Evidence for the Resurrection that Changed a Generation of Scholars (Gary Habermas Response)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 ноя 2020
- At the recent "Jesus on Trial" Christian apologetics mega-seminar, resurrection expert Dr. Gary Habermas gave a two-hour lecture called "Evidence for the Resurrection that Changed a Generation of Scholars". What is this evidence, and did it also change a generation of skeptics?
Jesus on Trial Conference -
jesusontrialconf.com
Support Paulogia at
/ paulogia
www.paypal.me/paulogia
www.amazon.ca/hz/wishlist/ls/...
teespring.com/stores/paulogia
Paulogia Audio-Only-Version Podcast
paulogia.buzzsprout.com
Follow Paulogia at
/ paulogia0
/ paulogia0
/ discord 
Наука
Let me get this straight. It can't be a group vision, because that never happens, but it can be a dead person coming back to life, because ... because ... because that never happens, either?
Resurrection is common among the faithful.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. "More than one person having the same hallucination? Preposterous! Nonsense! Could never happen, that's absurd! Clearly it must be magic."
@@Cellidor I think the sightings a could be just plain made up. Hallucinations aren't a plausible answer. There are mutliple sightings reported of elvis or aliens or the chupacabra.
@@michaelflores9220 That's my overall assumption too, I find the idea of 'simple beginnings made extraordinary as the story became legend through re-telling', I'm just commenting on the silly notion that magic is more plausible by default than 'people think they saw something they didn't'.
@@Cellidor But ... but ... but it's in the bible, and the bible says it's the inspired word of god, so it can't be wrong. By the way, this comment is the inspired word of god, too.
"Something happened... But I don't know what it is."
A reasonable observation. But if you can't identify what happened, you can't claim it as evidence, can you? It's like claiming "aliens" when you see a UFO, but forget what the "U" stands for.
"INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER."
Multivac
(Isaac Asimov - The Last Question)
The "U" stands for "undeniable", of course!
@@berndwolff2389 Well, nobody's denying that it's a flying object.
Fairly much what I was going to say myself.
Something happened..you don't know what it was so you do not get to assume anything.
What you can do is look at demonstrable evidences and facts.
No facts, no evidences exist that a biblical jesus character ever existed.
What we do have facts and evidences for is that the biblical jesus character is made up. We have facts and evidences that there was many jesus characters..all of them written about and none the biblical jesus character.
Well said.
I'm not even convinced Peter needed a hallucination. The resurrection from the dead could have just been another case of "enthusiastic believers" adding exaggerations.
Or you know. No nedical training whatsoever and many are probably not actually dead . Just suffering with brain or spinal trauma in a rotting mass grave. Besides. Muscles can still contract after death. An ignorant savage would 100 percent see that as still alive
@OcasioCortez 4prez2022 I would do that now...
Most if not all supernatural elements were probably added later, that's how myths evolve. If a Jesus character existed he wouldn't make up claims that are falsifiable and easy to demonstate. It wouldn't exactly help his case to claim he can walk on water.
@@tangerinetangerine4400 or he would. Shoko Asahara claimed he was the christ and that he could levitate not too long ago. He even took pictures of it for magazines. Uri Geller did not claim to be the messiah (that I know of) and he also made several easily falsifiable claims, including fixing broken electronics with sheer wanting it and finding oil with his psychic powers.
It's important to realize people can say things that aren't true and have other people believe them.
@@georgwisniewski4118 that's a good point. But 2000 years passed and we don't know if Jesus even existed. A lot of things were added in the meantime, trinity being an example since it's not even explicit in the bible. It's just another magical addition to the myth to make a mortal guy seem greater than he was. These things happen in other religions too.
The thing that gets me about Christianity, Islam, etc. is the book they claim "has all the answers" has to be translated and interpreted by "scholars" and "experts" to verify its meaning.
It's the Oracle At Delphi grift.
Southern Christians especially will simultaneously argue that the "word of God" is written for the simple man and not complicated AND that you have to study crap down to the root of the Greek word and know the entire context of every scenario of every command to understand it. It's beyond hilarious.
Just think of the arrogance, too.
"Now what God meant to say here was..."
@@smaakjeks
That has always been a favorite of mine too. When Jesus said that the OT laws would be in effect until "the heavens and the Earth shall pass away - until ALL has been fulfilled." A pretty clear statement that those laws are in effect until the end of time. But since Christians could not grow their cult while demanding that Gentile converts follow those laws, so they just decided Jesus did not really mean what he clearly said.
@@pdoylemi
But Christians claim that Jesus fulfilled ALL of that with his resurrection.
In other words... Christians think that Jesus said something like: Of course you have to follow ALL of the 613 commandments of the Old Testament and ALL of the laws... for a few more weeks, and then you can ignore almost all of it.😂
They also like to play the _'you are not qualified to criticise'_ card... I bet they would criticise www.amazon.com/Dragonology-Complete-Book-Dragons-Ologies/dp/0763623296/ without blinking.
A friend of mine died recently and it was unexpected or explained. Within a few days there were stories going around about how he died that contained no, or very little truth.
Stories can start within days. Especially within smaller communities of around 10,000 in this case.
