The Jesus Hoax with Dr. David Skrbina
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 июл 2024
- Visit MythVision Website: mythvisionpodcast.com/
Email for MythVision: mythvisionpodcast@gmail.com
GET RECOMMENDED BOOKS HERE: 👉 amzn.to/35FqNYf
Become a MythVision Patreon: / mythvision
MythVision Podcast Paypal: www.paypal.me/dereklambert7
Cashapp: $rewiredaddiction
Venmo: @Derek-Lambert-9
www.venmo.com/Derek-Lambert-9
MYTHVISION FACEBOOK PAGE:
/ mythvision
MYTHVISION FACEBOOK GROUP:
/ thewaterboyzradio
Twitter: @DerekPodcast (Derek Lambert MythVision)
Instagram: dereklambert_7
==============================================================================
Dr. David Skrbina discusses his research on Jesus being a Hoax. Is Jesus a hoax or Lie? Did the authors purposefully write lies down with the intention of tricking people? Watch this episode to hear this theory.
David Skrbina websites:
Jesus hoax.com
Davidskrbina.com
Time-stamps:
0:00: Introduction
3:34: What separates Dr. Skrbina from other liberal scholars
12:43: Dr. Skrbina’s basic argument
18:38: The first problem: lack of evidence
24:21: The second problem: chronology
27:33: The historical context of Jesus’ story, and Paul’s role
33:17: More on Dr. Skrbina’s basic argument
41:59: Is Paul’s Jesus an enhanced view of James’ and Peter’s Jesus?
44:20: Could Paul have wanted to hijack an already existing Christian movement?
46:45: Paul’s audience: slaves and non-Romans?
48:34: On the Roman Provenance theory
50:48: Paul’s reasons: not only political but also financial?
55:07: “Paul’s pushing a story to the masses that he does not believe”
57:56: Allusions to the Romans in Paul’s letters
1:01:14: Children of Devil = Children of Rome?
1:03:34: How did the letters were adopted by Rome?
1:05:47: What convinces Dr. Skrbina that a historical Jesus existed
1:07:05: Paul using stories about a historical Jesus?
1:08:20: What makes Dr. Skrbina’s different from Dr. Ehrman’s position?
#jesushoax #ApostlePaul #Mythvision
Paul saying I'm not lying always gets me.
Yup. When you see someone consistently making this statement, it's usually because they have been busted lying. In my PoliSci class, a professor once showed us a collation of interviews by President Richard Nixon. After it was done, the professor asked us what we learned. My response was, "He's always saying he's innocent and not a crook."
I absolutely agree - why does he need to constantly say this and why were these letters emphasised?
Trump, MTG, Boebert, George Santos all say the same thing. Lying is what got them where they are today.
@@joecurran2811 Brainwashing/"Educating" the "Mass"... IS!
@@benjalucian1515 simple solution! :)
Raise them all from the dead and put them on a lie detector, or the Scientology e-meter (really hard to fool, unlike the Police lie detector!) and that will verify if he was a liar or telling the truth! :)
He spent the first 20% of this session decrying amateur contributors without doctorates etc and then other scholars like Erhman. I am reminded of a pertinent saying "Blowing out someone else's candle won't make yours burn any brighter". Everything after that, ironically, was pure opinion.
Thanks, Myth-schism :) Interesting talk! :)
The guy's a liar,period.
While education and intelligence may indeed be mutually enhansive, they are not the same thing.
That's humanism, many confuse it.
Yes he presents no evidence he's just attacking the characters of those who present an argument in which he doesn't believe.
are u on apple podcast? i dont seem to be able to find u there ~
I could not get past 12 minutes into this episode, because your guest would not start discussing what he brings to table, just telling us why we should not accept everyone else’s findings.
i just want EVIDENCE for ALL these "findings", Really backed up, so that i can create an understanding of my own. But in "these days" EVERYONE is an expert as it seems. "- Beware the False Prophets" is a good warning that is more relevant today than Ever really. I personally don't believe that the Bible today is even close to a Fraction of what is the "Truth"(Actual history), but rather mostly mistranslated EVERY time they made a New version and also massively fabricated as soon as the Catholic church got their "game going". If NOT why does NOT the Vatican allow us to get into their MASSIVE archives and Carbon-Date(C-14) ALL their "Evidence" so that we can know how old it is to start with?. I don't even believe that the Vatican are truly "Religious" anymore, but rather more of a Business of sorts.Yes I am Cynical, a conspiracist and terribly fed up with "other people"(with apparent LOW moral) telling us what to do and how to behave just for the sake of it. If you learn TRUE Loving kindness(Compassion), Altruism and tolerance YOU are good to go and have already Outsmarted the whole Church as they can't really teach you anything anymore. Cheers
Thank ya!
This is why we tell fairy tales to children to keep them secure and feel safe.😍
works both ways.
Even when all "abrahamic faiths" get exposed as fake, God won't cease to exist.
You do realize yogis have a process to attain God realization?
Fairytales of old did the opposite they terrified children.
Yehova, there's no man in the sky, hon. Wakey wakey.
And safety breeds docile animals which is more than likely the goal of parents and ruling officials.....
All proceeds from this episode go to helping Dr. Skrbina purchase an extra vowel.
Good idea! Let a younger Vanna White turn that vowel in a skimpy dress.
Or Bosch mug
The R is a vowel in Czech and Serbo-Croatian lol I've said the same thing before I learned a little bit of those languages
He is No Sherlock Holmes ~~maybe he is just trying to cash in on a book Dr Watson
@@johnniebee4328that's right. Serbia isn't even spelled with an "e" in the actual language! ☺
Paul initially targeted early Christians with persecution, but realizing he couldn't eliminate them all, he took a different approach. He used a mixture of false information and Pagan beliefs to divert their faith from God, aiming to distance them from Jesus's message and keeping Jews from accepting it. Despite the Jews not embracing Jesus and Pagans maintaining their own beliefs, the question remains: Why did Paul orchestrate these actions? And why have various Christian-related atrocities been committed over time? Answering this question is crucial for the sake of understanding why Paul's actions led to these issues.
Paul went to Jerusalem and compared what he was teaching with what the disciples were teaching. They all agreed Paul was teaching the same gospel as they were. The one that Jesus gave them. The same Jesus warned me of a future situation in my life with a starkly clear waking vision. The event occurred a year later and the vision had crosses glowing in the windows of the restaurant where this event happened. Even the place where I finally sat was set out in this scene. So your assertions that Jesus never existed and that Paul corrupted the gospels are pure horse shit. Jesus lives now, he was crucified and had to be resurrected and attain His throne in heaven for Him to be able to send a messenger to me with this and other messages throughout my life.
Listening to this again. The image that popped into my mind was the scene from Life of Brian where John Cleese's character asked the question, "so what have the Romans ever done for us?" Hilarious!
Blessed are the cheesemakers.
I couldn't stop thinking of Life of Brian throughout this entire video.
Adam and Eve were supposed to be the first humans, they had two sons, Cain and Abel--who did the sons mate with? Their Mother was the only female in the myth!
@@wandaharris4260 Adam and Eve had more kids after Cain, Abel and Seth according to Genesis. Its all fantasy of course but yeah according to the books they had more sons and daughters after Seth.
Thank ýou
I am trying to suspend judgment on this guy, but I don't really care for the PhD waving (which isn't a PhD in history, theology, ancient Greek, etc.) and it seems to me the last thing you can evaluate in terms of the existence of Jesus (divine or not) is the motive for one advancing the existence of Jesus.
