[5th element; Aether] The author reviewed the experimental ether-drift experiments and publications of Michelson-Morley, Dayton Miller, Michelson-Pease-Pearson, and more recent others, from the late 1800s through the present. Many of these historical studies presented positive results in detecting a cosmic ether, and ether-drift through space. Among these experiments, the most widely cited Michelson-Morley experiment of 1887, which did show a slight positive result (and never the claimed “null”), was found to be the least significant or robust in terms of experimental procedures and actual data collected, as compared with the far more important 1920s’ study by Miller on Mount Wilson near Los Angeles, California. Most ether-drift experiments yielding claimed negative results were plagued by various unwarranted assumptions about the capacity of an ether-drift to penetrate dense materials such as stone buildings or metal shielding, or that ether flow would “contract” matter, including measuring instruments, leaving the ether-drift undetectible. Some obtained positive results, but the authors chose to interpret them as “negative” due to unwarranted assumptions demanding extremely fast ether-drift velocities near to the Earth’s surface. Miller was the first to experimentally account for these issues, his most important study made atop Mount Wilson in a thermal shelter, with the largest light-beam interferometer ever constructed, and where the light-beam path was enclosed only by light glass or cardboard. His procedures accounted for a matter-retarded cosmic ether-drift with a reduced velocity closer to the Earth’s surface. Miller thereby obtained significant positive results over four epochs of study. Albert Einstein also was aware of these issues, and admitted openly that if Miller was correct, then his own relativity theory would “collapse like a house of cards.” In subsequent years, however, the followers of Einstein defeated this evidence for the cosmic ether by public ridicule and political tactics, not too different from the modern “skeptic” movement. The Shankland, McCuskey, Leone, and Kuerti article claiming to have reviewed Miller’s Mount Wilson data, well after all the old ether-drift experimenters were dead and could no longer defend their findings, were also specifically reviewed and found to not support their own stated conclusions, thereby leaving the question of a cosmic ether and ether-drift as an open and unresolved question, or one which positive evidence indicates has been proven out. More recent ether-drift experiments from the last quarter of the 20th and early 21st Centuries, notably by Galaev, Múnera, and others, using radiofrequencies, light-beam interferometery, and other novel methods, have provided further proof for the existence of a cosmic ether in space. www.scientificexploration.org/journal/
Physicist Robert B. Laughlin wrote: It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such medium existed [..] The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo. Main articles: Pilot wave and De Broglie-Bohm theory Louis de Broglie stated, "Any particle, ever isolated, has to be imagined as in continuous "energetic contact" with a hidden medium." However, as de Broglie pointed out, this medium "could not serve as a universal reference medium, as this would be contrary to relativity theory."
RUclips always play’s Jesus commercials. EVERY commercial break. Wouldn’t that lower your channels revenue, since 90% of your watchers would skip? Can this be because of category placement?(religous, historical,etc) Didn’t know if you are aware.
Ancient books initiate us into ancestor worship. This is why children are not told to submit to their parents but to obey them. Atheism is also from ancestors, so atheists are doing what they should be doing and should not be judged .
Bart Ehrman is the best Bible teacher I ever had, and I learned from him only by videos, online courses, and books. Former fundamentalist and even attended conservative seminary and Bart was instrumental, often against my will, making me see the Bible for what it was and is, not what pastors and apologists say it is. I’m forever indebted to him for his great work. He’s so misrepresented by so many conservative and fundamentalists and he’s such a great guy and scholar. Thanks Bart and thanks Derek
Till 325 AD, not a single historian or writer wrote about Jesus Christ or any of his disciples . BEFORE THE FIRST COUNCIL OF NICEA IN 325 AD, NOBODY ON THIS PLANET EVER HEARD OF THE NAMES JESUS CHRIST OR CHRISTIANITY. JESUS/ BIBLE / CHRISTIANTY WAS COOKED UP IN 325 AD, BY JEWESS HELENA , WHO SAT ON THE POPE'S CHAIR.. "Vatican is Evil terrorist satanic organisation." If Satan does exist, then he thrives inside the Roman Catholic Church. The dead sea scrolls covering the period from Birth of Jesus to 68 AD , does NOT say one word about Jesus or his 12 Apostles. Hellenistic philosopher Philo Judaeus of Alexandria (20 BCE-50 AD/CE)-alive at the purported time of Jesus, and one of the wealthiest and best connected citizens of the Empire- makes no mention of Christ, Christians or Christianity in his voluminous writings. Nor do any of the hundreds of other historians and writers who flourished during the first THREE centuries of the common era. The DEAD SEA SCROLLS were all written by Pagan Essenes . None of them have been edited by later Christians, as is the case with some other Jewish literature. All the scrolls (except a treasure map known as the Copper Scroll) can be dated prior to A.D. 68 or 69, when the Qumran settlement was believed to have been destroyed by the Romans in the Jewish revolt. The oldest of the scrolls probably goes back to the middle of the third century B.C. The people of Qumran belonged to a Pagan religious group known as the Essenes. Pliny the Elder, who died during the volcanic destruction of Pompeii in the year 79 A.D., described a community of pagan Essenes living on the western shore of the Dead Sea, close to where Khirbet Qumran is situated. John the Baptist was an ascetic Essene . He was a vegan and was uncircumcised . Various literary sources like Josephus and Philo tell clearly that Essenes were ascetics. We also know, from literary testimony, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the archaeological remains of Qumran, that the Essenes practiced many water baptisms for ritual purification-similar to a dip in the Ganges or the river Pampa or at Thiirunelli. At Qumran, however, all members of the community were baptized with water for ritual purification. Josephus writes, "And as for their piety towards God, it is very extraordinary; for before sunrising they speak not a word about profane matters, but put up certain prayers which they have received from their forefathers, as if they made a supplication for its rising" (Wars, 2.8.5). This testimony accords well with what we know from the Dead Sea Scrolls. Prayer and humility was one thing that the Essenes . When they cooked up stories about Jesus they wrote that Jesus Christ ate the Last Supper in the Essene part of town. Jesus is not historical character, The Dead Sea Scrolls have produced increasing evidence to cement the fact that Jesus Christ never existed and the whole story was cooked up at the First Council of Nicea in 325 AD. The FAKE gospels were written after 325 AD after Jesus was cooked up at the first Council of Nicea.. Twelve apostles of Jesus never existed. Jesus Christ names 12 apostles to spread his gospel, and the early Christian church owes its rapid rise to their missionary zeal. Yet, for most of the Twelve, there's scant evidence of their existence outside of the New Testament. The concept of using statistics to prove that 'God authored the Bible' is bullshit. Why was the library of Alexandria burnt ? The gospel of Thomas was not written by Jesus' disciple Thomas. Englishman Godfrey Higgins studied Greek, Latin and law at Cambridge . His two-volume, 867-page book Anacalypsis: An Enquiry into the Origins of Languages, Nations, and Religions, was published posthumously in 1836. In his treatise, Higgins writes " the mythos of the Jews and the mythos of the Greeks are all at bottom the same lifted from the ancient mythos of Hindus ; and ... are contrivances under the appearance of histories to perpetuate doctrines," and that Christian editors “either from roguery or folly, corrupted them all.” 1900, Scottish MP John Mackinnon Robertson wrote that Jesus never existed but was an FAKE invention by a first-century messianic cult. He wrote about the First Council of Nicea of 325 AD where powerful forces invented a new god to fit the needs of the society of the time .Robertson specifically mentions the Talmudic story of the Yeshu . Thomas says: "Simon Peter said to them, ‘Make Mary leave us, for females don’t deserve life.’ Jesus said, ‘Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven’" (Thomas 114). AIYOOOOO -even Christians don’t like this When the master of James baby Jesus Christ never existed -- how can his disciple St James exist ? Even since the dead sea scrolls have been discovered CHRISTIANS and JEWS are jumping up and down like demented orangutans claiming that Essenes belong to them. Dead Sea text or Qumran Scrolls have absolutely nothing ZILCH, to do with the Bible of the Torah - never mind the diabolical lies of the Christians and the Jews. For arguments sake -even if messiah Jesus Christ existed , the gospels were written a even a century after Jesus' estimated year of death, by individuals who never met Jesus, and then were edited or forged over the centuries by unknown scribes with their own agendas. Dead sea scrolls have been written by Essenes of the sect of Apollonius For more plz click link ..... ajitvadakayil.blogspot.com/2016/04/apollonius-or-jesus-christ-who-is-real_10.html?m=1 "They came with a Bible and their religion. They stole our land and crushed our spirit and now tell us we should be thankful to the ‘Lord’ for being saved." - Chief Pontiac 1769 Native American Plz click link to read more ... 1. ajitvadakayil.blogspot.com/2013/01/christopher-columbus-father-of-american.html?m=1
@@MythVisionPodcast The Gospel is the Coming of the Kingdom of GOD, First Jesus Kingdom for a 1000 Years Then the Father's Kingdom, the Prophet taught the Gospel First then the Apostles
Always will click on a Bart cameo. Thanks for asking him these questions! I think he makes an interesting point at the end about not many people knowing the current status of scholarship. But other than Dr. Ehrman, who really is there to communicate this to the world? Ehrman is the Sagan of New Testament scholarship and we need a Cosmos to go with it.