After 2k years, and 3 efforts to find the historical Jesus which have resulted in the demonstration that the quest for the historical Jesus is an investigation of an echo chamber , it would be very surprising that Habermas et al can somehow pull out of a hat something that everybody else missed.
The current state of affairs is all the proof I need that Yahweh/Yeshua
is a fictional character.
@@JamesRichardWiley If Jesus is a fictional character then all of ancient history is based fictional characters. Let me know when you are going to admit this.
@@Justas399 not necessarily
@@JamesRichardWiley To be fair, most people from antiquity lack sufficient evidence to prove they existed. The literary Jesus is could very well be based on some crazy rabbi at the time, as they're were many of them. There had to be something that started the Christ cult.
@@Justas399 no not at all; the case of anybody's historicity is drawn up from 1) primary sources artifacts and documents created while the subject person was alive and could affirm or deny it 2) secondary sources that are artifacts and documents created after the life of the subject. If the source is identified it is much more credible than an anonymous one. For Julius Caesar, (this is a short list) we have as primary sources coins issued by the republican government over the course of his career (you can buy some on E bay). we have marble inscriptions of his dedication of the temple of Venus in Rome.. (similar to what rich people do today by donating oodles of money to university and have a library or building names after them) we have his books he authored ; we have Cicero and others commentaries an criticism of said books; we have his funerary mask; as secondary sources we have Livy, Suetonius histories of rome. We have a lexicon of roman laws issued in the 2nd century that still lists legislation that Juluis had the senate adopt and were sitll on the books. So if you want to maintain the Julius is fictional character then you must build a case showing each and everyone of this identified sources both primary and secondary are frauds. Good luck with that. Otherwise Julius existed. For JHC what do you have ? zero primary sources. none. nada. Not an auspicious start for the son of god. Secondary sources: anonymous gospels written decades after the event and they all have a clear agenda to lie. 2 of the gospels are just rewrites of the first. Not a solid case here. The testimonium Flavonium that Eusebius claims to have first discovered in the 4th century in the writings of Josephus (but nobody else did before him) should convince no one) The historicity case for JHC is weak. It does exist but it damns itself with faint evidence given the importance of the person. compare that to good old Julius
There are more tales of Elvis been seen after his death, than of Jesus. Just saying.
Elvis is flipping burgers in an interstellar road house.
@@JosephKano Is that the same roadhouse that Dalton is kicking ass and cleaning up the riff raff at?!
Or maybe ”men in black” was right. Elvis just went home! 😂
What? Are you saying Elvis is not king, and not still alive.
Blasphemy, you heretic, must be tortured until you see Elvis. LOL
It is interesting how hard, some humans try, to avoid reality, by believing in nonsense.
@@TheScreamingFrog916 Does it mean that I will have to spend eternity watching his movies and never more hear him sing?
Habermas doesn't realise most of his objections can be turned against his own argument.
If biblical scholars were capable of realizing the inherent failure of their arguments, their profession would vanish as quickly as...
...
uh.
Wow. I'm trying to think of an example of a snake oil salesman's "career" being invalidated by progress, but they're all still around, aren't they. Well shit, guess that answers why biblical scholarship still exists.
Give me one.
EZ
Habermas fails to present independent evidence for the dead people leaving the graves that walked through Jerusalem and where seen by many. As he fails to provide anyone not being a cult member or cult propaganda author to speak about this dead Yeshuah who came back. It is a fantasy story which copies a lot from other religions and fail to present the evidence.
@@TorianTammas Well... You just made free statements and ad homien against Habermas.
Ah yes, the best reason for a tomb being empty... the guy inside clearly came back to life and walked off. Obviously.
While, Ignoring the best reason of all. There was no tomb.
Which tomb? Even the tomb is invented as there is none outside the story..
Or he was never actually dead at that point.
The minimal facts argument in a nutshell:
let me lower the bar for these outlandish supernatural claims, so they can be backed by human hearsay and human witnesses, like every other claim, but pay special attention to THIS one, because is a mystery.
As an example of the logic used:
- the bible says there were 500 witnesses
- therefore there were 500 witnesses and their existence cannot be questioned
- the 500 witnesses prove the bible is correct
Umm, yah. That's not how that works.
@@fred_derf actually who counted everyone? maybe there were 499 , maybe 0.
@@gordonlynn8300 The bible claims there were 500 witnesses, but there is not an account from a single one of them, and none are identified...
These people always say that the apostles were willing to die for their beliefs but I don’t recall the Romans ever asking their permission
Precisely. Why would the Romans make an offer like: _Retract your magical claims and we will let you live._ ...?
No way! The Romans would just kill them. That's always the way the Romans rolled.
Right. Romans didn't usually kill anyone for religion anyway, they did it if someone was causing problems for the mundane order of things. Denouncing their believes wouldn't fix the problem.
people are willing to die for many religions and countries.
@@gordonlynn8300 Yes, exactly. Look at the suicide bombings. People are more than willing to die for their beliefs. In pagan religions, human sacrifice was common and considered an honor to be chosen to die for the gods. In no way does the willingness to die verify that any beliefs are true.
@@8698gil FACTS. HARRY POTTER ACTIOM
Thank you Paul! I wish I had your patience.
Thank you for your channel. It’s incredibly important to challenge religious beliefs as they sadly often lead to human suffering.