Well good thing we have your opinion! Gosh, now I can sleep tonight
@@willowgrey989 what a meaningful comment!
@@julianjanssen5499 just like yours
@@willowgrey989 Maybe you didn't read the second half of my (admittedly rather long) sentence.
Both Richard Carrier and Robert Price have PhDs in related fields. Dr. Price has two! And this guy has the nerve to diss theirs.
15+ minutes in and this guy continues to wag his lips at us about how awesome he is compared to Bart Ehrman? I’m sorry, im not interested in opinions. 5 years ago, at my rock bottom, I stumbled upon one of Ehrman’s books and my life changed immediately! Why? Because I was raised on opinions- be it my evangelical mother, preachers or Christian school teachers, from masturbation to abortion, they all had one. And it involved being “Right”. This guy sounds just like them. Yes, at my bottom, homeless and late stage alcoholic, I read Bart’s book and you know what it did? Provided stats and facts. Allowed me to have the power of Choice for the first time ever. At 43 I left Christianity and have never looked back. I don’t need another mans opinion. I need facts, just the facts. Thank you for your show. I’ll stick with supporting Dr Bart Ehrman. Oh and in case you were wondering- 5 years clean and sober and a life beyond my wildest dreams.
Me too. I learned a lot reading the Bart man. He's not a guy that can be so easily dismissed. And congratulations C B. That is one hell of an accomplishment! God bless you.
Armchair Philosopher thx AP.
So that's YOU... doesn't work that way for everyone. Wish I could have picked up a book like a magic wand, but magic isn't real either so....
@First Last you should be watching a video about that then. Hard to convert an atheist, save your breath please please please
Ummm, just who did ***YOU*** want to talk???? I, too, am not interested in opinions...more precisely-----YOURS!
Thanks! I'm working my way through the back catalog.
Thank you again my friend! I'm glad you're enjoying this work.
I get the feeling that early Christians wanted to emphasize to the Romans that they were not rebellious like those troublesome Zealots. Consider the famous phrase "render unto Caesar".
Starts at 13:00, after he dogs everyone for 12 minutes about not being Basicly "really" scholarly or qualified,, including even Richard Carrier,,,
He is No Sherlock Holmes ~~maybe he is just trying to cash in on a book Dr Watson
He doesn't seem to have any background in religious studies, archeology or really anything that prepares him to write about the question of Jesus. His writing spans a variety of very deep subjects. I'm always a bit suspicious when a scholar flits from field to field. That may be why he attacks scholars for being too cautious. He isn't cautious at all and his argument that the Jesus movement was a subtle conspiracy against Rome is based on almost nothing.
@@bartgrossman9361 Like the GOP claims Black Life Matters does? I know this video was posted before George Floyd got killed, but the arguments somehow came from the same box.
@@bartgrossman9361 funny how the "scholars" lol in religious studies cant come up with BASIC highschool level EVIDENCE of jesus. Cauase there isnt any
Yeah, he is clearly not familiar with carriers work beyond his recent book titles. I doubt he has even read those. He sounds like a politician with no substance to sell.
Skrbina doesn't seem to understand the reason behind Carrier's use of Bayes' theorem. In using Bayes' theorem, Carrier attempts to base the discussion of Jesus' existence on rational likelihood, rather than on faith. He's not doing it because he enjoys mathematics - which is how David seems to interpret it.
And just why would bayes theorem be rational??
@@raysalmon6566 The problem is that if a historian says "this is unlikely" it's highly relevant to the conclusion just how unlikely we're talking and how the argument is structured and so fort. Carriers methodology is an attempt to formalise the logic used for coming to historical conclusions in a way which highlights just how different probabilities interact to influence the probability of the conclusion. The fact of the matter is that probability is already the foundation of any historical argumentation and formalising this to avoid common mental traps is crucial imo even if historians don't like it. The fact of the matter is that the human brain is terrible at statistics when using "common sense" and so while many historians feel that they don't need to use statistics to evaluate how their probabilistic arguments flow to a final conclusion I think that they are wrong and that they should take Carrier seriously. As to whether or not his particular approach is the correct one you'd have to ask a statistician but Carrier has sound arguments for using the methodology he uses.
@@raysalmon6566 The whole point of the method is to say "We have this evidence" how can we model it, so it doesn't just become a mattter of "I feel this is more likely". The method IS valid. The premises and arguments you feed into it might not be, but that has nothing to do with the method.
@@nikolajrasmussen9573
That really is not historical methodology works
I don’t think Skrbina does not understand the reason why Carrier uses Bayes. What Skrbina says that it is very difficult to apply Bayes in an historical study and he is not wrong about it
I generally hit the ‘X’ button when I see the moderator wearing a backward baseball cap
Did this discussion ever happen the discussion that you proposed?
Let me get this straight. Paul preached against Rome, yet the Romans allowed him to spread his message *within the city itself for two whole years* while living in his own private rented house. Something's not right here. 🤔
My thoughts too Ed.
There's no actual evidence Paul went to Italy or Rome, the claim originates from a small obscure parish church in the south of Italy. Just the same as about a thousand churches across Europe claim to have the teeth of Jesus
Paul did not preach against Rome He preached Chist.
Sorry. The entire Bible is a hoax and all religions are scams. However, there's advice and principles in the Bible that are beneficial to heed. Jesus is a heroic figure, perhaps more a legend than a reality, who's a good example for mentally sound people who don't go overboard.
To the Romans he's making an "opiate of the masses" kind of argument. He's telling Rome that his sect will help keep the underclass quiet while focused on otherworldly nonsense.
I was surprised the video didn't include an ad for whatever liquor Dr. Skrbina is drinking.
So Jesus walks into a bar, orders a glass of water, turns it into wine. The bartender charges him for the wine, so Jesus turns it back into water.
I don't see any clues that he is drinking. Maybe the florid skin is high blood pressure
@@jewellevy It's the way he sips from a particular style of drinking glass.
Some people can't stand to be told the guy they pray to wasn't God
@@jewellevy
It's obvious, don't you see it's a mug of beer? 🍺
Sadly, look how many well intentioned people were denied access to their own spiritual connections based on truth and maybe even deprived of consciousness immortality due to the power grab and greed of our fellow mankind
No virgin birth
No fall of man
No sacrifice on the cross
Each responsible for their own lives - words and deeds
Restored the altered covenant standards to what they were to start with
Absolutely
@bettygreathouse4999 you are delusional
Crist said let "no man" deceive you but do consider >> Romans 3:7 KJV ( For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my Lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? ) - Paul the Apostle 😮
@@RalphSmith-cj5he Paul the deceiver
Who are the liars and decievers? This guy _just said_ at 32:00... "Jesus was a jewish rabbi who came to save the world from the evil forces, which were the Romans at the time..." No, that isn't what happend. Jesus' enemies were the Pharisees and Scribes... you see how bias works?
For so much preemptive trashing of Dr. Carrier and Dr. Price and the importance of his distinct education.. his argument is so weak. If this is the argument and evidence you can achieve by being a PhD and current professor- I’ll pass. Derek handled this so well and wouldn’t let anyone talk trash about all of our favorite, amazing “grandpa Price”.
It's like he didn't really read the other guys stuff. When he states "Carrier finds no basis for a historical Jesus, I would say 1/3 chance of Jesus being a real guy is some kind of basis.
Skrbina seriously accused Dr. Price of being in it for the money? Not only is that insulting, it just doesn't make any sense.
It makes absolute sense.
Yeah it does make sense... is you iq 65?