Wonderful video! Bart is a world class scholar. Currently reading "How Jesus became God" and it's so well written and enjoyable to read. Great interview Derek! Much respect and love!
Bart Ehrman makes the invaluable contribution of integrity to Biblical scholarship. If people actually knew what was in the Bibie, they would not foolishly claim to believe ever word of it, and might learn to appreciate some of the goodness in it.
@@darrylcoan8452 This has nothing to do with the Bible ! I'm speaking on Faith based beliefs in general. Whether it's a placebo effect or not the results work ! Your so bias against religion because of past hurt or failure that you can't see thr trees past the forrest. Jesus was right in his teaching that "As you believe so shall it be" so if it's not working for you it's because of you not anyone else. Take accountability and stop blaming religion kid.
WHAT IS SPECIAL ABOUT BEING A HINDU? By Francois Gautier. *Diversity in Divinity and Unity in Spirituality.* Be Your Own Messiah. 1) Believe in God ! - Aastik - Accepted 2) Don't believe in God ! - You're accepted as Nastik 3) You want to worship idols - please go ahead. You are a murti pujak. 4) You dont want to worship idols - no problem. You can focus on Nirguna Brahman. 5) You want to criticise something in our religion. Come forward. We are logical. Nyaya, Tarka etc. are core Hindu schools. 6) You want to accept beliefs as it is. Most welcome. Please go ahead with it. 7) You want to start your journey by reading Bhagvad Gita - Sure ! 8) You want to start your journey by reading Upanishads - Go ahead. 9) You want to start your journey by reading Purana - Be my guest. 10) You just don't like reading Puranas or other books. No problem my dear. Go by Bhakti tradition . ( bhakti- devotion) 11) You don't like idea of Bhakti ! No problem. Do your Karma. Be a karmayogi. 12) You want to enjoy life. Very good. No problem at all. This is Charvaka Philosophy. 13) You want to abstain from all the enjoyment of life & find God - jai ho ! Be a Sadhu, an ascetic ! 14) You don't like the concept of God. You believe in Nature only - Welcome. (Trees are our friends and Prakriti or nature is worthy of worship). 15) You believe in one God or Supreme Energy. Superb! Follow Advaita philosophy 16) You want a Guru. Go ahead. Receive gyaan. 17) You don't want a Guru.. Help yourself ! Meditate, Study ! 18) You believe in Female energy ! Shakti is worshipped. 19) You believe that every human being is equal. Yeah! You're awesome, come on let's celebrate Hinduism! "Vasudhaiva kutumbakam" (the world is a family) 20) You don't have time to celebrate the festival. Don't worry. One more festival is coming! There are multiple festivals every single day of the year. 21) You are a working person. Don't have time for religion. Its okay. You will still be a Hindu. 22) You like to go to temples. Devotion is loved. 23) You don't like to go to temples - no problem. You are still a Hindu! 24) You know that Hinduism is a way of life, with considerable freedom. 25) You believe that everything has God in it. So you worship your mother, father, guru, tree, River, Prani-matra, Earth, Universe! 26) And If you don't believe that everything has GOD in it - No problems. Respect your viewpoint. 27) "Sarve jana sukhino bhavantu " (May you all live happily) You represent this! You're free to choose, my dear Hindu! This is exactly the essence of Hinduism, all inclusive .. That is why it has withstood the test of time inspite of repeated onslaught both from within and outside, and assimilated every good aspects from everything . That is why it is eternal !!! There is a saying in Rigveda , the first book ever known to mankind which depicts the Hinduism philosophy in a Nutshell -" Ano bhadrah Krathavo Yanthu Vishwathah"- Let the knowledge come to us from every direction...
Eating less meat is important because of global warming and any religion which carries part of the weight of helping society adapt, is part of real life on Earth and any religion which pretends it doesnt matter is just engaged in fairy tales. Relevance to real life is the signature of the real God.
Very true. It's amazing that people think this is the word of god, but many of those people have not actually taken the time to see what god wanted them to hear!
It seems that they feel in reality that it is a book (different cannons) that can hide their hypocrisy and thus empower their own selfish/in-group corruption.
It's interesting that the earlier gospels have less detail than the later gospels. This is the opposite of what you would expect if the authors were nearer to the time of Jesus than the later ones. It says to me that the authors are developing the Jesus story with time.
Not necessarily they don't give the details Luk 1:3 εδοξεν [It seems good] G1380 καμοι [and I? or (Kamoi (a divine being)] G2504 παρηκολουθηκοτι [to be always present, to attend one wherever he goes] G3877 ανωθεν [from above, from a higher place (of things which come from heaven or God)] G509 πασιν [everyone, all things, everything] G3956 ακριβως [exactly, accurately, diligently] G199 καθεξης [one after another, successively, in order] G2517 σοι [you] G4771 γραψαι [writing] G1125 κρατιστε [most excellent] G2903 θεοφιλε [Theophilus = “FRIEND OF GOD”] G2321 Mechanical Translation: It seems good and I was always present from above (a higher place or heaven) everyone (or all things) diligently one after another writing you most excellent Theophilus (friend of God). Luke means Light Bringer and he was a physician? coincidence? Luk_5:31 And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick. Luk 4:23 And he said to them, “Doubtless you will quote to me this proverb, ‘“Physician, heal yourself.” What we have heard you did at Capernaum, do here in your hometown as well.’”
@@garryferrington811 Neither his words match no ones and he was not born of a virgin he was sent from FATHER. Luk 1:27 προς [at, near, by] παρθενον [Parthenon] μεμνηστευμενην [to give a souvenir] ανδρι [man (or Andri short for Andrew)] ω [whose] ονομα [name] ιωσηφ [JOSEPH] εξ [of] οικου [house] δαβιδ [David] και [and] το [the] ονομα [name] της [the] παρθενου [Parthenou (Surname)] μαριαμ [MIRIAM not Mary] There is nothing about a virgin in that verse. Miriam was Herod's wife a Parthian he married to tie the dynasty to Rome. Joseph was Herod's uncle he had watching Miriam and had instructed him to kill her if Anthony attempted or killed him. Herod faced this volatile situation and exploited it to his advantage. Indeed, it was no coincidence that the Romans entrusted the throne of Judaea to Herod the Great at the close of 40 B.C.E., the same year of the Parthian conquest. During the campaign, the Parthians installed Antigonus, son of Aristobulus II and scion of the Hasmonean dynasty, as king of Judaea. Herod fled to Rome to use this event to make a bid for kingship. He sought out Antony and underscored the Parthian threat (and threw in a bribe for good measure!). As the ancient sources make clear, the strategy worked; the Parthian actions motivated the Senate to make Herod the Great king. In this situation, Herod is best seen as a manipulator of Rome’s confrontation with Parthia for his own advantage. Angry and despondent over her son’s death, Alexandra wrote to Cleopatra, begging her to intervene by bringing Herod to justice for the murder of her son.[17] Cleopatra informed Antony of Alexandra’s request, and Antony summoned Herod to him to defend himself against Alexandra’s accusations. Knowing that his meeting with Antony could end in his own execution, Herod left Mariamme in the care of his uncle Joseph, and instructed Joseph to have Mariamme killed, should he be killed by Antony. As described by Josephus: Now Joseph, while administering the affairs of the kingdom and for that reason repeatedly meeting with Mariamme about public business or because of the respect which he was bound to show her as the queen, repeatedly fell into talks about Herod’s affection and great love for her. And when in women’s fashion she and even more so Alexandra, affected not to believe his statements, Joseph in an excess of zeal to reveal the king’s feelings let himself go so far as to speak of the instructions given him, offering them as proof of the fact that Herod could not live without her, nor, if he should suffer a malign fate, would he even be separated from her by death (Ant. 15:67-72).[18] Mariamme did not see Herod’s instructions to Joseph as complimentary, but as proof that her husband was wicked and deranged. www.thetorah.com/article/mariamme-the-last-hasmonean-princess
@@garryferrington811 Joh 8:22-23 So the Jews said, “Will he kill himself, since he says, ‘Where I am going, you cannot come’?” He said to them, “YOU ARE FROM BELOW; I AM FROM ABOVE. YOU ARE OF THIS WORLD; I AM NOT OF THIS WORLD. Joh_12:25 Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life IN THIS WORLD will keep it for eternal life. Joh_12:31 Now is the judgment of THIS WORLD; now will THE RULER OF THIS WORLD BE CAST OUT. Joh_16:11 concerning judgment, because THE RULER OF THIS WORLD IS JUDGED. Joh_18:36 Jesus answered, “MY KINGDOM IS NOT OF THIS WORLD. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But MY KINGDOM IS NOT FROM THE WORLD.” Over 38 times in the Gospels Christos says he was sent not born also. People do not listen for what he said they read those who formed a narrative instead. Copied these off my slides caps are not yelling just stuff I highlighted that way Joh 16:28 I CAME FORTH FROM THE FATHER, AND HAVE COME TO THE WORLD; AGAIN I LEAVE THE WORLD, AND GO ON UNTO THE FATHER Joh 3:13 AND NO MAN HATH ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN, BUT HE THAT DESCENDED FROM HEAVEN, THE SON OF MAN WHO IS IN HEAVEN. Joh 3:17 FOR GOD SENT NOT HIS SON INTO THE WORLD, TO JUDGE THE WORLD: BUT THAT THE WORLD MAY BE SAVED BY HIM. Luk 7:28 I tell you, among THOSE BORN OF WOMEN NONE IS GREATER THAN JOHN. Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.”