Personally I can’t imagine believing such extraordinary claims on such thin/no evidence.
It strikes me that Habermas has become really lazy, or perhaps tired. The democratisation of access to theological waffle has made life difficult for these once respected apologists. Even 25 years ago scholars and enthusiasts needed a decent major library to explore these topics. Now, major apologists and theological points can be demolished on RUclips in hours. Thank you Paul for continuing to provide well-structured arguments to dissect this ancient body of nonsense. I enjoy and admire your humility, attention to detail and willingness to correct or clarify yourself, and give credit to others. Please keep it up! Meantime Habermas should maybe switch to Islamic theology and see if he can bring his usual arguments and tools to justify the miracles of that faith. Much more (and more recent) 'direct' testimony to get his teeth into! Maybe he'd end up a polytheist!
I came here to say a much more abbreviated version of this. It must drive someone like WLC, etc... crazy that he can get called to account by mere mortals. Or to stick with this guy, Habermas apparently likes to change his claims depending on who is listening.
So glad to get the notification and be able to watch immediatly for once. You made my Monday morning Paul thank you!
just what I was going for!
I see no difference between religious folks talking about their canon and Star Wars fans discussing theirs.
You should. One is super violent, and the other has lightsabers.
Cononicalreason The lightsaber is more plausible then Jesus walking over water.
The boring answers are most likely the correct ones, in my experience.
We must not be looking at the same science, because that shit is the farthest thing from boring.
@@user-fj6kk1vo8n
Mundane facts can be boring. Not all science is equally exciting. After all, when was the last time you looked at your back garden, yet that would be science too.
@@tibfulv Lol I know. I was just being silly
You should script (with DarkMatter) a court case parody of “Jesus was resurrected from the dead” - bring in Viced Rhino, Matt D., Cosmic Skeptic, Holy Koolaid, etc. voice the plaintiff’s actual arguments exactly (from the likes of Gary, WLC, whatever - just pick the best ones) and mount an awesome animated defense. It would be awesome. Even more awesome if you could use an actual Judge as the judge voice.
I've never been this early before. Time to watch!
i want to echo what others have said: it was great to view this video first thing Monday morning - a terrific way to start the week. Keep up the good work, Paul! Now to my second viewing so I can soak in the information......
Once again, fantastic work Paulogia! I find your hypothesis quite sound. Another 👍 for your channel.
Rule of thumb: claiming evidence'-s' is the same as admitting there is NO evidence.
The group hallucination thing is a huge exercise in distraction and misdirection. You correctly pointed out that you don't even need a group hallucination to account for the data we have. Always good to remind people that we don't have to explain the events recorded in the Bible - rather we only need to explain how those words came to be written there (which does not require that those events actually took place). But even if there were group hallucinations, that does not require that everyone in the group actually saw the same thing. I agree that would be pretty rare. But what if they merely "believed" they saw the same thing, based on vague descriptions given by others? It's easy to make two stories appear "the same" if you keep the details vague, and the more vague they are, the easier it is to make them sound the same. People do this with prophecy claims. And in fact Gary is doing exactly this with his "minimal facts" approach. The less facts you have, the EASIER it is to make it fit your story. Could it be, that the additional details and evidence we don't have would contradict his story? Back to group hallucinations, we don't even need the individuals involved to believe they saw the same thing - all that is required to affirm these group hallucination STORIES is that someone else thought that a group had all seen the same thing, and they wrote it down.
Well at lest he says "This is a Joke", the one's I'm blogging with keep citing verses as evidence "IT DID happen" along with 2nd century early apostolic fathers. From now on, I'm going to send them your video links...I'm done repeating myself . Thanks Paul
Whats make this worse is I'm a former Jew.....now you go figure
I don't get it---how are you a former Jew? If you're a Jew, you're a Jew until you die.
Like I'm Irish. I'm American Irish, so I don't have Irish citizenship to renounce, but if I did, I would still be ethnically Irish until I died. Ethnicity doesn't go away.
@@ericpierce3660 it is also a belief. While he may be unable to escape ethnicity, he can discard the belief. Statistically, you have ancestors who believed in faeries.
@@ericpierce3660 Yes underwing judaism, I’m still a Jew. However that is only a religious title, if you understand what Jews believe concerning heaven, hell and Jesus then you would understand my statement.
So, what precisely IS the World to Come, in Jewish terms?
@@chrissonofpear1384 Not the end of world as Christian believe.
It's amazing to me that an event like this that has defined society pretty much for thouands of year and at it's face value would definitely be the most amazing thing ever has the at best extremely flimsy evidence and at worst not a shred of any. The creator of the entire universe has a plan that he demands his creation to adhere to and his best plan to make sure they get the info is an obscure event some 2000 years ago that wasn't "documented" fully until hundreds of years later in an era that had terrible documentation. It's mind boggling anyone takes this stuff seriously.
They could have spread the message using engraved gold plates and buried them near the Joseph Smith farm near Palmyra, New York... oh wait...
@@billglenn10 lmfaoooo thats the mormons right ?
@@sunkid02 You sir are Correct!
@@sunkid02 Oooo I like your you tube channel
ResidentEvilFan - People belief all kind of stuff without any evidence. The reason for the church is that it is a con which gives privileges and money.
You Crushed him BIG TIME, Cheers & Thanks.