It definitely makes sense 🤦♀️
Skrbina's accusation sounds a bit like a projection Trump would be jealous of.
It doesn't make sense because he doesn't make a lot of money. Yet he sticks with it through the decades.
Back then there were all kinds of self proclaimed prophets
I am reminded of Trent Reznor's lyrics in the song "Head like a hole", when discussing fundamental Christianity. "God money, I'll do anything for you." God money, just tell me what you want me to." "God money, nail me up against the wall." "God money, don't want everything he wants it all, etc, etc. 'Gods money not looking for the cure." Gods money not concerned about the sick among the pure." "God money, let's go dancing on the back of the bruised." "God money's not one to choose." Seems apt.
Actually the elephant in the room that overpowers everything is the fact that there was a massive religious power vacuum that occurred when Rome destroyed the Jewish world, there became this obvious religious power vacuum that nobody mentions or talks about in the context that I'm expressing it right now it was a massive power vacuum in the world of religion and that made it very easy for Christianity to come along
😇Repent? No you won't ! Therefore our Holy of holies shall humble you, for you have stolen our Earth and you persist in your madness. Repair His People and He may show you mercy. Look up! There is your just recompense arriving in Glory for the salvation of our souls.
His best evidence Jesus existed is his unproven theory that this kernel of truth is needed for Pauls lie. His best evidence is his own reasoning. This guy calls himself a scholar and philosopher, but can’t see how circular this is 🤯
He calls himself a scholar because he IS a scholar. He's got multiple phd's for goodness sake!
@@hardywatkins7737 no shit! So he definitely should know what circular reasoning is.
Despite all his qualifications, you do not need a PhD, to speculate as heavily as this guy does. This is in the category of "Ancient Aliens".
It was a giant suicide pact! They all wanted to die for preaching Christ.
I’ve never heard such RIDICULOUS REACHING. Almost embarrassed for him.
A horrible on going crime to humanity actually
Indeed, a horrible crime done to believers.
The main problem I have is when he is hypothesizing about Paul’s motivation for fabricating the story and describing the Jesus character. He is making the mistake that many others make in lumping the Pauline epistles in with the Gospels. The Jesus he describes is not the one depicted in the later Gospels and would not easily support his Pauline motive hypothesis. Whatever Paul’s motives were the writers of Gospels clearly had other motives. Paul might have wanted to create propaganda against Roman authority but whoever wrote the Gospels did not.
Do you know where I can get more info on the Jesus of the Pauline epistles being a differnt Jesus to the Gospels? I'm just getting into looking at the Bible closer and picking it apart.
@@Void-Realm jesus saying "do not think that I've come to abolish the laws..." and Paul saying fuck the laws!!! 🙄🙄🙄
We can all do miracles and are all the son of god. The son of god is the light in us that has to be resurrected to the crown chakra. Many will fail as a matter most will fail. The story is a conception of the spirits journey back to Godhood. We will keep dying and paying for sun until we resurrect off the wheel of time unto immortality
Having read the New Testament , since I was a child into adulthood for many years, I have no doubt that Christianity , as we know it today , is the biggest and the most successful scam ever devised by some very powerful men to 1) control the masses, 2) maintain their power and 3) enrich themselves.
@@Void-Realm Jesus said to follow Jewish Law. Paul said that having faith in Jesus is more important.
Jesus said not to worry about tomorrow. Paul said there was dignity in work, and was against idleness.
The Gospels focused more on Jesus' teachings and parables. Paul focused more on what Jesus' death meant.
Christians follow Paul, not Jesus. Edit: Paul also invented the term "Jesus Christ" instead of saying "Jesus the Christ".
David: you make good compelling arguments on merit. I advise against criticizing others based on degrees and arguments from authority. It’s a spurious way of arguing. Your arguments would be good or not good based on be quality of your ideas and rhetoric, nothing more or less. In my experience degrees only indicate interests, at most, not competence, even at researching and writing.
Especially since he clearly hasn't taken the time to actually look into Richard Carrier's background.
Exactly! This is the typical argument from authority fallacy. "Well so and so is not qualified to make an argument because they haven't done x, y, z like "I" have." He should just stick to the arguments and where he feels they are valid or not.
Agreed, David, please make an apology otherwise I will not buy nor read your book. A touch of arrogance has to be mellowed with some humility.
"how is your view different?" "The others, they're just one-trick ponies in the Jesus business."
Ah. An intellectual hater. Got it. Next time someone in your family is ill, just take them to someone "with an interest' in medicine. Don't worry if they're licensed or degreed.
The author is to be admired for having the courage to open his mouth.
Paul had a guilty complex after his near death vision he got and after prosecuting Stephen. That was his motivation and driving force at first.
The true religious Believers believe in the word faith, that's like taking the easy way out then you don't have to question anything when you have it takes all their fears away of the unanswered questions.
Religion is inevitably based on Faith. This is why it's a mistake for believers to debate sceptics and atheists: reason isn't their strong suit. They should celebrate their Faith and abandon attempts to prove the impossible.
Wrong, Faith is the minimum requirement, the currency of Heaven and its directly tied to loyalty. Its not a cop out, but rather the entry way
@@thevulture5750 "Ignorance" does not have the same meaning as "I don't know", yet you are equating the two terms. "Ignorant " is a pejorative word meaning that someone is generally uninformed or uneducated. You think that by substituting one expression for the other you can prove that the agnostic is uninformed and uneducated, but all you've done is commit another logical fallacy.
@@thevulture5750 I think you will find that the word generally has a demeaning connotation, and I think that's how you meant it.
@@thevulture5750 What I would say is that anything is possible, no matter how unlikely. I cannot definitively say that one-eyed flying purple people-eaters don't exist on Mars, but I think it's extremely unlikely. I think the same about the existence of God, by which I mean the traditional Judeo-Christian God, as I assume that's what we're talking about. And I'm not saying it's a toss-up whether he's there or not. I think the likelihood of his existence is heavily weighted against him. Anything is possible, but suppositions for which there's no evidence are unlikely to be true. Revelation is not evidence. Prime mover arguments are not evidence. There simply is no evidence. All believers have is Faith, a fact which the Church has always loudly proclaimed. And that's fine, if you want to believe, but Faith is not Reason.
Skrbina is a total nobody which considers himself so important. Comparing himself to Ehrman Price and Carrier is an embarassment for such a dim light he is.
And who the fuck are you? NOBODY
@@willowgrey989 So are you and I
Academics and other commentators like to come up with a thesis. They can't just say "We don't know".
That's how we move forward as a society. Everything starts as a theory
To be honest , this one video struck me the hardest and I can't stop coming back to this months after. Has it actually been a year since it was posted ?? Anyway there is something soo simple and yet so profound about this conversation and yet so many missing pieces still. The topic of this discussion has always been in the back of my mind. "WHY"
have you seen the t shaped megaliths at gobleki tepe??? i think jesus was a serpent god
@@northstarwhiterhino5861 hmm tell me more. The serpent is linked and used in many circles with a cross. Representing a blood line
His dates are all wrong. Search Askcliffe you'll get your answers there.
Genesis 3:22 i think thats why they/we have the serpent bloodline....but should not worship the beast. The mark of the beast of the field.....not saying god didnt send him but to worship him is directly disobeying the first 2 commandments...and the gospel disobeys the rest
@@northstarwhiterhino5861 Genesis 3:22 is about Adam and Eve opening the curses the world we live today. Being deceived by the serpent. Not a serpent bloodline.