He's also a deceiver who knowingly misrepresents material and pretends mainstream academic scholarship doesn't exist when he is pursuing his overt anti-christian agenda Basically an erudite wolf in sheep's clothing and not to be trusted
Not only those things, but many apologists are suddenly agreeing and changing narratives due to the serious factual evidence provided...they cannot find real faults
I love this quote from William Lane Craig on Bart Ehrman. "I lost all respect for Bart Ehrman frankly, when I saw him in public debate, how he deliberately and deceptively tries to mislead laymen in this (truth or fallacy of the resurrection of Jesus Christ & etc.)..." William Lane Craig Here's an excellent example. Bart says that the Gospels were written in scholarly Greek. Exactly the opposite is true. The Gospels were written in Koine Greek: "Koine Greek has a simplified grammar, and the sentence construction was simple. While Koine Greek is considered to be the language of everyday life, modern Greek can be termed as the language of the books." Another good example is how he blatantly and knowingly misrepresents the account of the trials and subsequent crucifixion of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark to show how Mark contradicts Luke's account of the same. If you are a sincere seeker of the truth I would invite you to watch Mike Winger's treatment of the above. I guarantee you that it will change your perception of Bart forever. Here's Mike Winger on Bart: ruclips.net/video/g2ne3ndnVQk/видео.html
@@rolandovelasquez135 great job mate ,n thanks for that link …that bastard Ehrman must be doing it for some Antichrist organisation for some 300 pieces of gold … he must be a Morden day Judas …. At least he repented n hung himself
@@rolandovelasquez135 right these guys lie and lie so much they forgot they been lying for decades. Also this guy mythvision deletes comments when they make him look foolish why would he do that if he's concrete in his faith? No respect
@@rolandovelasquez135 Not as clear, or cut and dried as you'd want to believe. Consider that Koine Greek did not die out. On the contrary it grew in use and prestige, in fact, to become the standard form of Greek in the Middle Ages, becoming the reference form of Greek language as the general Greek population rapidly accepted Christian faith. Modern Greek remains very similar to Koine Greek. Additionally, there is a wide range of Greek language in the New Testament. Luke is basically "classical," according to commentators, while Paul's letters are an articulate, educated version of Koine. Other writings vary to a conversational form of Koine. Many authoritative sources exist for the more technical details of language evaluation of the New Testament texts.
Many of them cling tightly to their religious beliefs out of fear. The fear that they may be making a huge mistake by giving up (or even questioning) their faith and as a result would be condemning themselves to eternal punishment in the afterlife. Or fear of losing their moral compass and becoming an evil monster. Also the fear that without faith, their lives will become empty and meaningless with neither purpose nor value. Christianity in particular is VERY effective at evoking fear. Giving up one's belief in Santa Claus is not tied with such fears... other than perhaps no more presents for Christmas!
This perception of stunted growth is interesting. I'm not sure I'd criticize anyone's development who believed in Santa Claus but could still solve a rubik's cube. I'd consider them fairly advanced despite their belief in the mythological, particularly since I've never solved a rubik's cube.
I felt taken aback by that too. I’m reading Acts right now and it’s so obviously fiction. Whether blatantly contradicting Pauls own letters, using predictable narrative formulas over and over, rewriting stories from gospel of Luke and just changing the characters names (eg road to Emmaus vs phillip and the ethiopian eunuch), hell even at the start he contradicts his own gospel account of the resurrection (easter sunday vs 40 days later). I mean it’s baffling to me that Bart even entertains the idea of its historicity.
Well the only parts of Acts I'm willing to concede were historical or semi historical are the parts that made Paul look bad. It only took 2000 years but it is now revealed that Paul is a proven liar. Something the Jews probably knew all this time.
It's always interesting to hear Prof. Ehrman speak. He has so much to teach us. I've read most of his fascinating books and highly recommend them to anyone who's interested in theology, Christology and ancient Middle-Eastern religious history, etc. Good and intelligent questions, Derek. 👍
One other way to know why all 4 gospels are different is because Matthew portrays Jesus as the New Moses for a New covenant, Mark as the standard devine massianic image, Luke as the New Elisha, and John as God in flesh. 4 different perspectives on Christ, all compliment eatchother ✌️
@@scambammer6102 Mark Luke and John were clearly written by scribes that new the apostles according to early tradition and the text it self, however its Matthew that was written by the apostle. Bart's claims that it wasn't doesn't excuse the traditional claim very well.
@@micahpond6895 Sorry, none of the gospels were written by the names they carry, that is simply the expert's consensus due to the evidence (it was only since 180CE that the gospels were mentioned by name, before that they were simply anonymous). You are free to present why you think that is not the case, hopefully with none of the usual apologetic excuses.
First, Mark says that Jesus was the Messiah and he was exalted when John baptized him. Then the Jews complained that the Messiah should’ve been born in Bethlehem and his Messiah status was not impreesive. So Matthew and Luke made up fantastic stories, both contradicting each other, as to how Jesus was born in Bethlehem but ended up in Nazareth. Matthew then spent his energy trying to harmonize the story with prophesies, while Luke just sloppily made up stuffs, like the nonsensical census. Then Jesus was made to be exalted, either on his birth or at conception. John,… John just didn’t care. He was the number one fan fiction writer. Jesus here was GOD and has been since the beginning of everything.
the church fathers should have mixed up the gospels of thomas john and barnabas and discarded paul's letters or I think it would be a best seller if were selected from the most fantastic gospels and a single book was made.they could also create a monotheistic religion instead of a trinity 2000 years later, Christians are still making videos on youtube that we finally explained the trinity I think the church fathers and Paul followed such a strategy to get along with the pagans
I have a difficult time believing that the people who listened to Jesus had perfect recall since people now do not seem to have the ability to recite exactly what a modern speaker says especially years later. So what do we know what did Jesus actually say. I have a high I.Q. yet I cannot remember in detail what Bart says in one of his talks. I can remember the gist of what Bart says but I guarantee that 10 years from now I doubt I can remember much of what he said.
The most effective method for most people to become non theists or atheists or agnostics , etc ; is simply to get them to seriously read these bronze / iron age books and let them evaluate the authenticity of the stories and claims made by the so called authors of these books which are supposedly divinely inspired ! A good percentage who do just simply " drop out " from believing these incredulously nonsensical narratives !
What is surprising when I think about it as a very long term churchman is the fact that I have not heard from anyone in the church in all that time a single comment on the scholarship like Prof Ehrman on the Bible. Not once in thousands of interactions!
While I cant comment of course on your annecdote, what strikes me as an ex christian is this.. if the message of jesus is the most important message ever, why dont top theists, such as the pope, not spend ALL their time debating his existance. Have a moderator panel with theist and non theist scholars in the middle, and the various popes, and church leaders v secular scientists and aethiests. When either side says.. the bible says this.. then prof bert etc step in. If the world depends on religion, then the debate should be constant and totally public 😳 👍
What IGNORANCE ! There are no "gospels" ( plural ). There is ONLY ONE "gospel" ( GOOD NEWS MESSAGE ). You can hang all the pieces of paper on your wall all you want, but your "education" will not give you "understanding".
@@MythVisionPodcast ....That's ok, I forgive you. And you're right, you shouldn't use your "brain", you should use your MIND ( "SPIRIT" ) because that's WHAT "GOD" IS . ( John 4:24 ) Funny how that "koolaid" works.......isn't it.
All religious Interpreters and Instructors should be licensed, monitored, be required reporters and to have a Social Workers certification. Govt can use secret shoppers to make sure they arent abusing or grooming the general public.
Hi. May i ask the following question: " if God pre-existed Nature and actually created it, us, life, the whole thing.... what was he all loving, all powerful and all knowing of/about before he created everything?"
Please consider joining MythVision Patreon to help me in continuing doing this work! 💯 www.patreon.com/mythvision -💥Get early access to 100's of videos not made public -💥Ask questions for scholars I interview and potentially have a video recording from the scholars -💥Private message me
My favorite gospel story is Baby Jesus taming the dragons. Haven't seen it in a movie, though. Then again, I've never seen a movie where, when Jesus dies, all the dead rise up as zombies, presumably hungry for human brains, although it's "gospel truth." Would make a hell of a movie.
Thanks to Derek and Bart for these explorations and explanations of the biblical material. I am amazed at the number of Christians I have known who actually DON'T read the Bible and have no idea other than a basic 'Merry Christmas, oh, but he dies at the end' grasp of the Good Book. I've gone cover to cover three times now starting as a young teen. I love the study of this book but I never for one second believed the supernatural angle. And if Jesus actually existed, I not sure he did either. It's a whopper of a story either way.