It's awesome to have a such a mundane explanation being presented for all to see! Keep up the good work!
Love your work, Paul. Keep it up!
Very Good. I think that, in few months, you should be able to draw a strong parallel between groups of people during biblical times believing so much in false narratives that they won't see the truth and large groups of people in current day society doing the exact same thing. We just call it politics now. It is so human to want to be lead.
Just look at Flat-Earthers to get a good picture how quickly false beliefs can spread even in _our_ age and time.
It seems to be a human tendency to feel the need to belong to a 'special' group.
Remember all the people waiting in Dallas for JFK Jr to show up?
6:21 - It's like he's winding up for a magic trick. "Now first I need a volunteer from the audience! Now give me a fact, any fact..."
Paul, once again thank you for your patient and well-worded deconstruction of what I'd just dismiss as 'the usual circular argumentation'.
Thanks.
Such a great breakdown!
Thank you, I was really bored today, then I saw your video, nice.
"... and one of the Johns"
LUL
Paul, this might be your best video yet! Reading Mike Lucina's The Resurrection of Jesus (which also presents these same minimal facts argument) kept me a Christian for a couple years until I also started discovering these inconvenient holes in the minimal facts case. Thank you for putting the major objections all together in an accessible format!
I'm shocked that Gary has the comments turned off on his videos. Shocked! Lol
Willingness to die for a belief doesn’t make it true. People died for David Koresh and Jim Jones. The only thing this proves is the individual’s conviction to their belief, even if the belief is delusional.
9/11 wouldn't have happened if people weren't prepared to died for an unproven belief.
I must admit that if we had individual testimony of let's say 8 out of the 12 disciples claiming that they walked around with the living jesus, saw him get cruzified, saw the resurrected jesus with their own eyes and then a good record of how they were prosecuted, given the chance to recant but didn't and then killed I might be intrigued. At least a little.
But damn reality is nowhere close to that.
@@guiagaston7273
Even if you did have that, it wouldn't amount to good evidence that the claims were true.
It's still all hearsay.
@@jacketrussell that's why I added "at least a little" :)
At least I would have to think about it. And I would find a discussion about it to be interesting. But with how things are in reality I just watch these videos for laughs
Listening to the "early so it is true" argument, I remembered the story that revolves around Phil Collin's "In the Air Tonight". That song was not out long when stories passed around about the song and people shared it believing it to be true even though the story is ridiculous. By his standard is QAnon true too?
Also the " Paul Is Dead " rumours that began circulating after McCartney appeared barefoot on an album cover must have been true .
I think "in the air tonight" had something to do Phil Collin's marriage breakup, didn't it?
Just seeing the 'Liberty' logo on his shirt is enough to trigger the "THIS GUY IS GOING TO SPOUT BULLSHIT BECAUSE HE IS FULL OF IT" response.
Much respect Paul. Not simply criticizing, but putting forth your own hypothesis for consideration, makes for a compelling argument.
It's considerably more thorough than my investigations.
To even consider ressurection as a plausible theory, i would have to say, it should be proven to even be possible in this world.
someone must prove that there is a Supernatural, something that totally defies the basic laws of the universe , as
known so far by scientists . I doubt this will happen anytime soon if ever.
@@gordonlynn8300 supernatural is self contradictive, if this world is natural, then that means that supernatural would not exist, if something that is deemed supernatural does exist - it's natural.
But people were getting resurrected all the time in those days...Lazarus, the Centurian's servant, the dead girl, the boy Elisha raised, the mob of Jewish saints from Matthew 28. Just because it doesn't happen now that we have iphones to document it doesn't mean you shouldn't believe it. /s
@@jeremy4148 yeah and supposedly there was a zombie apocalypse. Funny how the further science gets advanced, the ways of present and preaerve evidence vecomes better preserved, there comes the less room for superstition.
@@Brugar18 Only if natural = existence. If instead natural = our known physical Universe, then anything existing outside it (such as another Universe) could be 'supernatural' .
'You saw the risen Christ?'
'You smoke what I'm smoking... you'll see him too.'
Paulogia I just stumbled upon your work due to your video with Mythvision. I dont know how I feel about him exactly but I do enjoy his corroboration with Robert Price very much. I just wanna say I love your work, I love your manner of speaking, and I love your hair! why did you animate it so wretchedly when it is in fact so strong, blonde, and flowing. this is the only grievance I have with your channel, there are no others! thank you for everything that you are doing!
Nicely done.
I'm not even convinced that Peter had a resurrection sighting. It could be that a group of followers kept meeting after the crucifixion just because they enjoyed remembering their lost friend, then rumors started circulating about the resurrection, and then Peter as the leader of the group had to just go along with it. He never directly affirmed it, but he never denied it either. When speaking about it, he would speak as a spokesperson for the whole group ... "we are witnesses of the things that happened". He passively accepts the group consensus to avoid outcasting himself.
Or Peter believed in it hard enough to lie to himself and others to keep their belief.
Either way, I'm still convinced Paul was a con artist who took their gospel message and sold it to the masses. Then he became so popular, the disciples couldn't deny him or they would split the church. Eventually, he eclipsed the others and became the defining figure of the early church.