It’s always interesting to hear a different take on the origins of Christianity. I think he slightly misrepresented Dr Carrier though. He’s not just in the “Jesus game”. He writes on other aspects of history and philosophy.
origins of Christianity ???
saying that gives away the farm
bv14 john 18:37"You are a king, then!" said Pilate.
Jesus answered, "You say that I am a king. In fact, the reason
I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth.
Everyone on the side of truth listens to me."
@@raysalmon6566 John the Baptist knew who Jesus the Messiah was. He called Him the "Lamb of God which takes away the sin of the world." John 1: 29.
@@louisaccardi2268 agree, however Jesus as human did not stand out. the Pharasees were always looking for him but he blended in with the crowd
[357]Briony Sherrell@ray salmon Sure but do you have any evidence that that is true? And using the bible as evidence for the bible doesn't work. That's like me saying "I saw a purple donkey. The evidence that I did is this peice of paper I wrote it down on." t9Jehan Desains Please prove the existence of God, using the scientific method. Thanks. t9
"Origins of Christianity", Revelation 2:6-15,20-23; 3 in the "Synagogue of Satan"(v13) from the Romans who wanted to control this Jews by controlling the Jewish Religion=modern Constantinian Roman Catholicism of Vatican I; Herod(Edom-Kings of Judea, Idumea and Samaria)=modern Charismatic Catholicism of Vatican II, which controls Charismatic prosperity glossolalic pentecostal "prophetic" protestant churches; and the the Apostate Sanhedrin of Jerusalem (Ephraim Samaria who were against Judeans)-the Bishops like Nikos Bishop of Laodicea-modern Orthodoxy & Coptic church controlling Mainstream Protetantism. These are the MAIN powers behind the RISE of the "Synagogue"-full of "Jews who are nevertheless NOT Jews(Yehudim=Judeans)" but they made up "Christianity"-(Christ=a Greek anointed "saviour") SUPPLANTING the Apostolic-Discipleship church originated by Messiah the Prince of the JUDEAN BEREANS(1 Thess 2:14-17).
This NEW "Jew-ISH" religion was distinctly different from the JUDEAN APOSTOLIC Church because, it believed in the PAGAN doctrine of SALVATION by "sacrifice" of a human or a Deity "for the SALVATION of the people, the nation and the world"(John 11:47-50=Nah 1:11) This SALVATION by "sacrifice" was called the "Nicolaitan doctrine" that became a STUMBLING BLOCK in the Apostolic church which was thereby DERAILED permanently. NICOLAITANISM is probably the REASON why Judaism RIGHTLY REJECTED this "Christ" who brings SALVATION by a MURDEROUS "sacrifice" is NOT their MESSIAH the PRINCE, so they could not be dragged into this Constantinian-Herodian-Sanhedrin(Ephraim-Samaria and apostates in Judah)
So Christianity is basically the "Synagogue of Satan"that preached SALVATION by the murderous "sacrificial" murder of the Innocent and blamess to JUSTIFY the wicked many!-which is how the CRUCIFIXION MURDER was SANITIZED as "an ordained 'sacrifice' for the people, nation and world" cloaking the evil of murder in a garment of "salvation" narrative! which was purely how the pagans saw their sacrifices, which were offered to "apppease the ANGRY gods!" BUT for the Jews, this "sacrifice" was the PURE WHINE(angry, bitter, murmuring) OF BABYLON(EPhraim-Samaria and the Pagan "Jezebels" against the MostHigh) where they question the responsibility for sin and claim a in Romans 5 that if SIN entered the universe thru ONE MAN, then logically SIN should be REMOVED by the DEATH of ONE MAN!-hence the MURDER of ONE RIGHTEOUS MAN was justified as THE NECESSARY SACRIFICE of ONE to JUSTIFY all others!...the problem of the doctrine of "ORIGINAL SIN"-its origins, and therefore WHO should BEAR RESPONSIBILITY for SIN and therefore responsible for RECEIVING THE PENALTY of THAT SIN. For the Jews this man considered Most Holy in Israel provided them with the PERFECT "sacrifice"!
@@louisaccardi2268 do we have any writings from John the Baptist?
The good Doctor would be more credible if he didn't the first 12 to 15 minutes, dismissing everyone who disagrees with him. If he's sure of his position, he doesn't need to insult, or downplay anyone to add credibility to him
I'm kinda of glad he did that actually. The point of him doing that wasn't a baseless attack or straw-man but it was a way to explain why these others don't have the freedom to talk or write about Christianity completely due to their positions at Universities or personal reasons. Since they are not "attacks" on these people but rather an explanation why we don't have a complete picture it helps me to understand him and his motives better. I appreciate it.
@Deep.Purple cutting off someone's head doesn't make you any taller. Besides, his comments certainly don't apply to Carrier or Price or Miller.
It's likely the other scholars don't go there because examining motive is sheer speculation.
@@davidlenett8808 Not to mention Atwill, who not only ASKS the question "why", but goes to great lengths to try to answer the question.
I disagree. Pointing out what sets him apart is not insulting the people he was ASKED to comment on SPECIFICALLY BY NAME ASKED TO COMMENT ON. And all he did was saying they were not scholars mostly and other biases they may have. Such as having to be politically correct and pander to the media which is real.
I think he was just pointing out that Ehrman, Price, etc. have already put forth some of the same views that he has - except that he believes Jesus was a complete hoax, and the question of WHY the hoax started has not been sufficiently explored, even by Price.
Not saying I agree or disagree.
I’m not a scholar but I have followed several of these brilliant NT scholars you’ve had on your show. I love it, because I have known since I was a kid that this had to be a fictional story. In my mind though, I feel that maybe it was someone like Philo of Alexandria, who was a proud Greco-Roman Hellenized Jew living in Alexandria at the times, that composed these fictional stories and based it off of the first century failed messianic movements. Lots of the characters sound familiarly like the characters in the messianic movements. The dates of 6CE & 66CE are crucial dates in that in 6CE the Census of Quirinius birthed the initial revolt, the virgin birth of Jesus being symbolism (the name Mary literally translates to ‘rebellion’) for the movement and fourth philosophy that led to the First Jewish-Roman War of 66CE, which was the same year Halley’s Comet was seen in the skies. One of the accounts by Roman historian Cassius Dio depicts Armenian King Tiridates, with magis, traveling to Rome following a celestial body. The historical account sounds somewhat identical to the nativity story of the magi following a star to meet a king. The death of the messianic movements evolved into a continuation of the movement but through a spiritual resurrection ideology. It seems as though that the allegorical stories were taken out of context and a new Christian movement evolved into one where they believed the stories to be literal truth rather than allegory.
I'm just waiting for Santa Claus Hoax next I told my son the truth when he was nine..He asked and I couldn't lie to him
Fatima, Portugal destroys all biased claims against christianity
Why? Becouse God can talk for himself.
@johnthompson9513 Well, you do know that Nicholas of Myra is the inspiration for good Ole St. Nick! He was an actual person, so on a sense, Santa is real!
You can look it up. I always got a kick out of the fact that he was a Bishop, so he wore a red miter on his head. Thus, the red Santa Hat! I'm not so sure about the jolly appearance, but some legends say Nick had a jovial laugh!
@@marydonahue1 legends
OK then? How many people would allow Lions to eat them in the Roman coliseum If the story of Jesus was no better than a Superman comic book! Duh!
In the near-death experience many people have said that they have been in the presence of Jesus.
How do you explain that?
Many near death experiences have had a variety of encounters. Varying from family members, angels, aliens, demons, etc.