Question about Dr. Ehrman's claim that the gospels dont claim to be written by the disciples: Doesn't the gospel of John claim to have been written by the "disciple whom Jesus loved"? Edit: Here's the verse referring to: This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true. John 21:24 NIV
you are assuming that "John" was the "disciple whom Jesus loved." That doesn't follow automatically. You are assuming that based on later interpretations. Also, the Gospel of John was written long after the alleged events (at least 80 years) and was certainly not by an eyewitness.
Ten logical, historical arguments proving Jesus never existed. 1. There is no original account of the life of Jesus originating from the time he supposedly lived. 2. All Later Accounts Of The Life Of Jesus Are Pure Hearsay. 3.The Gospels Were Writlen As Christian Propaganda. 4.The Gospels Are Unlikely To Have Been Written By Disciples Who Knew Jesus. 5.The Earliest Books Of The New Testament, The Epistles Of Paul, Do Not Ever Refer To Jesus As A Living Being. 6.The New Testament Was Designed At Council Of Nicea in 325 A.D. To Promote Christianity Not Document Historical Fact. 7.There Is No Historiceal Evidence Of An Eclipse, Earthquake Or Rending Of The Veil In The Temple SupPposed To Have Happened At The Moment 0f Jesus' Death. 8.There Are No Tangible Historical Artifacts Linked To Jesus. 9.The City of Nazareth Did Not Exist During The Time Jesus Is Reputed To Have Been Alive. 10.The Life History Of Jesus Parallels are to close to older Pagan gods, like Horus and Mithra to be real.
aBrahamic logic , Moses/Jesus/Mohammed believing. (Judaism Christianity Islam) is based on messiah hero worship. They constantly over hype their 'son of god ' to market themselves as they are Godless... Brahmic logic ,SELF believing (Sanaathan Dharma, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism) is based on Cosmic laws, Nature laws/worship, knowledge gathering, defining divinity as symbolism thru images, Stone dietes..etc Worshipping Nature's forces, elements, animals birds plants is a core part of Faith....combined with individual Self consciousness, self inquiry , self realization..
The gospels are midrash on the eyewitness prophets Haggai and Zechariah who NAMED Zerubbabel as Christ. Haggai 2:23 NKJV - ‘In that day,’ says the LORD of hosts, ‘I will take you, Zerubbabel My servant, the son of Shealtiel,’ says the LORD, ‘and will make you like a signet ring; for I have chosen you,’ says the LORD of hosts.” Zechariah 4:7 NKJV - ‘Who are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain! And he shall bring forth the capstone With shouts of “Grace, grace to it!” ’ ” Jesus and John are direct swaps for Zerubbabel and Zechariah. The NT is a midrash script... that got hellenised just like everything else did.
best explanation i've heard for many myths and religious writings is that they are scientific astronomical writings in story form. Just as hypothesized in Hamlet's Mill.
Chritian Jihad Sariya Law) If your brother, son, daughter, wife, or friend asks you to serve another god, what must you do, according to Dt 13:6-10? Stone them to death (You must throw the first stone.) If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die. Deuteronomy 13:6-10
Perhaps, only with Contradictions and Extreme Contradictions can Wisdom be cultivated and Knowledge obtained through Understanding; and therefore necessary within the Literature for Higher Learning? How else could more attention be drawn from an audience for "Continuous Working Theories" that require Critical Thinking, Debate, and Discourse? If every word within Literature were as a Diamond then what about the Rough? If every stone was a Pearl then how could the Value appreciate? If there were no dirt in the Mine, or stones in the River, or rocks within the Earth then what need and use would there be for a Sifter or Strainer?
MATTHEW I6:I6,I7 Flesh and Blood can NOT reveal GOD'S Living Word of TRUTH. Only GOD in Heaven. Everyone is going to figure it out and write a book. No No No. Just read with The LORD GOD and allow HIM to reveal.
I think 'Mark' would have known eye witnesses. I say this because of Mark 15:21. Mark has Simon of Cyrene carry the cross of Jesus, but his mention of his children, Alexander and Rufus, is a really weird thing to do unless they would be known to Mark and his audience.
@ 22.:30 Erhman states "I think it is very, very difficult to show dependence of one author on another." @ 13:30 Ehrman states that [paraphrasing] he thinks Matthew, Mark and Luke had a source of information and that Mark is pretty much replicated in Matthew and Luke. He also says that the authors probably believed that what they were recording was truth but that doesn't mean it is right. This is just speculative as it could actually be truth and therefore right. There is no evidence that this is not the case. There seem to be a lot of speculations in his reasoning based on these and other statements in the same interview. If, in fact, the events in the canonical Gospels are based on eyewitness accounts (this being the likely 'source' of all the information in the Gospels), then it would be no surprise to find large portions recording the same events. They would also be writing for the express reason of declaring salvation through faith in Jesus's death on the cross for the forgiveness of our sins and his resurrection in the flesh, so recording the main miracles and details of his crucifixion and resurrection would be crucial to demonstrate that Jesus was not just a man, but indeed God incarnate who came to rescue us from our fallen state. And if these 'elites' who are speculated to have recorded the Gospels had in fact come to believe in Jesus and were disciples of the Apostles, they would have been very eager to write down these accounts as a testimony for declaring the truth about Jesus's ministry, death and resurrection so other's would have a written record and also come to believe through their testimony. "I say this in order that no one may delude you with persuasive argument." - Colossians 2:4 - "See to it that there is no one who takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception in accordance with human tradition, in accordance with the elementary principles of the world, rather than in accordance with Christ. For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form..." - Colossians 2:8-9 - 3 years ago I would have enthusiastically agreed with Dr Ehrman and used all his arguments to persuade others that Jesus is not the Author of Life. But praise God because he opened my eyes to see Jesus is the way, the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father but through him. I pray that the Holy Spirit opens your hearts to believe in Jesus. Amen.
My friend, the remarks about showing reliance were pertaining to a very specific case of Luke knowing Josephus Antiquities 93AD. When you mention the Gospels to try contradicting Bart, i'm not sure your factoring that 90% of Mark is literally used in the Gospel of Matthew. This would be plagiarism according to today's standards. I'm glad that your life is satisfying with your beliefs, but a deeper look into this material and your doubts may arise.
@@MythVisionPodcast It's not plagarism if the authors were in agreement and the author of Matthew was confirming and expanding on Mark. The authors believed in Jesus and had received the Holy Spirit. That is why they wrote the Gospels. Matthew and Peter (the likely source for Mark who was his student) spent 3 years together with Jesus and the other Apostles and were like brothers. If the authors of the Gospels were 'elite' Greek converts, they would have known this. They would possibly even have heard the eyewitness accounts from Peter, Mark (who was an evangelist) or Matthew. Why not? As believers, they would want to confirm both accounts to testify to their truthfulness. There is no indication that the writers of the Canonical Gospels were in competition with one another or wanted to upstage one another. What could they possibly gain?
@@harashq198 We're probably not going to find common ground on this issue, because Matthew's Gospel corrects Mark many times. Luke's Gospel is also correcting earlier Gospel accounts. He says so in his prologue. You're making many assumptions about who Mark is based on later Church father remarks. What matters most it seems is that your new life with Jesus is better than it was without believing.
@@MythVisionPodcast The prologue to Luke: “…it seemed fitting to me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in an orderly sequence, most excellent Theophilus; so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught.” The author of Luke was confirming, amending and expanding on what had already been recorded. Historians and writers, for example, do this all the time, so how much more someone writing on the subject that is of ultimate importance to all of humanity for eternity? Additions and corrections in the Synoptic Gospels are to be expected, just as any biographies of a person verified over time by multiple eyewitnesses would become more refined. The authors of Matthew or Luke/Acts would have been collecting information from possibly thousands of eyewitnesses as details were discussed and confirmed over the years. They may even have presented different versions from different perspectives deliberately for the record. This makes sense, especially considering the hundreds of eyewitnesses of the resurrected Christ. In fact, if there were not corrected and updated versions over time, this would be really suspect. All of these updates actually add to the veracity of the record of the ministry, miracles, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Gospels were written to different cultural audiences, which explains the different perspectives and emphases in the books…so that all in the known world could grasp who Jesus is. It’s actually brilliant composition and decision making for maximum communication. Why it is that so many people had attempted to make records of Jesus life? If he didn’t perform miracles and rise from the dead, no one would have bothered to record much about him at all. And, if Jesus was just another wise teacher, the whole Bible is basically irrelevant to anyone who is not Jewish. Yet, as Dr Ehrman points out, the Bible is the most read, studied and believed document in history. Why? Consider this: If the Gospels are true, then God has indeed visited us as prophesied throughout the Jewish Scriptures (OT). If the Gospels are true, the Kingdom of God on earth has begun and it started at Jesus’s resurrection from the dead. That means Jesus is the Son of God, the eternal King of Kings and Lord of Lords who reconciles us with God when we believe that he paid the penalty for our sins on the cross and rose in the flesh, conquering death and granting eternal life in his Kingdom to all who believe. God's Kingdom will be fully established when Jesus returns to judge the living and the dead. I know I cannot convince you. No one could have convinced me, even if they produced irrefutable evidence that could not be denied…I would have found a way to invalidate it. It was the Holy Spirit of God who opened my eyes. You can ask him to reveal the truth to you. "He [Jesus] said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven." " - Matt 16:15-57 -
So we know the bible is fake and false , we know the story of God and Jesus is fake and false and here we are discussing how much of an untruth it is , yep that's humans for ya , still making money from nonsense .
