With respect to your linked video, he makes a lot of assumptions in his explanation of how we got the bible we got. He assumes that it was tradition and "The Holy Spirit" that guided the final edit. But the final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea and the Council of Constantinople almost 400 years after Jesus. My research suggests there was a great deal of controversy at the time. That was the reason these councils were formed; to end the controversy by the creation of laws, solidify rulership of the Roman Empire, and establish the divine rulership of the Holy Roman Empire. See my other comment in response to someone else directly below this (at the time of this post).

Assuming that "the Holy Spirit" guided the final edit is canon, but that doesn't make it truth. Assuming that "Tradition" is somehow related to truth is also faulty. Assuming that it was in fact tradition, when there is substantial evidence of controversy among different groups that called themselves "Christian" (followers of the teachings of Jesus) is hugely problematic. These assumptions require faith because there is substantial evidence against them.

In general, people do what they do for power. There is substantial evidence that the bible we got, and more importantly, the canon we got, was designed specifically as a power play. In fact, that's not even controversial, at least with regards to the results of all of Europe and no small part of the world being ruled by The Church (one variant or another) for almost two millennia. It was ruled by the canonical laws which were created by the same people who created the final bible. I suggest that was not coincidental.

With respect to your linked video, he makes a lot of assumptions in his explanation of how we got the bible we got. He assumes that it was tradition and "The Holy Spirit" that guided the final edit. But the final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea and the Council of Constantinople almost 400 years after Jesus. My research suggests there was a great deal of controversy at the time. That was the reason these councils were formed; to end the controversy by the creation of laws, solidify rulership of the Roman Empire, and establish the divine rulership of the Holy Roman Empire. See my other comment in response to someone else directly below this (at the time of this post).

Assuming that "the Holy Spirit" guided the final edit is canon, but that doesn't make it truth. Assuming that "Tradition" is somehow related to truth is also faulty. These assumptions require faith because there is substantial evidence against them.

In general, people do what they do for power. There is substantial evidence that the bible we got, and more importantly, the canon we got, was designed specifically as a power play. In fact, that's not even controversial, at least with regards to the results of all of Europe and no small part of the world being ruled by The Church (one variant or another) for almost two millennia. It was ruled by the canonical laws which were created by the same people who created the final bible. I suggest that was not coincidental.

With respect to your linked video, he makes a lot of assumptions in his explanation of how we got the bible we got. He assumes that it was tradition and "The Holy Spirit" that guided the final edit. But the final edit was decided at the Council of Nicaea and the Council of Constantinople almost 400 years after Jesus. My research suggests there was a great deal of controversy at the time. That was the reason these councils were formed; to end the controversy by the creation of laws, solidify rulership of the Roman Empire, and establish the divine rulership of the Holy Roman Empire. See my other comment in response to someone else directly above yours.

Assuming that "the Holy Spirit" guided the final edit is canon, but that doesn't make it truth. Assuming that "Tradition" is somehow related to truth is also faulty. These assumptions require faith because there is substantial evidence against them.

In general, people do what they do for power. There is substantial evidence that the bible we got, and more importantly, the canon we got, was designed specifically as a power play. In fact, that's not even controversial, at least with regards to the results of all of Europe and no small part of the world being ruled by The Church (one variant or another) for almost two millennia. It was ruled by the canonical laws which were created by the same people who created the final bible. I suggest that was not coincidental.