Even beings from other cultures have been described in perfect detail, without any previous knowledge of them in life.
My guess is that our spirit/soul is greeted with a guide that our consciousness is either projecting out for coping to the change or the guide is choosing an image suitable for getting the message across.
For those of you old enough, David’s explanation reminds me of the M*A*S*H episode “Captain Tuttle” where they made him up based on a number of other people.
Do you mean a composite figure?
@@kuljim2602 Sure. Take the best of a number of people, add in some enhancements, and you create the preverbal “too good to be true” character. Since it was many decades before there were any books written about him, most of it would have been made up.
Did they? I don't recall them making him from another of other people, but the gave him a bunch of noble attributes, until his his untimely death trying to save someone and jumping from a helicopter.
@@Cheepchipsable "There's a little bit of Capt. Tuttle in all of us. In fact, you might say that all of us together made up Tuttle." (if I remember the line correctly).
Dr. Bob's favourite phrase is 'We'll never know'. In that he's almost certainly right.
But that doesn't sell books. You're tempted to come up with solutions which cover everything where none is possible.
Careers and bookdeals demand answers to things that are probably
unanswerable.
Stupid phrase. No way to know whether we'll ever know ...til we know.
31:30 how could Paul make up the story when he was well after the 4 gospels?
It's forever fascinating to watch Christians both practising and ex , focus so much of their time and effort on what is to others, obviously a fictitious narrative devised and implemented by very human creators/authors.
I was like you once then I actually read it! I suggest you do the same before you make uneducated comments. 😊
@@Darren-dh1zhReading it would convince any rational person with reasonable intelligence, of its obvious absurdity.
@@beachcomber1able so you read all 66 books?
@@beachcomber1able watch the opening ceremony of the Hadron Collider and why have a statue of Shiva the destroyer? I never became a believer just by reading a book! I came to be a believer after 20 years of research into history, then I read the Bible, it's true wether you agree or not.
@@Darren-dh1zh what nonsense 😒
i am from Christian culture and recently thought "why have i not read The Book?" Have now- took as long as it took and open to your thoughts. Thank you
The standard explanation for why his followers didn't write things is because they were expecting the end times. The 900+ followers of Jim Jones at Jonestown did write things, or record things with a tape recorder?, which is how we know what happened.
Lots of powerful points in this video. Especially the last ten minutes. "The best way to create a lie is to use a kernel truth." Looking forward to reading his book.
QUICK ! DRINK THE KOOL-AID ! ever think these lying anti-Christianity scum are using that ploy to mislead you ?
This dude brings no factual evidence to any of his claims and he's clearly delusional and very angry about the whole thing
No miracles, no higher consciousness, no records of Jesus. In India where it is recorded of a Jewish boy at that time, for almost 30yrs practice meditation to be a Master, along with other healing with his hands and studying the ancient manuscripts daily, that's all nonsense huh, Yea, only these people with a doctor degree from some liberal collage could write a little book about someone as the son of God Jesus was a hoax. Something that was foretold would last 3000 yrs. So I guess it is on its last leg. The motive force was not to get rid of the Roman Empire, it was to spread the life of Christ. The disciples did not truly believe, because they all feared for their lives right after Jesus was crucified, in as much Jesus told them what would happen to each one after his death.
Remember you will deny knowing me three times than the cook will crow, but when he came back from death, that was a game changer. That was a transformation of consciousness for all that knew him, and for now those who believe, but mostly for those who seek the truth and though experience know it, then it becomes written in your heart. Even Christians that have a NDE that see Christ are saying that it's not like what they were taught in church, so there you go. For me, it is Yoga, Christ, Buddha, Krishna, Vishnu, and the study of NDE's, and they of the accent past, the Gods and the sons of the Gods it is recorded some did raise the dead and all done what we call miracles. Bless you on your journey.
What about all the books they found in caves like the book off Maria Magdelena and Thomas?
Can't believe he simply admits that there was a historical Jesus where Paul based his hoax....
Yes, the entire story was a hoax, but by the way, there actually was a historical Jesus, which kinda makes that part of the story not a hoax.
The story in Luke about a census cannot be true. It was made up in order to get Jesus of Nazareth to be born in Bethlehem. If there were no historical Jesus of Nazareth, there would be no need to make up such a transparent lie. Just call him Jesus of Bethlehem and be done with it. For this reason, I think Jesus of Nazareth was a historical person.
We know that the character Saul / Paul was the main driving force behind behind the start of Christianity. Can someone please tell me of any extra Biblical evidence that this Paul was a real person ? Yes someone wrote some letters, but who was it ?
Just the most influential person in all history after Jesus.
There was never a St. Paul. Paul is really Apollonius of Tyana. Apollonius went to India twice and brought back the gospels of Buddha, Brahma and Chrishna, Chrishna being the one who Apollonius focused on. The Church appropriated his works, changed them by replacing Chrishna with Christ in the first century and the rest is history. If you want a detailed history of this, read a book called Antiquity Unveiled, written by J.M. Roberts.
@@michaelwallace2487 ha,ha. Obviously you never read anything from Paul. He
From 1 Corinthians 3:6-9
4 For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not being merely human?
5 What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, as the Lord assigned to each.
6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth.
7 So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth.
8 He who plants and he who waters are one, and each will receive his wages according to his labor.
9 For we are God's fellow workers. You are God's field, God's building.
Actually, I have read Paul, when I was a Christian. Now, I’m older, more knowledgable.
The watering and planting mentioned above was done by Apollonius, Apollos, Pol, Paul, Saul, all being the the same person, Apollonius of Tyana! Different names were used because of the various dialects that existed in the regions. Apollonius preached and spread the gospel of Christos… Chrishna, the Hindu prophet, made god, just as Jesus Christ does in the Bible. The church appropriated Apollonius of Tyana’s works, altered them to create their man-god.
@@michaelwallace2487 judging by your first comment, you went dumber with age.
I'd like to preface this by saying that although I had a Christian education, I have been completely atheist for 55 years since my early 20's.
My understanding is that there was a period when christianity was starting to take hold, but was viewed with animosity by the Romans, and although it may not have been the official Roman stance, Christians were getting killed because of it - the same as people get killed nowadays for belonging to the wrong cult - or being of the wrong colour, etc. As lot of the problem was that Christians did not have a unified belief - largely due to the fact that they were following many different gospels that gave them different stories about Christ. The Gospel of Judas came to light fairly recently. Google tells me ...
"Although lost for centuries, the Gospel of Judas was known to have existed because it was mentioned by St. Irenaeus of Lyon, who condemned it as a fiction in ad 180. However, a Coptic translation (c. 300) of the original Greek text was discovered in a codex found in Egypt in the 1970s."
I have also heard it suggested that Christianity would have died a natural death if the Romans hadn't tried so hard to stamp it out.
Bishop Iranaeus took it upon himself to give Christians a set of literature that would tell a reasonably harmonious view of the life of Jesus, and he condemned all the gospels that fell outside of that harmonised version of Christ, as being apocryphal, and told everybody that the story to follow was in Matthew, Mark, Luke & John - though even they don't tell the story identically. Are other apocryphal gospels still in existence?