Lot of people have no clue in the ancient Hebrew that there is no New testament there was just only the Father Yahuah. In fact Exodus 23:13 He warned his people about speaking in any other name or deity. That's why the Black Hebrew Israelite slaves came to America because they spoke in another name. Father Yahuah told his people that I do not give my power or glory over to another! Like ecclesiastics 1:9 there's nothing new under the Sun what was in the beginning will be at the end nothing changes. Father Yahuah said his people I am the same today tomorrow forevermore I never change nothing's new what was proclaimed in the beginning will be proclaimed when his kingdom comes.
Dear Derek,The most important work of this century concerning the Bible is that of. Mauro Biglino. After working with and convincing the Vatican translators of his skill and knowledge on some 15 of the most ancient texts known, he has translated the these ealry texts from the original Hebrew and aramaic when only consanants were used. This makes his work not a matter of translation but a factual account of what is actually writen there. He is fond of saying that he has the most simple and basic task of just defining the words as they are written in Proto Hebrew directly. It's pointless to argue with what it acually says because without the later added vowels it's almost impossible to question what the terms there are saying. What he found was so earth shattering, it lead to his dismissal by the Vatican. Derek. I am totally confused by the fact that you have had hundreds of relegioue scholors with out a mention of Mauro Biglino. I would think he is the most important guest you could ever have on the program. His book "The Naked Bible" has had the most profound changes on my understanding of the Bible in my life. As a teaser, did you know that the concept of One God is never even mentioned in the original Bible.
Josephus was the only source available at the time Luke and Acts were written. For example, the author of Luke and Actis could not have learned from anywhere else that, for example, Antonius Felix and Porcius Festus were procurators of Judea, because only Josephus wrote about them. And, for example, the Internet and Wikipedia did not exist in the second century and books were rare back then which is why the author of Luke and Acts had to rely on the only available sources they had.
"Lay people" is a telling term for him to use because it's like "laity" - except for Dr. Bart, it's scholars, not clergy. I'm afraid 'lay people' are not interested because they're not there for history or reality even, they're there for religion, not to see the guy behind the curtain working the bellows of afflatus. Now, there certainly is a large group of people interested in the archeology, the history, the scholarship of these religious texts, Dr. Bart and others have done exceptionally well with them, but the vast majority of people are there for things like redemption, salvation, etc. and not, oh, the textual analysis of a 2nd century copy of a copy of a copy of copy of a copy of Mark.
When you asked Dr Ehrman about the 3 people who had influenced him, I was desperate for you to ask which three scholars had influenced him the most. You didn't do it. I don't give a damn about non-academics. They tend to allow all their biases to colour their points of view which is completely useless.
The bible is a sui generis book authored by God who instituted a church. The historical methods employed by Ehrman routinely ignore the passages in the gospels where Jesus promises to institute a church with the authority to bind and loose, which was subsequently formed at Pentecost and bound the faithful to the negation of the Mosiac law in Acts 15. The same church of the bible is the Roman Catholic church of history with the authority to bind and loose, which has bound the faithful to the inspiration and total inerrancy of the bible as witnessed by the church fathers and Papal statements. Ehrman's scholarship is generally skeptical scholarship separated from supernatural faith. The problem being supernatural faith from the supernatural divinity is superior to reason, the natural sciences and any of Ehrman's historical methods. Again, Ehrman's approach to the biblical text is flawed by ignoring the divine author, faith and the authority of the church to bind and loose on all matters of faith. By ignoring these supernatural realities Ehrman's scholarship artificially decapitates the supernatural order and inverts reality by promoting the usurpation of the supernatural by natural reason and the natural sciences. Generally, Ehrman advertises his agenda by highlighting well-known biblical problems which he never admits cannot be proven to be unresolvable. Ehrman's method is deeply flawed to arrive at his problematic conclusions against church teaching, based upon scholarship which includes much that is good and true but much that is speculative, false and not demonstrable. Ehrman seems to be an impressive scholar, but takes an anti-realist position against the nature of God himself, who is uncreated, supernatural reality, far superior to anything in the universe and the entire created order. Ehrman's scholarly position is reducible to a creature of limited means apparently overcoming the supernatural divinity who has infinite power and knows all things by using a flawed method. Evidently, Ehrman's position is not tenable. I urge people not to take this man's scholarship seriously. One example of many serious flaws is where Ehrman states in another video that James was Jesus's brother as though brother cannot mean cousin or covenant family member. Ehrman's casual affirmation of a point long since contented and explained is an indication he does not care for careful scholarship on factual details of history used within the biblical text. Another point to note is Ehrman's scholarship casually ignores the very strong connection between the biblical text and church history with the conversion of the Roman empire to the Catholic faith and the many miracles of the saints. His scholarly void on these critical points should make readers wonder about his intent to treat the biblical text as a stand alone text of the ancient world independent of church history. If the biblical text is not historical how does he explain the historical miracles of say Fatima and Guadelupe? If those miracles are true and there is a supernatural divinity which is the Trinity which instituted a church with a supernatural authority to bind and loose on the faith as taught in the bible, how can he maintain a purely natural approach to the text devoid of faith and the authority of the church? He cannot without being subject to the charge of being disengenuous. Ehrman must ignore crucial historical details within church history to found his flawed method. He claims to be a historian but routinely ignores the consequences of historical events when those events do not coincide with his chosen scholarly method. Ehrman's historical method is born of rationalism and naturalistic pantheism which denies the supernaturalist biblical world. for Ehrman's scholarship to be seriously considered he must demonstrate his agnosticism, rationalism, and naturalistic pantheism are all true before commencing his quest to understand the historical basis for the biblical text. The foundations of Ehrman's scholarly approach includes deep and consequential flaws which which expose his psychological and scholarly bias against the authenticity of the biblical text.
I respect scholars, historians, apologists, thinkers, but could any be correct in their judgement? Why not Mathew's verbal witness be written by another? And Mark being the actual writer and researcher of other witnesses?
For anyone who has never read any of his books, I'd recommend you buy one or a few of them. This man explains everything in the simplest manner and makes very sharp point; he also always shoots straight to the point everytime, while providing very comprehensive evidence for his points. Also, does anyone know a similar scholar and author who deals with the Old Testament?
It might be interesting to ask Dr Ehrman to talk about How He Learned to Write. No one is born knowing how to write a book, high school students do not know thus, nor do college or graduate students. My point is to understand how difficult and time consuming it is to acquire the specialized skill to write a book like one of the gospels,
If you’re not a born again Christian then chances are that you’ll be unable to place your right palm on the KJV and say these words once only->> I refuse to be full of demons. Holy Spirit or demons,we all have to choose. Please choose wisely.❤️✝️
The reason that the sited apologists have to not budge on the topic of the resurrection is because without it, there can be no blanket forgiveness and hope for the 2nd coming. All Christians would be left with are the cutesy infant narratives and a set of stories with teachings - all, or nearly all, of which were said and done by other known and unknown itinerant teachers of the day, or some major theologians of the day (e.g., Rabbi Hillel). So, yes, to be in any sense a Christian, someone has to be willing to "die on the hill" of the resurrection - even though there seems to have been poor evidence for it at the time of its alleged occurrence.
I have to go back and read the gospels. Bart says the dates indicate none of the gospel writers would have known anyone who had possibly walked with Jesus. Do the gospels not talk about walking with the savior?
The apologists are those who confine themselves in denominational doctrine. They're asked to explain a verse or chapter and get esoteric as if there's a hidden truth that they only know.
He doesn’t believe that there is a divine Jesus and he does think there are some elements of the New Testament are legitimate. Nothing hypocritical at all
@@theartzscientist8012 That would be the composition fallacy, only because a part of the book is fraudulent that doesn't make everything in the book fraudulent. It also works the other way, only because a part of the book is reliable that doesn't mean the whole book is reliable. The key is in analyzing each claim and then present which one is reliable and why.
The only part of the Bible that we can be sure are Jesus' words and not what others wrote he said is The Sermon on the Mount. Those words ring true as from Jesus/
my dad was a pastor in Dallas but after reading 'misquoting Jesus' I left church trinity trigod for monotheism of islam. Jesus himself was a monotheist
"I call Christianity the one great curse, the one great intrinsic depravity, the one great instinct of revenge, for which no means are venomous enough, or secret, subterranean and small enough - I call it the one immortal blemish upon the human race." Friedrich Nietzsche
@@michellebrown4903 Hinduism is not a religion, it's just Culture ( a conglomeration of various living styles) There are a lot of fiction, a lot of" good", a lot of "bad " ideas, of course. But the Hindus don't think that all that was written actually happened.
Sign up for Bart Ehrman's new course "The Unknown Gospels" here 👉 www.mythvisionpodcast.com/unknowngospels
You need to interview Mark S. Smith!
[5th element; Aether]
The author reviewed the experimental ether-drift experiments and publications of Michelson-Morley, Dayton Miller, Michelson-Pease-Pearson, and more recent others, from the late 1800s through the present.
