical understanding to even see the very simple things written... I mean, Mat 24 is not that hard to grasp, yet you blindly miss it....
Plus, Matthew has many contradictions...
(Matthew 8:13 & 8:14) Jesus healed the leper before visiting the house. (Mark 1:29-30 & 1:40-42) Jesus healed the leper after visiting Simon Peter?s house. Before or after? Come on Matthew, get you records straight.
(Matthew 8:5-7) The Centurion approached Jesus, beseeching help for a sick servant. (Luke 7:3 & 7:6-7) The Centurion did not approach Jesus. He sent friends and elders of the Jews. Did he approach or didn't he? Come on Matthew, get you records straight.
(Matthew 9:18) He asked for help, saying his daughter was already dead. (Luke 8:41-42) Jairus approached Jesus for help, because his daughter was dying. Was she dead or wasn't she? Come on Matthew, get you records straight.
(Matthew 10:10) Jesus instructed them not to take a staff, not to wear sandals. (Mark 6:8-9) Jesus instructed his disciples to wear sandals and take a staff on their journey. Were they instructed to take a staff and sandals or not? Come on Matthew, get you records straight.
Matthew 2:15, 19 & 21-23 The infant Christ was taken into Egypt. Luke 2:22 & 39 The infant Christ was NOT taken to Egypt. Was he taken to Egypt or not? Come on Matthew, get you records straight.
Matthew 5:1-2 Christ preached his first sermon on the mount. Luke 6:17 & 20 Christ preached his first sermon in the plain. Where did he preach his first sermon? Come on Matthew, get you records straight.
I could go on and on and on. So please, stop saying the bible is a perfect historical and factual book. And how can you quote Matthhew prophecies, or any prophecy for that matter, when the bible is filled with contradictions and discrepencies.
Clearly it is an imperfect book written by imperfect people. You say you can't trust scientific theories because it is based on imperfect science and imperfect people, yet you believe everything in the imprefect bible that was written by imperfect people. That's funny.
If you have four eye witnesses to a story, and asked them to tell it, you would expect them to add up for the most part, correct? But would you expect them to mirror each other word for word? highly unlikely. So why would you expect the four gospel writers to have the exact wording for each event. Silly stuff like plain, or mount? This is the basis of your argument? You're better than this. I'm just gonna leave this be, it ain't worth either of our times.
I noticed you failed to address some of my questions in previous posts. Like how you went on and on about natural disasters, and I recounted that Scientists say we are causing more damage to the earth ourselves than anything. Is this true? Must be, because science says so. If that's the case though, even more praise to Jah, because he mentions bringing ruin to those ruining the earth. Which means, he knew something was coming long before Science would be able to confirm it
I also have some info I liked, so I will share. The book NanoMedecine states that the human body is made up of 41 chemical elements. The basic elements- Carbon, Iron, Oxygen, and others- are all present in the "Dust" of the earth.
So I guess it's not so Crazy for genesis to say this: Gen 2:7
And Jehovah God proceeded to form the man out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man came to be a living soul.
Question. What could Moses use to confirm what Science now has thousands of years later? Or did he have to just trust the human designer, that you say does not exist?
So begs the question, how did those 41 lifeless building blocks come together to form a living human? A Nasa space shuttle is made of of some 2.5 million parts, which takes teams of the most brilliant engineers alive, and many years as well. The human body however is made of some 7 octillion atoms, 100 trillion cells, dozens of organs, and at least 9 major organ systems. Am I to believe that it takes Nasa Years to build a shuttle that they are not sure will even work completely correct, but the human body which is much more intricate just evolved by blind chance? Word doggy?