I know that Matthew starts off by giving the lineage of Christ by tracing who begat whom, all the way from Abraham to Joseph, who was married to Mary, the mother of Christ - except that if she was impregnated by the Holy Ghost (allegedly), Joseph wasn't related to Jesus, so the lineage falls a bit flat. However, the gospels were records of the life of Christ *_outside_* of the writings of Paul, and while your talk was compelling, you said very little about them. I have heard (I'm not a Biblical scholar) that they were published more than a lifetime after the death of Jesus, which is plenty time for the story to be embellished - but they didn't have mass-production presses in those times, so the published gospels were probably copies of other hand-written copies, rather than simply stories that had been passed on verbally, and preserved in no more than memory. In fact, their mere existence for so long after Christ testifies to there having been some continuing interest by somebody in the Christ story. There must have been written documents (gospels) which did not have the political agenda that Paul had. What I'm getting at is that the gospels weren't simply passed on by word of mouth, preserved in no more than living memory - so I don't feel that your claim that there were no non-Paul-generated texts to offer evidence of the life of Christ. There must have been.
Historical evidence is Matthew dates to before 40 CE - accepted by two or three different named sects. The Greek dates to 85 CE, minimum - the other gospels date to after 100. Then Matthew had chapter 1 added after Luke came out - it makes no sense to have Jesus born of God at birth, then also at his baptism having God say otherwise.
Onediscipletoanother organization. Lots of info discovered there - inculding 3000 year old scrolls evidence that proves Jesus teachings were of God.
8:30. A little strange that he draws skepticism against Ehrman because he is a professor and against Price because he isn't. (though I think Price once held a faculty position)
I must have it wrong because I thought he was just eluding to the idea that they didn’t go far enough to explain Paul’s motives for lying.
This book could even be a lot smaller: there is no evidence... full stop. No idea why I should read this...
Then don't... no one gives a shit if you do or not
@@willowgrey989 ... Exactly!
@@willowgrey989 you sound like someone who would read and believe it.
Richard Carrier is not even close to a one-trick-pony! He does careful scholarly work.
I want him to not pull punches, but he doesn't want to misspeak.
Robert Eisenman found enough historical evidence of James to write a thousand page book on him. So James must of been a real person.
Trying to listen for the what the essence of the video is, I keep thinking of Bruce Willis in The Fifth Element, racing back to Earth to stop the thing, and the president is on the line with him, talking about nothing much at all, and Bruce says: "Mr. President, any idea when you're going to get to the point?"
So let me get this straight. Paul wanted to overthrow Rome but hardly spent anytime there.
Because Paul had seen so many other rebellions against Rome, he just knew ONE MORE was worth a try. So he pissed off both the Romans and the Jews while establishing struggling little churches. This is absurd.
THERE is nothing at all in the Bible to show that Paul was fomenting a rebellion sgainst Rome.He claimed his rights as a Roman citizen.He asked Christins to pray for those in authority over the.
Paul never existed imaginary been never ever speak for itself but only in people's heads always in there's heads 😂.
Yeah like biden does😂😂😂😂😂
The apostle Paul was martyred (Killed) in Rome for preaching Jesus Christ as God.
I have written a book and I went to get it published by Publishing world South Africa.They said good things about my book and that they believed it would be a good sell but they asked me to contribute 50% to the publication of the book,I asked God and the answer was no and so my book was not published.Now whether I keep everything the same or add other things I have learned through the years too it and if it get published in maybe 20 years what would people say.Will they say the book was already written by 2015 or will they say the book was written and published in 2043?Who is to say those apostels did not write down the scriptures way before the people learned about it?
It gets even deeper - when you question the existence of Moses
My introduction to Acharya S. (Dorothy Milne Murdock) was via this great two-part interview:
Part 1
ruclips.net/video/pOAZ1L-0hgs/видео.html
Part 2
ruclips.net/video/QrBFwhBMgz8/видео.html
Which led me to one of her extraordinary treatises …
“Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver”
@juliusskoolafish9672 - he's open that he's an athiest. I wouldn't be shocked to hear he doesn't believe in Moses either. However, the crux of it is that he's an anti-Semite and minces no words about it in his book. only on the videos he's Mr. Nicey-Nicey
About credentials, Paul also came from a oppressed group. There is a type of weight in this. That not all debaters can bring to the table. Often the more privileged people are in denial of oppression even when educated.
Hes probably the least convincing speaker on myth vision.. for all his claims of being more controversial than Price and Carrier, he is actually more conservative.. and as he keeps saying it is his Speculation. Lots of maybe and ifs..
Everything is "speculations" and "ifs" when it comes to this stuff. Now I agree his argument that Paul completely invented the divinity and theology of jesus seems a little far fetched as even Derek pointed out that Paul mentions in his own letters he had opposition and disagreements with jesus followers before him. All Dr. Skrbina really has in his corner is that there's no surviving documents or even reason to believe there were ever documents from actual followers of jesus. I'll admit that's a pretty big hole in christianity in general. But did Paul really write letters making up stories about having beef with people who were jesus followers before he was? That's hard to fathom. But Skrbina is 100% right on this point. That whether Paul or others did it, someone or some people invented the narratives and divinity stories of jesus whether he existed or not and that key point seems to always be avoided by scholars.
@Sjakalen Not very bright are you?
I get the impression he made more stuff up then Ron Hubbard did. To me as an atheist it is a kind of irrelevant if Paul wrote stuff he heard as bedtime stories from his granny or wrote stuff revealed to him after smoking bad weed, it's the conspiracy overtunes with which Skrbina ticks me off.
@@kamion53 Well yeah, Paul definitely made crap up. The question is what was his motive more than anything. Did he genuinely believe what he was writing or did he have an agenda
@@exillens If he had an agenda I think it was a more noble and pragmatic one then Skrbina suggests.
It may be a wild card I am throwing in, but having followed a few of the readings of Richard Carreer I got the idea that Paul more or less was an organisor of existing "Christian" communities in stead of a founder of new communities.
Communities of Hellininized Jews with a wide variety of Jewish, Hellinistic, Messianic or Zoroastic idea's, wondering which set of rules to follow. Paul with his link with Pharisaic and Hellinistic beliefs ( being a Pharisee from Tarsus and familiar with Jerusalem) could function as a counselor, traveling around, hearing idea's and discussing and judging them and and leaving his end rapport behind in a nice and clear Epistle.
He never wrote an Epistle to Alexandria, maybe because it did not have a Christian community although later it became one of the largest Christian cities, but it had a large community of Hellinised Jews. Paul may have been well educated in the Law, but the Alexandrians probably were far better educated then he was.
Acts is the main source for the life of Paul, but it is written decades after he lived and very unrealable with quite a broad streak of anti-semitism, which in itself is weird.
Weird because the purposed audience was no more them 8000 souls, the total amount of Christians at the start of the 2nd century. Christians that still had strong relation and family ties with the Jewish communites of 8 million people.
By starting out from the NT, it’s more likely that Pauls first motives was to impress the sadducees in Jerusalem, and by handling the Jewish people for Rome, reaching a career as a powerful man.
By his own initiative he started to attack Jesus-messianics in Jerusalem.
Then by getting the approval of the high priests, he went further, but on his way got a collapse of some sort and that changed his mind.
So, as he might have realized to be militant didn’t work out, to reach his goal, as a Roman citizen and probable Herodian, he wanted to side directly with the Roman elite.
By joining them in the pursuit of a message that finally would end the messianic rebellion against Rome, still while doing all this, he could build up an heroic image of himself as a brave man, knowing fully well he always was protected by Rome.
I thought judas and Mary had writings that the Vatican locked away. Or did someone else write about their story?
Their are books like “The Gospel of Judas” and Mary that were popular in some early Christian groups, like the Gnostics (though this is a very generalized statement). The texts more or less fell out of favor along with those early Christian groups.
What I want to know is why do people want to destroy the idea that a man named Jesus ever lived. If people want to believe it, let them...how does it hurt you?
Rome did not collapse quickly after conversion to Christianity. The (Christian) Roman empire lasted another ~thousand years in Constantinople. And ~all the subsequent European empires were Christian too. If anything, Christianity has been a cornerstone of empire.
It was not holy, it was not Roman, and it was not an empire.
Honestly,I don't want to live my whole life digging in the black hole trying to find something.....
In Plutarch's text Isis and Osiris at some point he says, that after the Titan wars, Typhoon left riding a donkey and that he has children the Jerusolimus and the Judeus. I think that the donkey represents the lower instincts of human nature and he was basically trying to give us a warning message of where the danger is coming from. Remember that he was a priest of Delphi too and very aware of what was going on within the Roman empire then.
I have the suspicion that the collapse of the Roman empire was by design and a power grab from the inside. Also noone ever talks about the holocaust of the Greeks and Romans that refused to be Christianised. Alaric later on was deliberately sent to mainland Greece by secret arrangement with Constantinople to raise down Delphi etc etc etc... Not the only attempt of totally wiping out the old world view... And the old world view was pretty.... Philosophical... It was creating free spirits... But how can you rule the world when there's a production of very conscious people... Then the Middle Ages arrived...🙃
My question is what if the Jesus' followers were illiterate and, therefore, weren't able to write anything down? I know later writing were attributed to four of them, but were they the true authors? Nero lived just after Jesus "death". Why did he make it such a point to torture and kill so many people, those who said they were followers of Jesus? Why did he feel that they posed such a threat to him and his empire? These questions also need to be addressed.
I already know that. I will give that answer to the question: "Why?" 1- Because they wanted it to be true. 2 - Because they could not accept that there was no resurrection and that they believed in vain. 3 - In order to gain power and spread that lie to the world and thus rule and liquidate all those who think differently...etc.
re: _" "Why?" 1- Because they wanted it to be true."_ >> Why did they want something so humiliating to be true?
re: _"2 - Because they could not accept that there was no resurrection and that they believed in vain"_ >> But Jews already believed in the resurrection without Jesus, so on what basis was it that they "could not accept" ??
re: _"3 - In order to gain power and spread that lie to the world and thus rule and liquidate all those who think differently...etc"_ >> How does one "gain power" by being persecuted first by fellow Jews and then for hundreds of years by the Romans? It seems like a very odd 'strategy to gain power' !!
Is it possible that the disciples didn't write down things because of 2 reasons:
1) They were illiterate
2) They believed the end of time is coming any minute and there's no use in writing
?
No they were not illiterate Luke 24 45
Interesting point! As a Catholic, we believe in the ORAL traditional as well as the Written, and Peter, Paul, and the Apostles, who became Disciples of Jesus and spread His Word ( And it IS a gospel of love)- love for yourself is to get rid of the crap that bogs you down ( otherwise known as sin!) and believe that God loves you and wants a relationship with you, and in your heart! So beautiful!
If that's a lie, I'm on board with it because it sire makes me feel better about myself and helps me to love others and chose kindness and goodness over the oppisite!! Thank you, Jesus!
And, no, they weren't illiterate! There was a lot written. Check out the Dead Sea Scrolls! Also, how could this history survive without a strong Oral Tradition of padding down stories, as ever culture of people has, and part of that is hyrogliphics, paintings on walls communicating with us. God wanted the Truth to survive, and we are so Blessed to have the Word of God!
As far as we know, Jesus and his disciples were Aramaic speaking judeans from the Galilee.
Our earliest written sources are greek and much later.
The Dead Sea scrolls are mostly in hebrew as far as I know and their connection to early christianity is not very clear at this point.
@@marydonahue1 Many cultures didn't have a written language, they were either completely oral or used story images on walls or rocks to tell the story by mouth. ancient people of the Middle East are the same, telling history and tales by mouth around fires to pass down their culture.
why is it that nobody I’ve heard or read don’t mention James Valliant and Warren Fahey? there book is very thorough and convincingly!!!
I'm afraid you guys missed the matter that Robert Eisenman wrote about Christian writings in the DSS?
Ebionites had Matthew before 40 CE and others translated it "as best they could" per Papais, about 100 CE.
One theory I heard was that Romans wrote the bible. It made a lot of sense when the motive and linguistics were explained.
"The language" was in Greek.
@@trilithon108 Armenian.
Rome decided which languages were allowed to be spoken in which parts of their empire and which Gods would be allowed to be worshipped within their empire.
Anyone even slightly familiar with Latin literature from the classical period would see that the Bible is totally alien in spirit as well as linguistic expression
Romans scholars used Greek extensively. However, I doubt that the New Testament was deliberately forged.
It seems like Bart may need to be careful because of the kids and parents at Chapel Hill.
It’s crazy how people always project…… after all that noise about how other critics aren’t qualified to write for the position of opposition, because of lack of college degrees and therefor research knowledge/experience, when he actually gives his position it is all completely speculation, and ‘you can imagine…’ based on absolutely ZER0 research or knowledge or insight. This man is an expert on his own imagination.
This is a lot more plausible than the bible as a true story. He is obviously right. If anybody witnessed any of the so called miracles someone would have written it down at the time not forty or so years later.
Paul was possibly epileptic and the vision on the road to Damascus a result of a seizure. It's also possible he was a believer of Mithras to some extent, and had an epithphany during said seizure. He was obviously a very strong and persuasive speaker and prolific writer, but am unsure it was a planned hoax.
No I don't think Paul's vision was due to him being an epileptic. His story is told numerous times in various books and each telling is different. He was a bad liar because he didn't have a good memory. Unfortunately though, that doesn't mean anything to Christians because they only read the Bible to confirm their own biases.
If Jesus existed, he then did die. No miracles. No rising from death. Death is a irreversible process. This author's math education makes him a strong, logical thinker. I will read his book.
Thing is motive is always thr most difficult to prove, for instance you dont have to prove motive in a court of law, it can help but you dont HAVE to have it
Then why I hear what was their mind set we have to find out from all those apologetics when a yt guy shoots up a crowd of Hispanics or Afro-Americans
@@jorgerodriguez3392 that's just the game the ypippo run
The motive is power.
The notion that Paul invented Jesus as a way to start a rebellion against Rome is at least a plausible hypothesis to critique. It is ironic though that another hypothesis is that Rome invented Jesus as a way to stop rebellion!
I wonder if he's read any of Barbara Thiering's work she's an expert on the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Thank you, I now have a new monkey wrench to throw in the "what caused the fall of Rome" debate. I never thought to argue that the adaptation of Christianity destroyed the Empire
Got to say that I've thought basically the same sort of thing for a long time. Book written 50-100 years after the fact that were written to publicise a new religion are going to be dubious at best, but don't think this guy presented his case very well.
As to Ehrman and Carrier, well they want to be taken seriously so they have to work with what can be shown and although this theory is very plausible, I'd say it has to be something along these lines, there can be nothing to back it up unless you can find something that shows Paul as being a con man. Basically we need something like when Hubbard said “You don't get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you start a religion.”
David seems to be unaware of a lot of evidence. he makes the conventional claim that writings were produced 20 years after the crucifixion, and the gospels within the first century.
It wasn't written 50-100 years after..things were written shortly after and gathered and put in one book many years later..It was when God wanted it to be done for certain reasons..
@@souldesire5932 really? This is news to me, I suppose you have evidence.......sorry being stupid again. Using god can do anything so he did it only works if you can prove god exists, Using it to prove god doesn't work.