Many of these historical studies presented positive results in detecting a cosmic ether, and ether-drift through space.
Among these experiments, the most widely cited Michelson-Morley experiment of 1887, which did show a slight positive result (and never the claimed “null”), was found to be the least significant or robust in terms of experimental procedures and actual data collected, as compared with the far more important 1920s’ study by Miller on Mount Wilson near Los Angeles, California.
Most ether-drift experiments yielding claimed negative results were plagued by various unwarranted assumptions about the capacity of an ether-drift to penetrate dense materials such as stone buildings or metal shielding, or that ether flow would “contract” matter, including measuring instruments, leaving the ether-drift undetectible.
Some obtained positive results, but the authors chose to interpret them as “negative” due to unwarranted assumptions demanding extremely fast ether-drift velocities near to the Earth’s surface.
Miller was the first to experimentally account for these issues, his most important study made atop Mount Wilson in a thermal shelter, with the largest light-beam interferometer ever constructed, and where the light-beam path was enclosed only by light glass or cardboard.
His procedures accounted for a matter-retarded cosmic ether-drift with a reduced velocity closer to the Earth’s surface.
Miller thereby obtained significant positive results over four epochs of study.
Albert Einstein also was aware of these issues, and admitted openly that if Miller was correct, then his own relativity theory would “collapse like a house of cards.”
In subsequent years, however, the followers of Einstein defeated this evidence for the cosmic ether by public ridicule and political tactics, not too different from the modern “skeptic” movement.
The Shankland, McCuskey, Leone, and Kuerti article claiming to have reviewed Miller’s Mount Wilson data, well after all the old ether-drift experimenters were dead and could no longer defend their findings, were also specifically reviewed and found to not support their own stated conclusions, thereby leaving the question of a cosmic ether and ether-drift as an open and unresolved question, or one which positive evidence indicates has been proven out.
More recent ether-drift experiments from the last quarter of the 20th and early 21st Centuries, notably by Galaev, Múnera, and others, using radiofrequencies, light-beam interferometery, and other novel methods, have provided further proof for the existence of a cosmic ether in space. www.scientificexploration.org/journal/
Physicist Robert B. Laughlin wrote:
It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such medium existed [..] The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity.
This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. [..]
It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo.
Main articles: Pilot wave and De Broglie-Bohm theory
Louis de Broglie stated, "Any particle, ever isolated, has to be imagined as in continuous "energetic contact" with a hidden medium."
However, as de Broglie pointed out, this medium "could not serve as a universal reference medium, as this would be contrary to relativity theory."
RUclips always play’s Jesus commercials. EVERY commercial break. Wouldn’t that lower your channels revenue, since 90% of your watchers would skip? Can this be because of category placement?(religous, historical,etc) Didn’t know if you are aware.
Ancient books initiate us into ancestor worship. This is why children are not told to submit to their parents but to obey them. Atheism is also from ancestors, so atheists are doing what they should be doing and should not be judged .
I love Bart's laugh. Always good to see him.
Bart Ehrman is the best Bible teacher I ever had, and I learned from him only by videos, online courses, and books. Former fundamentalist and even attended conservative seminary and Bart was instrumental, often against my will, making me see the Bible for what it was and is, not what pastors and apologists say it is. I’m forever indebted to him for his great work. He’s so misrepresented by so many conservative and fundamentalists and he’s such a great guy and scholar. Thanks Bart and thanks Derek
Till 325 AD, not a single historian or writer wrote about Jesus Christ or any of his disciples .
BEFORE THE FIRST COUNCIL OF NICEA IN 325 AD, NOBODY ON THIS PLANET EVER HEARD OF THE NAMES JESUS CHRIST OR CHRISTIANITY.
JESUS/ BIBLE / CHRISTIANTY WAS COOKED UP IN 325 AD, BY JEWESS HELENA , WHO SAT ON THE POPE'S CHAIR..
"Vatican is Evil terrorist satanic organisation."
If Satan does exist, then he thrives inside the Roman Catholic Church.
The dead sea scrolls covering the period from Birth of Jesus to 68 AD , does NOT say one word about Jesus or his 12 Apostles.
Hellenistic philosopher Philo Judaeus of Alexandria (20 BCE-50 AD/CE)-alive at the purported time of Jesus, and one of the wealthiest and best connected citizens of the Empire- makes no mention of Christ, Christians or Christianity in his voluminous writings. Nor do any of the hundreds of other historians and writers who flourished during the first THREE centuries of the common era.
The DEAD SEA SCROLLS were all written by Pagan Essenes . None of them have been edited by later Christians, as is the case with some other Jewish literature.
All the scrolls (except a treasure map known as the Copper Scroll) can be dated prior to A.D. 68 or 69, when the Qumran settlement was believed to have been destroyed by the Romans in the Jewish revolt.
The oldest of the scrolls probably goes back to the middle of the third century B.C. The people of Qumran belonged to a Pagan religious group known as the Essenes.
Pliny the Elder, who died during the volcanic destruction of Pompeii in the year 79 A.D., described a community of pagan Essenes living on the western shore of the Dead Sea, close to where Khirbet Qumran is situated.
John the Baptist was an ascetic Essene . He was a vegan and was uncircumcised . Various literary sources like Josephus and Philo tell clearly that Essenes were ascetics.
We also know, from literary testimony, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the archaeological remains of Qumran, that the Essenes practiced many water baptisms for ritual purification-similar to a dip in the Ganges or the river Pampa or at Thiirunelli. At Qumran, however, all members of the community were baptized with water for ritual purification.
Josephus writes, "And as for their piety towards God, it is very extraordinary; for before sunrising they speak not a word about profane matters, but put up certain prayers which they have received from their forefathers, as if they made a supplication for its rising" (Wars, 2.8.5). This testimony accords well with what we know from the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Prayer and humility was one thing that the Essenes . When they cooked up stories about Jesus they wrote that Jesus Christ ate the Last Supper in the Essene part of town.
Jesus is not historical character, The Dead Sea Scrolls have produced increasing evidence to cement the fact that Jesus Christ never existed and the whole story was cooked up at the First Council of Nicea in 325 AD.
The FAKE gospels were written after 325 AD after Jesus was cooked up at the first Council of Nicea..
Twelve apostles of Jesus never existed.
Jesus Christ names 12 apostles to spread his gospel, and the early Christian church owes its rapid rise to their missionary zeal. Yet, for most of the Twelve, there's scant evidence of their existence outside of the New Testament.
The concept of using statistics to prove that 'God authored the Bible' is bullshit.
Why was the library of Alexandria burnt ?
The gospel of Thomas was not written by Jesus' disciple Thomas.
Englishman Godfrey Higgins studied Greek, Latin and law at Cambridge . His two-volume, 867-page book Anacalypsis: An Enquiry into the Origins of Languages, Nations, and Religions, was published posthumously in 1836.
In his treatise, Higgins writes " the mythos of the Jews and the mythos of the Greeks are all at bottom the same lifted from the ancient mythos of Hindus ; and ... are contrivances under the appearance of histories to perpetuate doctrines," and that Christian editors “either from roguery or folly, corrupted them all.”
1900, Scottish MP John Mackinnon Robertson wrote that Jesus never existed but was an FAKE invention by a first-century messianic cult. He wrote about the First Council of Nicea of 325 AD where powerful forces invented a new god to fit the needs of the society of the time .Robertson specifically mentions the Talmudic story of the Yeshu .
Thomas says: "Simon Peter said to them, ‘Make Mary leave us, for females don’t deserve life.’ Jesus said, ‘Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven’" (Thomas 114).
AIYOOOOO -even Christians don’t like this
When the master of James baby Jesus Christ never existed -- how can his disciple St James exist ?
Even since the dead sea scrolls have been discovered CHRISTIANS and JEWS are jumping up and down like demented orangutans claiming that Essenes belong to them.
Dead Sea text or Qumran Scrolls have absolutely nothing ZILCH, to do with the Bible of the Torah - never mind the diabolical lies of the Christians and the Jews.
For arguments sake -even if messiah Jesus Christ existed , the gospels were written a even a century after Jesus' estimated year of death, by individuals who never met Jesus, and then were edited or forged over the centuries by unknown scribes with their own agendas.
Dead sea scrolls have been written by Essenes of the sect of Apollonius
For more plz click link .....
ajitvadakayil.blogspot.com/2016/04/apollonius-or-jesus-christ-who-is-real_10.html?m=1
"They came with a Bible and their religion. They stole our land and crushed our spirit and now tell us we should be thankful to the ‘Lord’ for being saved." - Chief Pontiac 1769 Native American
Plz click link to read more ...
1. ajitvadakayil.blogspot.com/2013/01/christopher-columbus-father-of-american.html?m=1
I see Dr. Bart Ehrman. I watch. Simple as that.
I concur
Thank you
That’s two of us!!
@@MythVisionPodcast The Gospel is the Coming of the Kingdom of GOD, First Jesus Kingdom for a 1000 Years Then the Father's Kingdom, the Prophet taught the Gospel First then the Apostles
@@james8996 ❤
Always will click on a Bart cameo. Thanks for asking him these questions!