@@Lobsterwithinternet Agreed. There are so many ways the Christian church could have started with all-natural explanations. Apologists crack me up. All the natural explanations fail, therefore the resurrection is true. It could be that the resurrection doctrine wasn't even all that important to people at the very beginning. I think the original group formed to live out the teachings of the Sermon on the Mount. They might not have even cared all the much if Jesus rose from the dead. Sure, some people believed it, and that added some fuel to the fire, but for others, they may have cared more about other things. The movement grew and evolved from there. It's not a binary all-or-nothing thing that modern apologists make it out to be. When I read the book of James, it sounds to me like a group of people who were trying to live a simple, moral life, not a group of hot-headed zealots who ranted continuously about Jesus rising from the dead.
Basically the belief in a 2000 year old zombie.🤦🏿♂️🤦🏿♂️🤦🏿♂️
@Paul Morgan Jesus is one of the best attested historical figures of the ancient world.
@@Justas399 🤦♂️ No, he isn’t. Not even close.
@@ajclements4627 Who in the ancient has 4 eyewitness accounts of their lives?
@@Justas399 You realize the authors of the Gospels are anonymous. We don't know if they even met the Apostles!
In other words, we have 4 stories that are *claiming there are 4 eyewitnesses* .
That's a wholly different scenario.
@@Justas399 We have hundreds of letter from.a Roman senator and consul name Cicero. He is well attested to have lived and what he did as is Gaius Julius Ceasar I am sorry, but whoever told you that about Jesus is either uninformed or a liar.
I got an ad for an Israeli Christian book distributor masquerading as a movement. Just found that amusing.
I am always amazed that seemingly such smart people decide to jump through such mental gymnastic on religion. There is, sorry to say, no good evidence of an event that is IMPOSSIBLE to have happened. AND that they themselves discount in every other story that is not their story. It is insane.
Darn, I'm one of those "atheists with no training". I never knew I had to take lessons. I only know what I observe, read, and reason out for myself.
Yeah. Me, too! Now, those believers who never even read the Bible. They have their act together.
We know from science that memory is sketchy. Why are we acting as is the memories written down are facts?
Because anonymous hearsay accounts of generational recall is all they have at best?
not all memories are equal
@William
Sure.
...considering the Gospels were written down by anonymous authors that likely never met the Apostles decades after Jesus's death (should he have existed), then it follows this telephone game would have passed through a multitude of people with varying memory capabilities.
@@zacharyshort384 sure they don't have them saying im blah blah writing them but they havent been attributed to anyone else ever which says a lot. And I think u can put the earliest of them in 50 to 60 ad range so they are pretty early. So if someone got the author wrong everyone would have knew it bc they were alive during then and they passed their writings down to their disciples so the disciples knew who wrote it. And if u haf to lie about who wrote them u wouldn't use Matthew luke mark but a prominent disciple of Jesus.
@@williamlougheed7094 It's not just that they are anonymous; the majority of biblical scholars do not think the authors of the Gospels were the Apostles. For one, it's highly unlikely they could write Greek in the academic manner presented in scripture.
So authors that may or may not have met any of the Apostles, wrote down the oral tradition being passed around decades later.
Lots of opportunity for things to get scrambled as they pass around through communities of people with memories of varying ability.
Good summary!
Well shredded. Kudos!
Paul meets a "Peter" and a "James" in Jerusalem. He does NOT clarify that "James" is a biological brother of Jesus. He identifies "James" as a "brother of the Lord" which was what any initiate was also called. Furthermore, there is nothing other than _assumption_ that the "Peter" who Paul met is, in fact, the "Peter" written about in the later New Testament accounts.
@SigmaTauri2 What does it even mean to claim that Jesus existed? What we have is a collection of stories about fragments of events and conversations that are attributed to "Jesus" and make up a patchwork and often contradictory, in different versions, picture. How many of those and which ones have to be true to definitively claim that a historical Jesus existed?
I don’t buy that argument. Only James is specified as being “The Brother of the Lord”. It would be more reasonable if the text said “the Brothers of the Lord.”
@@heathenwizard Well the point is that Peter himself probably had a more important role, whilst James was just a common or garden brother of the lord.
@@heathenwizard No, it wouldn't, since he was only referencing one person. Peter he gave another title, which I don't recall, perhaps apostle? He also refers to James as "a brother of the Lord" but I am not certain that is as distinct in meaning in Greek as it is in English; probably not.
Keep in mind that Peter-Petros-Kefas-Rock was a title, not a name. Peter's original name was Simon, a common Jewish name. When Paul mentions Peter it is likely that he refers to "the" Peter, not "a" Peter.
Would Christianity have survived without the leader of Rome declaring it?
Why isn't the answer " he wasn't dead" ? They got him down by bribing guards to let them have body early, he wandered around for a few weeks and died of wounds . Explains both the "empty tomb" and " reserection " appearances where he has holes in hands etc. Makes most sense.
Josephos describes having his friend taken down and surviving.
Jo of Aramathea had enough dough to own a spare tomb.
PAUL! No video link above your head around 20:00! I was gonna go watch that next lol
ruclips.net/video/IUCI3cMJCvU/видео.html
Many Americans remember Trump winning the 2020 election.
@OcasioCortez 4prez2022 Yes, there is a winner. There might be a coup that reverses the result, or there might be some as-yet unrevealed massive, conspiratorial fraud that might be used to reverse it (unlikely, even if some evidence is produced). But there is a winner.