All history accounts of key figures come many years after and is accepted by historians. That's just a fact. Not up for speculation.
@@thebritishbookworm2649 No many accounts are contemporary and many are basically regarded as fiction. They we have religious stuff which many just accept with nothing to back it up. It's working out which is which that is the issue.
The one question I have is that this gentleman claims that there isn't any collaborative writings at the time, has this gentleman ever had access to the Vatican library?
Their “line in the sand” is they refuse to give up their gig. Nobody wants to accuse and be sued.
My next book:
“My Life’s Work Was A Lie” - Nobody Ever PHD
Probably the reason that the gospels exist without any evidence of authorship has more to do with people not wanting to be identified the gospels were probably written by people who did not want to be fingered for having written those pieces therefore no author is ever given, fear of persecution as there was no First Amendment
Your absolutely on the right track . The video or book that confirms this is called Caesar’s Messiah. You should see it👍🏼
The guest seems to speak with absolute certainty about things no one can be sure about. Dr. Price's views are more balanced in light of the available evidence. As an example, why would deliberate intent to deceive be more likely than one having an hallucination and believing it was a vision?
Go back to church
My brother, history is best understood as transition from Pax Romana to Unum Sanctum to the New World Order by the same old bloodlines. The victors write the histories. Paul or Saul or perhaps Flavius Josephus was elevated as he was a Roman agent of Jewish pacification. I suggest the speaker is just grounded in common sense. On the one hand Skribina points to the lack of any common sense in the Gospels and yet accepts some of the Roman accounts. Because I assure you nothing but Roman reports pass the muster of Roman censors. All words are spells. What you call hallucinations is likely a form of magic. Which only has power over the minds of men.
Unless someone explicitly writes their motives, it's almost impossible to know.
I think the reason no one talks about it is that it's almost impossible to prove.
I'm pretty sure there is a theory that tha Romans invented Jesus.
Because Paul continued to talk to Zombie Jesus throughout his life. That means more toward mental illness.
Problem: None of the manuscripts we have are originals so there's no way to know when they were written. The date of the discovered (copies of) documents in no way proves that earlier copies did not exist.
The earlier copies of the truth come from the Sumerian tablets and the Emerald tablets. you read those which goes way back about 40000 years ago. Then you get a clear picture of where we're at to. Day and why we're there.
Dead Sea scrolls were dated to before Jesus. And had NT with them.
@@MandyAltamirano re: _"Dead Sea scrolls were dated to before Jesus. And had NT with them."_ >> False. There were no New Testament writings present in the Dead Sea Scrolls, as anyone who has looked into this, knows. The nearest writing was the Book of Enoch and other writings of a messianic nature, but NONE from the New Testament.
You work with what you have and not “what might or might not exist”.
@@Habanero777 Interesting I'll check that out. I've heard of the Sumerian tablets but know very little about what they say. Thx
Only just found this channel, and am really enjoying it. Is there a similar one for Islam and Judaism?
I usually believe the guy with his baseball cap 🧢 on backwards when it comes to such serious issues…
No wonder the author's book is so thin! Based on this interview, I am led to conclude that it consists of nothing more than unsubstantiated and/or nonsensical speculation based upon assumptions in which any extant contradictory textual evidence is conveniently dismissed as some kind of intentional deception. I fail to see how the conversion of anyone, whether they be Jew or gentile, to Paul's abstract cosmic Christ theology would have benefited the cause of the Jewish revolt against Rome as this author would have us believe. If anything, the religion being promulgated by Paul seems consciously designed as a pacifistic Roman-compatible substitute for a Judaism that would no longer be possible and/or practical once the temple in Jerusalem had been destroyed.
Note that the Romans believed THEIR emperors were gods. Stating some crucified Jew was a demi-god would NOT be Roman-compatible. The pacifist part of Paul's teaching would be to captivate the minds of those under Roman rule. After that meme has been created, you can go for the capital. I suggest a contemporary example where the Q meme in America resulted in an actual attach on the US capitol. Notice how the enabler of a LIE, that the election was a fake, claims he loved the people who physically acted on his words...which the enabler claims were not his intent. Humans don't want to believe they would die for a lie. Did the woman who was shot at the Capitol die for a lie ? Did the people at the Branch Davidian compound in Texas die for a lie ? The 9/11 attackers ?
Why did you watch the video if you have beliefs you are not willing to part with? Just to talk shit? Pathetic
@@onedaya_martian1238 except that didn't happen did it. 40 years later the Jews went to war with the Romans and lost.
@@thebritishbookworm2649 And the point is ?
@@willowgrey989 ... Some ppl only subscribe to these kinds of channels so that they could try to insult the speaker 🤷♀️
Dude looks pissed off. Take it easy, princess.
well,to be more exact, the Gospels Jesus wasn't opposed to the Roman Emperor;he famously said "give to God what belongs to God and give to Caesar what's Caesar`s"
I wonder how much of Ehrman you follow? As far as I am concerned, he always gives detailed explainations as why, how and what!
He is a good communicator with a depth of knowledge.
I freaking love the common sense and logic here without all the word salad from others! This is so simple and direct! Thanx for doing this!
@First Last 😂 scared little bird.
My thoughts also. I loved his stance on this. And it's a credible stance.
@@hardywatkins7737 the video is basically a lie
@@raysalmon6566 great explanation of why it's a lie. I love your insight.
😂.. it's just a theory .. his evidence is an alleged lack of evidence.
I have a problem with the timeline that they do have because Mesopotamia and Samaria was there before all of this stuff so that means that time started way before that epic battle of Gilgamesh was 36,000 years BCE if I’m not mistaken, Gilgamesh was the fifth king of Uruk today I believe that is Iraq
For the people that keep saying “oral tradition”, have you played a game of telephone? In the words of Reo Speedwagon, “tales grow taller on down the line”. Even today, when we have reports, video, pics, etc people still argue what happened 50 years ago. Imagine with no writing and just oral back two thousands years ago.
Skrbina is 100% right on one point. That whether Paul or others did it, someone or some people invented the narratives and divinity stories of jesus whether he existed or not and that key point seems to always be avoided by scholars.
Those are assumptions. Some others say otherwise. Paul was executed by beheading while Peter was crucified by the Romans with their bodies inside the Vatican. If the skeptics want to verify, they have to research with the Vatican for proof.
The main point was that those martyred apostles besides Peter and Paul would not endure suffering and death if Jesus was fake.
@@thornados4969 Martyrdom is irrelevant, people get killed, kill others and some even strap bombs to themselves for beliefs all the time. Paul (according to himself) never saw jesus alive anyway. He was simply going off visions. No one knows how any apostle died. All we have is legends told hundreds of years after they would've died just like how the 4 gospels were legends written at least one to two generation after jesus would've been executed and all used Mark as a source. You need to bring a serious argument to the table in light of these facts
@@thornados4969 Jesus being fake vs Jesus being a charismatic and progressive, but entirely human, rabbi are two very different things.
Hmm
1:04:00 the Eastern Roman Empire lasted into the 15th century, based around Christianity. So much for his conclusion that Paul's lie succeeded.
What did Jesus say when He saw Stephen? "In him there is no guile" These two got a ship load.
Whether purposely, or at random, some people will make up stuff, and fill in between the facts, just to have a good story. Others will take that story, and use it for their own purposes. I think that's why the Romans adapted this new christianity. It doesn't really matter why, but it's fun to debunk the old myths. Thanks guys.