I think he makes an interesting point at the end about not many people knowing the current status of scholarship. But other than Dr. Ehrman, who really is there to communicate this to the world? Ehrman is the Sagan of New Testament scholarship and we need a Cosmos to go with it.
Wonderful video! Bart is a world class scholar. Currently reading "How Jesus became God" and it's so well written and enjoyable to read. Great interview Derek! Much respect and love!
That’s why MythVision is my favorite channel on RUclips 😍😍😍 Keep going man.
Bart Ehrman makes the invaluable contribution of integrity to Biblical scholarship. If people actually knew what was in the Bibie, they would not foolishly claim to believe ever word of it, and might learn to appreciate some of the goodness in it.
Lots of scholars would disagree
@@jonathandutra4831 sure… those who want the bible to be true to protect their fragile beliefs
@@darrylcoan8452 This has nothing to do with the Bible ! I'm speaking on Faith based beliefs in general. Whether it's a placebo effect or not the results work ! Your so bias against religion because of past hurt or failure that you can't see thr trees past the forrest. Jesus was right in his teaching that "As you believe so shall it be" so if it's not working for you it's because of you not anyone else. Take accountability and stop blaming religion kid.
@veganhigler6541 Not with that attitude
@@jonathandutra4831 Maybe if I believe in Santa Claus and unicorns, both of them will become real 🤔
WHAT IS SPECIAL ABOUT BEING A HINDU?
By Francois Gautier.
*Diversity in Divinity and Unity in Spirituality.* Be Your Own Messiah.
1) Believe in God ! - Aastik - Accepted
2) Don't believe in God ! - You're accepted as Nastik
3) You want to worship idols - please go ahead. You are a murti pujak.
4) You dont want to worship idols - no problem. You can focus on Nirguna Brahman.
5) You want to criticise something in our religion. Come forward. We are logical. Nyaya, Tarka etc. are core Hindu schools.
6) You want to accept beliefs as it is. Most welcome. Please go ahead with it.
7) You want to start your journey by reading Bhagvad Gita - Sure !
8) You want to start your journey by reading Upanishads - Go ahead.
9) You want to start your journey by reading Purana - Be my guest.
10) You just don't like reading Puranas or other books. No problem my dear. Go by Bhakti tradition . ( bhakti- devotion)
11) You don't like idea of Bhakti ! No problem. Do your Karma. Be a karmayogi.
12) You want to enjoy life. Very good. No problem at all. This is Charvaka Philosophy.
13) You want to abstain from all the enjoyment of life & find God - jai ho ! Be a Sadhu, an ascetic !
14) You don't like the concept of God. You believe in Nature only - Welcome. (Trees are our friends and Prakriti or nature is worthy of worship).
15) You believe in one God or Supreme Energy. Superb! Follow Advaita philosophy
16) You want a Guru. Go ahead. Receive gyaan.
17) You don't want a Guru.. Help yourself ! Meditate, Study !
18) You believe in Female energy ! Shakti is worshipped.
19) You believe that every human being is equal. Yeah! You're awesome, come on let's celebrate Hinduism!
"Vasudhaiva kutumbakam" (the world is a family)
20) You don't have time to celebrate the festival.
Don't worry. One more festival is coming! There are multiple festivals every single day of the year.
21) You are a working person. Don't have time for religion. Its okay. You will still be a Hindu.
22) You like to go to temples. Devotion is loved.
23) You don't like to go to temples - no problem. You are still a Hindu!
24) You know that Hinduism is a way of life, with considerable freedom.
25) You believe that everything has God in it. So you worship your mother, father, guru, tree, River, Prani-matra, Earth, Universe!
26) And If you don't believe that everything has GOD in it - No problems. Respect your viewpoint.
27) "Sarve jana sukhino bhavantu " (May you all live happily)
You represent this! You're free to choose, my dear Hindu!
This is exactly the essence of Hinduism, all inclusive .. That is why it has withstood the test of time inspite of repeated onslaught both from within and outside, and assimilated every good aspects from everything . That is why it is eternal !!!
There is a saying in Rigveda , the first book ever known to mankind which depicts the Hinduism philosophy in a Nutshell -" Ano bhadrah Krathavo Yanthu Vishwathah"- Let the knowledge come to us from every direction...
Eating less meat is important because of global warming and any religion which carries part of the weight of helping society adapt, is part of real life on Earth and any religion which pretends it doesnt matter is just engaged in fairy tales. Relevance to real life is the signature of the real God.
I would argue the Bible is the least read book considering how many people think it's holy.
Very true. It's amazing that people think this is the word of god, but many of those people have not actually taken the time to see what god wanted them to hear!
It seems that they feel in reality that it is a book (different cannons) that can hide their hypocrisy and thus empower their own selfish/in-group corruption.
Even most Christians don’t even read the Bible. Just cherry picking to make Jesus God or prove the confusing trinity
@@theastronomer5800 the trick is to write gibberish so that no one can read it
#Preach
It's interesting that the earlier gospels have less detail than the later gospels. This is the opposite of what you would expect if the authors were nearer to the time of Jesus than the later ones. It says to me that the authors are developing the Jesus story with time.
And it gets more and more ‘fantastical’ like a child adding bits on every time to make the story more dramatic.
Not necessarily they don't give the details
Luk 1:3 εδοξεν [It seems good] G1380 καμοι [and I? or (Kamoi (a divine being)] G2504 παρηκολουθηκοτι [to be always present, to attend one wherever he goes] G3877 ανωθεν [from above, from a higher place (of things which come from heaven or God)] G509 πασιν [everyone, all things, everything] G3956 ακριβως [exactly, accurately, diligently] G199 καθεξης [one after another, successively, in order] G2517 σοι [you] G4771 γραψαι [writing] G1125 κρατιστε [most excellent] G2903 θεοφιλε [Theophilus = “FRIEND OF GOD”] G2321
Mechanical Translation:
It seems good and I was always present from above (a higher place or heaven) everyone (or all things) diligently one after another writing you most excellent Theophilus (friend of God).
Luke means Light Bringer and he was a physician? coincidence?
Luk_5:31 And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick.
Luk 4:23 And he said to them, “Doubtless you will quote to me this proverb, ‘“Physician, heal yourself.” What we have heard you did at Capernaum, do here in your hometown as well.’”
Seems like Mithra and Osiris combined with John the Baptist, or something like that.
@@garryferrington811 Neither his words match no ones and he was not born of a virgin he was sent from FATHER.
Luk 1:27 προς [at, near, by] παρθενον [Parthenon] μεμνηστευμενην [to give a souvenir] ανδρι [man (or Andri short for Andrew)] ω [whose] ονομα [name] ιωσηφ [JOSEPH] εξ [of] οικου [house] δαβιδ [David] και [and] το [the] ονομα [name] της [the] παρθενου [Parthenou (Surname)] μαριαμ [MIRIAM not Mary]
There is nothing about a virgin in that verse. Miriam was Herod's wife a Parthian he married to tie the dynasty to Rome. Joseph was Herod's uncle he had watching Miriam and had instructed him to kill her if Anthony attempted or killed him.
Herod faced this volatile situation and exploited it to his advantage. Indeed, it was no coincidence that the Romans entrusted the throne of Judaea to Herod the Great at the close of 40 B.C.E., the same year of the Parthian conquest. During the campaign, the Parthians installed Antigonus, son of Aristobulus II and scion of the Hasmonean dynasty, as king of Judaea. Herod fled to Rome to use this event to make a bid for kingship. He sought out Antony and underscored the Parthian threat (and threw in a bribe for good measure!). As the ancient sources make clear, the strategy worked; the Parthian actions motivated the Senate to make Herod the Great king. In this situation, Herod is best seen as a manipulator of Rome’s confrontation with Parthia for his own advantage.
Angry and despondent over her son’s death, Alexandra wrote to Cleopatra, begging her to intervene by bringing Herod to justice for the murder of her son.[17] Cleopatra informed Antony of Alexandra’s request, and Antony summoned Herod to him to defend himself against Alexandra’s accusations. Knowing that his meeting with Antony could end in his own execution, Herod left Mariamme in the care of his uncle Joseph, and instructed Joseph to have Mariamme killed, should he be killed by Antony. As described by Josephus:
Now Joseph, while administering the affairs of the kingdom and for that reason repeatedly meeting with Mariamme about public business or because of the respect which he was bound to show her as the queen, repeatedly fell into talks about Herod’s affection and great love for her. And when in women’s fashion she and even more so Alexandra, affected not to believe his statements, Joseph in an excess of zeal to reveal the king’s feelings let himself go so far as to speak of the instructions given him, offering them as proof of the fact that Herod could not live without her, nor, if he should suffer a malign fate, would he even be separated from her by death (Ant. 15:67-72).[18]
Mariamme did not see Herod’s instructions to Joseph as complimentary, but as proof that her husband was wicked and deranged. www.thetorah.com/article/mariamme-the-last-hasmonean-princess
@@garryferrington811 Joh 8:22-23 So the Jews said, “Will he kill himself, since he says, ‘Where I am going, you cannot come’?” He said to them, “YOU ARE FROM BELOW; I AM FROM ABOVE. YOU ARE OF THIS WORLD; I AM NOT OF THIS WORLD.
Joh_12:25 Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life IN THIS WORLD will keep it for eternal life.
Joh_12:31 Now is the judgment of THIS WORLD; now will THE RULER OF THIS WORLD BE CAST OUT.
Joh_16:11 concerning judgment, because THE RULER OF THIS WORLD IS JUDGED.
Joh_18:36 Jesus answered, “MY KINGDOM IS NOT OF THIS WORLD. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But MY KINGDOM IS NOT FROM THE WORLD.”
Over 38 times in the Gospels Christos says he was sent not born also.
People do not listen for what he said they read those who formed a narrative instead. Copied these off my slides caps are not yelling just stuff I highlighted that way
Joh 16:28 I CAME FORTH FROM THE FATHER, AND HAVE COME TO THE WORLD; AGAIN I LEAVE THE WORLD, AND GO ON UNTO THE FATHER
Joh 3:13 AND NO MAN HATH ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN, BUT HE THAT DESCENDED FROM HEAVEN, THE SON OF MAN WHO IS IN HEAVEN.
Joh 3:17 FOR GOD SENT NOT HIS SON INTO THE WORLD, TO JUDGE THE WORLD: BUT THAT THE WORLD MAY BE SAVED BY HIM.
Luk 7:28 I tell you, among THOSE BORN OF WOMEN NONE IS GREATER THAN JOHN. Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.”
GOSPEL FEVER
MOAR COWBELL
Fascinated that amidst the illness he's still spreading gnosis
Freddy Silva helped me understand the real message of 'Christ'. One that most people have completely failed to comprehend.
I left church for islam 2002. god was not farted out of mary's birth canal and wore a diaper sucked a pacifier as church teaches
Yes! I love me some Bart Ehrman!!
You are genuinely MYTH .... SO IM UNSUBBING !
Shalom 🙏
Thanks for sharing this .
Bart is a legend .💪💪💪
Bart is such a boss. He is so humble but so bright and erudite.
He's also a deceiver who knowingly misrepresents material and pretends mainstream academic scholarship doesn't exist when he is pursuing his overt anti-christian agenda Basically an erudite wolf in sheep's clothing and not to be trusted
Real talk.
Not only those things, but many apologists are suddenly agreeing and changing narratives due to the serious factual evidence provided...they cannot find real faults
@@MrZORROish you mean he is not scorched by the rubbish spouted forever
@@GrinchDec23 No, I mean he's a liar.
Love this. I'm a huge fan of his work. Hope he recovers from Covid soon.
Seems he has been banished to the garden shed 😳😂😂. Thats a very nice shed tho.. a sort of glamping shed 😂
I love this quote from William Lane Craig on Bart Ehrman.
"I lost all respect for Bart Ehrman frankly, when I saw him in public debate, how he deliberately and deceptively tries to mislead laymen in this (truth or fallacy of the resurrection of Jesus Christ & etc.)..."
William Lane Craig
Here's an excellent example. Bart says that the Gospels were written in scholarly Greek. Exactly the opposite is true. The Gospels were written in Koine Greek:
"Koine Greek has a simplified grammar, and the sentence construction was simple. While Koine Greek is considered to be the language of everyday life, modern Greek can be termed as the language of the books."
Another good example is how he blatantly and knowingly misrepresents the account of the trials and subsequent crucifixion of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark to show how Mark contradicts Luke's account of the same.
If you are a sincere seeker of the truth I would invite you to watch Mike Winger's treatment of the above. I guarantee you that it will change your perception of Bart forever. Here's Mike Winger on Bart:
ruclips.net/video/g2ne3ndnVQk/видео.html
@@rolandovelasquez135 great job mate ,n thanks for that link …that bastard Ehrman must be doing it for some Antichrist organisation for some 300 pieces of gold … he must be a Morden day Judas …. At least he repented n hung himself
@@rolandovelasquez135 right these guys lie and lie so much they forgot they been lying for decades. Also this guy mythvision deletes comments when they make him look foolish why would he do that if he's concrete in his faith? No respect
@@rolandovelasquez135 Not as clear, or cut and dried as you'd want to believe. Consider that Koine Greek did not die out. On the contrary it grew in use and prestige, in fact, to become the standard form of Greek in the Middle Ages, becoming the reference form of Greek language as the general Greek population rapidly accepted Christian faith. Modern Greek remains very similar to Koine Greek.
Additionally, there is a wide range of Greek language in the New Testament. Luke is basically "classical," according to commentators, while Paul's letters are an articulate, educated version of Koine. Other writings vary to a conversational form of Koine. Many authoritative sources exist for the more technical details of language evaluation of the New Testament texts.
Enjoyed seeing Bart! He is one of my favorite guests. He is just easy to comprehend. Thank you for the excellent content.😊💚🍀
My fellow adults who have imaginary friends and gods and refuse to outgrow them like they outgrew Santa Claus still AMAZES me…
What are you trying to tell me about Santa Claus?!
Many of them cling tightly to their religious beliefs out of fear. The fear that they may be making a huge mistake by giving up (or even questioning) their faith and as a result would be condemning themselves to eternal punishment in the afterlife. Or fear of losing their moral compass and becoming an evil monster. Also the fear that without faith, their lives will become empty and meaningless with neither purpose nor value. Christianity in particular is VERY effective at evoking fear. Giving up one's belief in Santa Claus is not tied with such fears... other than perhaps no more presents for Christmas!
@@davidburroughs2244 ,😂🤣😂🤣🤛🏾
@@davidburroughs2244 I'm afraid that the mouse, was in fact, stirring.
This perception of stunted growth is interesting. I'm not sure I'd criticize anyone's development who believed in Santa Claus but could still solve a rubik's cube. I'd consider them fairly advanced despite their belief in the mythological, particularly since I've never solved a rubik's cube.
"It would make Acts less likely to be historical". How do you get less likely than zero? Acts is obviously fanfic.
I felt taken aback by that too. I’m reading Acts right now and it’s so obviously fiction. Whether blatantly contradicting Pauls own letters, using predictable narrative formulas over and over, rewriting stories from gospel of Luke and just changing the characters names (eg road to Emmaus vs phillip and the ethiopian eunuch), hell even at the start he contradicts his own gospel account of the resurrection (easter sunday vs 40 days later). I mean it’s baffling to me that Bart even entertains the idea of its historicity.
By fanfic, I hope you mean ‘obvious polemic by the winning ideology to sugarcoat their history while legitimizing it by sock-puppeting the apostles’.
@@Lobsterwithinternet yep
-1
Well the only parts of Acts I'm willing to concede were historical or semi historical are the parts that made Paul look bad. It only took 2000 years but it is now revealed that Paul is a proven liar. Something the Jews probably knew all this time.
be safe from covid...hope you can take paxlovid
Thanks for this. I have enormous respect for Bart Ehrman's scholarship, and I appreciate the work that you put into your questions.
It's always interesting to hear Prof. Ehrman speak. He has so much to teach us.
I've read most of his fascinating books and highly recommend them to anyone who's interested in theology, Christology and ancient Middle-Eastern religious history, etc.
Good and intelligent questions, Derek. 👍
Nice comment Bob, thank you.
One other way to know why all 4 gospels are different is because Matthew portrays Jesus as the New Moses for a New covenant, Mark as the standard devine massianic image, Luke as the New Elisha, and John as God in flesh. 4 different perspectives on Christ, all compliment eatchother ✌️
*All contradict each other
and none of them actually knew the guy
@@scambammer6102 Mark Luke and John were clearly written by scribes that new the apostles according to early tradition and the text it self, however its Matthew that was written by the apostle. Bart's claims that it wasn't doesn't excuse the traditional claim very well.
@@micahpond6895 Sorry, none of the gospels were written by the names they carry, that is simply the expert's consensus due to the evidence (it was only since 180CE that the gospels were mentioned by name, before that they were simply anonymous).
You are free to present why you think that is not the case, hopefully with none of the usual apologetic excuses.
First, Mark says that Jesus was the Messiah and he was exalted when John baptized him. Then the Jews complained that the Messiah should’ve been born in Bethlehem and his Messiah status was not impreesive. So Matthew and Luke made up fantastic stories, both contradicting each other, as to how Jesus was born in Bethlehem but ended up in Nazareth. Matthew then spent his energy trying to harmonize the story with prophesies, while Luke just sloppily made up stuffs, like the nonsensical census. Then Jesus was made to be exalted, either on his birth or at conception.
John,… John just didn’t care. He was the number one fan fiction writer. Jesus here was GOD and has been since the beginning of everything.
Wonderful interview, Derek.
Derek, when you demonstrate a forward slash on camera don't forget it reverses the image! You need to do it the other way....
the church fathers should have mixed up the gospels of thomas john and barnabas and discarded paul's letters or I think it would be a best seller if were selected from the most fantastic gospels and a single book was made.they could also create a monotheistic religion instead of a trinity 2000 years later, Christians are still making videos on youtube that we finally explained the trinity I think the church fathers and Paul followed such a strategy to get along with the pagans
I have Brown and I have Kuemmel number 3 is difficult but no one had a greater impact than Rudolph Bultmann -- "uncle Rudy" if you please.
If they’re that important, and of god, why didn’t god do anything sooner to reveal them… