Great video! Dr. Miller spent a long interview talking about a whole lot of nothing lol. I’m glad to see people doing response videos to him and other secular scholars and mythicists that Derrick only seems to have on myth vision now days. Would be nice to see him have other scholars to challenge or debate these views rather than him title and label these crazy views as indisputable truths like he has been.
I don't know how you came across my feed, but you did a fantastic job at breaking down his argument. I nearly spit out my water when he said what the two options of debate were. Then he says "well, the consensus of secular scholars agrees that...." Sooooo.... He literally admits that he has only explored the idea between OTHER secular scholars. 😂😂
Wouldn't that be like gathering consensus on if whether or space is real within a group of NASA employees, or asking a group of 3 year olds if Santa is real, or gathering a consensus from PETA activists on whether or not we should eat meat. 😂😂
@@ktex4873 Thanks for watching and subscribing! I was literally astonished at his total lack of arguments. Did you see how clueless he was on the origin of Christianity? And he had been invited as a top expert to explain exactly that! And he just embarrassed himself. He sounded like a middle school teenager that has no idea of what he is talking about, "Yeah...like...you know...like...I mean...you know...yeah...kinda...like..."
Hello. You should consider watching the longer interviews where he presents the evidence to back his claims. I dont think he was trying to convinces anyone on this video, seeing as he didnt present arguments in this, only conclusions. I see this as an introduction video, with the primary audiance intended to be athiests. Thank you.
This is an incredibly bad and ignorant commentary, especially at 9:46 where you just excerpted a small section out of context without mentioning the fact that Miller's answer is based on a book-length analysis. Much of all this is a dishonest paraphrasing of Miller. Your comment applies to yourself: "This is beyond embarrassing". On top of it Miller started as a Christian. He lost his faith when he read the text critically instead of apologetically, as you do. On the contrary to what you say, his assumption was that the Bible and Christianity were true. I bet your reading of the Qur'an is much less apologetic than your reading of the Bible.
Absolutely agree. This guy is mischaracterizing Dr. Miller's actual position on the Christ myth. I can say this without a doubt as I own and have read Dr. Miller's book on the topic, _Resurrection and Reception in Early Christianity._ This guy here has likely *not* read the book, and unfortunately just jumps the gun, bloviating about how ridiculous it is for Dr. Miller to talk about the marginalization of Christ Mythicists from general scholarly discussion; seemingly unaware that this is neither his nor Derek's position on the figure of Jesus.
Thanks, both, for your comments. My video is based on the interaction Dr. Miller had with MythVision. My comment about Dr. Miller's "beyond embarrassing" conclusions is not directed to his books (which I have not read) but to the embarrassingly weak explanation he gives of how supposedly, as a result of his many studies, Christianity originated.
@@thejerichoconnection3473 The short video you are responding to only makes sense within the context of his book, _Resurrection and Reception in Early Christianity._
@@josephpercy1558 no, it doesn’t. If someone asks Dr Miller, “please explain me in short how Christianity originated”, which should be the summa of his whole studies, and he starts babbling improbable hypotheses one on top of the other that make zero sense, I have the right to conclude his arguments are embarrassingly weak. I don’t care if he wrote a lengthy book about it. I already got all the information I needed: he probably has no idea of what he is talking about.
@@thejerichoconnection3473 They make "zero sense" to you because you haven't actually read his book. Telling me that you don't care about this contextual data in the book *tells me* all I need to know about you. Absolutely pathetic. Are you lazy or just retarded?
Really??? This dude thinks he knows more about the history of religion than Richard C Miller?? Richard C Miller, Richard Carrier, Robert Price, Dennis McDonald, etc This guy on this channel thinks he knows more?? Really?? What a laugh!!!!!! Dude you are embarrassing yourself. You think the Bible is literal history?? It’s mythology.
@@Scorned405 Did I ever say I know more than him? I said his appearance on MythVision was embarrassing for the lack of logical arguments he presented. Dr Miller is the perfect example of someone that has erudition but at the same time huge gaps in logical thinking. That’s exactly why he and the others you mentioned are marginalized by the rest of the scholarly community, pretty much like the flat-earthers within the scientific community.
Great video! Dr. Miller spent a long interview talking about a whole lot of nothing lol. I’m glad to see people doing response videos to him and other secular scholars and mythicists that Derrick only seems to have on myth vision now days. Would be nice to see him have other scholars to challenge or debate these views rather than him title and label these crazy views as indisputable truths like he has been.