We watched the horse race. We saw one horse win by a long stretch. We don't have to wait for the ceremony to see who won.
@OcasioCortez 4prez2022 you must be sslllllooooooowwwwwwww
@OcasioCortez 4prez2022 Found the christian
@OcasioCortez 4prez2022 Ah the evasive answer. If you are not a youtube Christian troll, you are sure behaving just like one.
@OcasioCortez 4prez2022 No - atheists are just people who don't believe in god/s for whatever reason.
To be Resurrected, first you have to exist!
'Elvis is Alive you know ' Love the show, will do the recommended home-work.
The Staypuft marshmallow man in Ghostbusters is a classic example of a false memory. When asked, people of my generation said they could remember the Staypuft marshmallow man from their childhood.
Why is he using scripture to prove scripture ? Where is the independent secular evidence ? You would think the dead rising from the grave and roaming the streets of Jerusalem would have been recorded by non biblical scholars
The dead wandering the streets wanted to write a book, but they thrn opened a bar and invented the drink zombie. They just never got around to do it.
A tactic to look out for: when Paul uses phrases like "witness" or "appearance", he is not necessarily endorsing the Gospel version of the stories of witnesses and appearances. Habermas gets a lot of mileage out of conflating Paul's claims and the gospel claims.
Anyone who has been to charismatic-type church services knows that phrases like "witnessing God" get thrown around _very_ loosely. Any number of mundane occurrences can be interpreted as an "appearance" of God. Dreams, emotional nudges, strange lighting, a Bible passage that comes to mind at the right time, a funny shaped cloud, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if the tradition of the appearance to the five hundred was started by a conveniently timed ray of sunlight.
I think the sightings could be just plain made up. Hallucinations aren't a plausible answer. There are mutliple sightings reported of Elvis or aliens or the chupacabra. it is written that the muslim prophet Muhammad split the moon into before many eyewitnesses.
Paul wrote 20 to 40 years before the storytellers of the gospels. Paul claimed to have been in the third heaven in his life time. He can't provide any evidence for it. So he is a liar or a lunatic or he fell for other storytellers even as he claims to have all that heard in his head
@@TorianTammas I don't think it follows that he is a liar or lunatic just because he can't prove something like that. It's plausible that he really believes that he was taken up to the third heaven. Perhaps it was a very realistic-feeling dream. Plenty of relatively sane people have read more into a dream than they probably should have. It doesn't make them a lunatic.
I have an example of mass hallucinations that I was involved in back in like 2004 in middle school. Dozens of people including me smelled a gas leak at school and 4 people including my sister went to hospital from it but there was no gasleak even though the school was evacuated because so many teachers smelled it too
I have the most amazing story to tell...I just need food and lodging for the night if you wish to hear it.
I think this is how it all got started. Then a power motivated government takes over. No actual real live hero of the story needed.
A question I always ask myself, why would God do miraculous supernatural things thousands of years ago, that would indeed prove to us all he is there, when he could have waited to a modern age when we know much more about how things work...
Honestly after hearing the video out I believe your version sounds more reasonable Paul.
'I told two friends... and they told two friends...and so on...'
Before I watch this awesome video, I need to congratulate you. You have managed to become one of the most often quoted counter-apologists on the 'net. Even the Curmudgeon of Contrarianism, Matt Dillahunty, recommends your channel! G
An honest scholar wouldn't shy away from saying "we don't know" Not knowing isn't an opening to shove whatever ridiculous thing you believe into.Even if some "higher power" had something to do with how we got here, there's no way in hell you could know ANYTHING about that being. Claiming you do know is disingenuous..... It's like he doesn't get that some things can just be "unsolved". We don't know for sure who Jack the Ripper was, but that doesn't mean we're stupid for not knowing, we simply don't know. YOU DON"T KNOW, and you don't get to shove god into the open hole in your knowledge.
The other day, I had a thought about the whole Pauline vision of Jesus that made me ponder exactly how people two thousand years ago, living in a world that took for granted the existence of multiple gods and spirits and monsters and all sortsof magic, really conceptualised reality - and more importantly, how did they come to judge whether something was real.
We look at dreams today, and know that what we see in them are not actual events - but to people living thousands of years ago, before this paradigm existed, there must be a question of whether or not two utterly emersive experiences, one occurring during waking hours, and the other during sleep, would have been intuitively separated into reality and imaginary.
I have no idea whether Greek scholars thought about this - but it seems entirely reasonable that Paul's experience could have been what we would call a dream. If it was assumed that a dream was presenting something just as real as a waking experience, Paul would have no reason to specify any caveat to specify which it was. A psychologically frail man having a disturbing dream, while his companions experienced nothing is so much more parsimonious than the Christian interpretation that God - who wanted everyone to know him, decided to reveal himself so privately that he ensured that no-one with Paul witnessed it. I mean - why on earth would Paul's companions not merit the same revelatory experience? It doesn't make any sense.
Or he just made it up to gain power, and ego massaging.
+ben green, writes _"It doesn't make any sense."_
Welcome to christian apologetics.
@@fred_derf
indeed.