I guess Dennis McDonald don’t know what he’s talking about either?? Smh
I don't know how you came across my feed, but you did a fantastic job at breaking down his argument. I nearly spit out my water when he said what the two options of debate were. Then he says "well, the consensus of secular scholars agrees that...."
Sooooo.... He literally admits that he has only explored the idea between OTHER secular scholars. 😂😂
Wouldn't that be like gathering consensus on if whether or space is real within a group of NASA employees, or asking a group of 3 year olds if Santa is real, or gathering a consensus from PETA activists on whether or not we should eat meat. 😂😂
Subscribed, btw. 😊
@@ktex4873 Thanks for watching and subscribing! I was literally astonished at his total lack of arguments. Did you see how clueless he was on the origin of Christianity? And he had been invited as a top expert to explain exactly that! And he just embarrassed himself.
He sounded like a middle school teenager that has no idea of what he is talking about, "Yeah...like...you know...like...I mean...you know...yeah...kinda...like..."
Miller has 3 MAs from Harvard, Princeton.and Yale and PhD..who are you
Hello. You should consider watching the longer interviews where he presents the evidence to back his claims. I dont think he was trying to convinces anyone on this video, seeing as he didnt present arguments in this, only conclusions. I see this as an introduction video, with the primary audiance intended to be athiests.
Thank you.
@@tm0209 thanks for your kind suggestion. Definitely appreciate it. I will give it a try.
This is an incredibly bad and ignorant commentary, especially at 9:46 where you just excerpted a small section out of context without mentioning the fact that Miller's answer is based on a book-length analysis.
Much of all this is a dishonest paraphrasing of Miller. Your comment applies to yourself: "This is beyond embarrassing".
On top of it Miller started as a Christian. He lost his faith when he read the text critically instead of apologetically, as you do. On the contrary to what you say, his assumption was that the Bible and Christianity were true.
I bet your reading of the Qur'an is much less apologetic than your reading of the Bible.
Absolutely agree. This guy is mischaracterizing Dr. Miller's actual position on the Christ myth. I can say this without a doubt as I own and have read Dr. Miller's book on the topic, _Resurrection and Reception in Early Christianity._ This guy here has likely *not* read the book, and unfortunately just jumps the gun, bloviating about how ridiculous it is for Dr. Miller to talk about the marginalization of Christ Mythicists from general scholarly discussion; seemingly unaware that this is neither his nor Derek's position on the figure of Jesus.
Thanks, both, for your comments. My video is based on the interaction Dr. Miller had with MythVision. My comment about Dr. Miller's "beyond embarrassing" conclusions is not directed to his books (which I have not read) but to the embarrassingly weak explanation he gives of how supposedly, as a result of his many studies, Christianity originated.
@@thejerichoconnection3473 The short video you are responding to only makes sense within the context of his book, _Resurrection and Reception in Early Christianity._
@@josephpercy1558 no, it doesn’t. If someone asks Dr Miller, “please explain me in short how Christianity originated”, which should be the summa of his whole studies, and he starts babbling improbable hypotheses one on top of the other that make zero sense, I have the right to conclude his arguments are embarrassingly weak. I don’t care if he wrote a lengthy book about it. I already got all the information I needed: he probably has no idea of what he is talking about.
@@thejerichoconnection3473 They make "zero sense" to you because you haven't actually read his book. Telling me that you don't care about this contextual data in the book *tells me* all I need to know about you. Absolutely pathetic. Are you lazy or just retarded?
I can’t stand Derrick lol
Really??? This dude thinks he knows more about the history of religion than Richard C Miller?? Richard C Miller, Richard Carrier, Robert Price, Dennis McDonald, etc This guy on this channel thinks he knows more?? Really?? What a laugh!!!!!! Dude you are embarrassing yourself. You think the Bible is literal history?? It’s mythology.
@@Scorned405 Did I ever say I know more than him? I said his appearance on MythVision was embarrassing for the lack of logical arguments he presented.
Dr Miller is the perfect example of someone that has erudition but at the same time huge gaps in logical thinking.
That’s exactly why he and the others you mentioned are marginalized by the rest of the scholarly community, pretty much like the flat-earthers within the scientific community.