@@kevinshort3943
I'm sure he must have been somewhat driven by his ego or he wouldn't have been so full of himself and inclined to get people to 'join his gang' - but I would say that people are more likely to act on what they think is true, than on something they know they just made up. Even grifters like those prosperity preachers or Dave Rubin types believe what they say to some extent - although, I will add that it isn't too hard to go along with something you suspect isn't true, if it benefits you in some way.
It's an interesting question though - I mean - do you think Donald Trump believes what he says? I'm inclined to think so.
@@bengreen171
"do you think Donald Trump believes what he says?"
No, the guys a pathological liar.
I was a pre-seminary student at a Christian college. I agree with everything you have said so far.
“I'm not bad, I'm just drawn that way”
☺
Secundus. Aargh! The dreaded swirly screen made me a fibber!
"Very likely historical facts....." yep, that sounds like a set in stone fact to me
History and even science is done with probabilities. Science has quantum uncertainty, history has its own uncertainty
@@austinlincoln3414 Ive never heard a historian nor a scientist say that facts are "very likely." The ones i have talked to say why they believe such and such to be true. I personally have never had a teacher or professor use that phrase. Its very likely that I am a douche, but you should still want proof! lol 😆
@@austinlincoln3414 huh? Maybe elaborate a little that’s quite a vague blanket statement..
With reference to Habermas, et al; It is impossible to get anyone to understand anything if their income depends on not understanding it.
Are you suggesting that they are simply lying for the $$$?
@@furious32ninja Yes, a lot of them are. They're con men. A lot of these apologists are really sharp.... but they make blatant mistakes in their arguments in order to support their position. Maybe it's just cognitive dissonance. But I think it's more likely that it's all an act. They don't really believe. They make money selling their books. Plus they have a lot of power and followers. They're not going to give up their $$$.
Love you
Why are apologists the only people I've ever heard use evidences as the plural of evidence? Why do they all not know basic english? I would get if it were 1 or two. I would get it if it was many people from many different fields talking about many different subjects. But this one word being recycled only by people from one field (a field that basically has a stated premise of grifting people) confuses me and makes me think something is up. I get what you mean by not liking the word
The words "evidences" and "evolutionists" tend to cause me to be very skeptical now. It doesn't only come from apologists but the ratio is overwhelming in my experience.
@@MichaelDeHaven I'm not trying to say that it is in fact only apologists who use it. I was just speaking from my experience. If I ever had heard it in person with someone I'm sure I wouldn't have been able to control my facal expression.
Apologists are (generally) talking to people with little to no scientific education and using evidences sounds like more than evidence to someone who doesn't know that evidence in an uncounted noun. They are basically relying on their audience being ignorant and unquestioning.
And this all assumes that Jesus even existed, which is not near as concrete as many think.
Which is one of my favorite things to point out to Christians. Watching them sputter and rage about a "fact" that they "know" is true (that Jesus existed) but can't actually demonstrate in any concrete way is always extremely entertaining. All the vast majority of them can do is repeat the standard talking points like "there's more evidence for Jesus than Caesar" or "all scholars agree" which fall apart so amazingly easily. Watching their brains turn off in an attempt to prevent the cognitive dissonance is quite fun... I just wish they'd turn it back on more often and actually examine their beliefs honestly instead of zoning out or storming off.
@@timeshark8727 I wasn't aware that Jesus wrote a book with his own hands... Caius Iulius Caesar has left us 3 or 4 as far as i remember... De bello Gallico the most well known one to this day and bane of any latin student of the last few hundred years :D We also have a MONTH named for him by his successor and avid biography writer Caesar Augustus/Octavianus and a calendar system. We have seen wars happen (measured by the shift in occupation of territory and money flowing into Rome for building projects etc... We have Romans in Britain for almost 500 years.
They have a little bit more luck with Alexander the Great, but not much more, cause he too left dozens of cities and other places behind that carry his name, ended up on coins etc and founded three big dynasties ruling the remnants of his empire for centuries...
The only thing of lasting importance that speaks of Jesus existence is the CHURCH. Which heavily edited and beautified its own history... with THAT measuring staff Joseph Smith HAS met hte Angel Moroni and we should any day now find traces of historical jews in North America 1500 years ago ;) Even worse, we KNOW the new testament is full of references to the weird prophecy beliefs of the messianic jewish cults... which we can SHOW did exist. The image of our evidence wouldn't be very different for an actual breathing Jesus that was then heavily rewritten to fit as many "bible prophecies" as they could force him into as compared to a non existent or "spiritual" Jesus that came from the beginning only in form of bible prophecy verses and narrative... How would you know which is which?
💚 *quality content* 💚
When faith meets FACTS!
Hallucinations?! How about flat out lying? That’s the most logical explanation.
"My god is the one true god" said every religion we have ever had.
But if you say that its all the same god. You have other issues. Like that god having such extremely poor communication skills.
That it led too this many god beliefs being considered the one truth to explain our reality.
Religion is just a collection of poorly thought out personality cults.
Yeah the hallucination theory was something I did consider.
I hear where you are all coming from with this stuff - but, I’m not going to stop going to the church covered dish meals and miss out on Mrs. McGillicuddy's apple crisp with buttered & browned graham cracker crumb topping… Her tuna casserole is pretty good also… This stuff is REAL and you can BELIEVE (and eat) it…
The living members of the Heavens Gate cult reported the successful uploading to the mothership the day the other members killed themselves. It didn't take decades for a rumor to turn into a "fact"; it was reported immediately. In the unlikely case that this cult becomes successful in the future, I guess we must all believe it really happened because the true believers said it happened, especially since it was eyewitness testimonial.
If we had more minimal fact historians, we could fit all of the worlds history in one neat book ...
; )
When the first Christian pilgrims arrived in Jerusalem they were shocked to find that nobody knew where Jesus's tomb had been.
The main problem with Habermas' "minimal facts" is that they aren't facts. That rather undermines his whole argument.
You know how they are it is a make belief. Unicorns exist in the belief of Habermas and so fictional stories are for him really imagined.
Why do Young Earth Creationists insist on saying “evidences” when the plural of evidence is... evidence. Evidences is a verb such as, science evidences the fact of a 4.5 billion year old Earth.
Or at least “pieces of evidence”.
In academia, you _do_ get certain words with that form of plural, especially if talking about nested multitudes. Example: several pieces of evidence for this, and several pieces of evidence for that: evidences for this and that. Another example would be fish/fishes. Talking about individuals of one species you would write fish. Talking about individuals of several species, you can write fishes.
@@smaakjeks In YEC , when speaking of scientific evidence you say, “Look at all these points of evidence.” When speaking of evidence you pull out of your butt you say, “Looky here at all dese evidences.”
@@tylerwest719 They prefer to be called Cdesign proponentsists
Here is my minimal facts argument against the resurrection:
Fact 1: Jesus is nowhere to be found
Therefore, Jesus did not rise from the dead. Done.
1- Nowhere to be found because His body was not in the tomb because He rose from the dead. Over 500 people saw Him alive over the course of 40 days.
@@Justas399 It's a physical resurrected body, placing that body physically back into the 3D space of Earth? Since you're referencing 1 Corinthians 15 with the 500 people thing, Paul later explains in that chapter that resurrected bodies are imperishable. Therefore, Jesus should still be here walking among us, meeting with people, going on world press tours, etc. Why not? He's physically resurrected with a physical yet imperishable body. Why isn't he here? Oh, but he ascended into Heaven. So that means his physical body literally lifted up and went into the sky? Are we to believe that Jesus is now in orbit around the Earth? The whole story doesn't make a lick of sense and that's what I mean when I say Jesus is nowhere to be found.
@@kdietz65 The reason that Christ is not walking among us now physically is because He ascended to heaven. He is not in orbit but in a different "dimension" of existence. Even after His ascension He appeared at times to some of His apostles. Paul and John come to mind.
@@Justas399 That kind of strained justification is a huge red flag and how we can know that it is almost certainly false.
@@kdietz65 how does that follow?
It would be cool if we could, somehow, get our opponents on the issue to step back and examine their basic most reasons why they personally feel the way they do; why they propose such strange occurrences and hold such unreasonable positions.
We'd need one or more psychologists in the mix.
Superior job on that video
Hmm, it looks like "the evidence that changed a generation of scholars" changed them into a generation of smug, dishonest straw-grabbers..
Wouldn't it be straw-graspers though? 🤔
@@user-fj6kk1vo8n It's a qualitative thing. Too subtle, huh? 🤔
I can't remember the book right off, but several years back I read a book by a guy who had toured several cemeteries. He talked about there being two different 'tomb of Christ"s in Jerusalem.
I would go find the book so I coukd properly cite it, but it was on a lower shelf when my house flooded about 3 years ago.
Theres multiple claimed tombs of Jesus Christ. Hell there's even claimed tombs in Japan and India.
The one line from Gary Habermas that I find most offensive comes at 18:51 - "They gave he and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship." I'm sure he wouldn't say "They gave he the right hand of fellowship," but somehow, because Barnabas is included in the handshake, the correct "him" becomes the woefully incorrect "he." That's a common error among people who don't have a strong grasp of grammar but are anxious to sound "correct." And it's a sign of sloppy thinking.
Good video :) I do find it somewhat interesting that there seems to be this requirement for religous apologists to shoehorn miracles into events when mundane explanations are perfectly serviceable.
Even when I was a Deist I thought that any "god" that did decide to interact with its creation likely would use naturalistic means to do so, since it would be the easiest way to make an event occur (otherwise why "create" causality in the first place if just wishing events into existence is easier, if that makes sense)
He should have just stopped after he said, "I will give no historical fact..."
11:15-11:21 That one Avatar lady in the movie had a pretty decent definition of the term.
The story of Uganda martyrs: what does it tell us about group hallucination?
Well in 1885 -7 a group of 23 Anglican and 22 Roman Catholic were burnt alive while singing and claiming to be holding hands with jesus. Today thousands of pilgrims walk miles from all over east Africa to come and visit the shrine in a place called Namugongo. It gets better, exhaustion from walking long distances and in the heat of the unforgiving African sun, many of them claim to see vision of jesus and the martyrs loitering about.
By the way if christian apologists ever wish to populate the list of those who were willing to die for their beliefs, then they should add these 45 young men because at the moment they only have two (Simon and Paul). Good enough these 45 actually did not recant despite the fact that the King of Buganda had offered to let them go.
Me too.. 11mins earliest for me ever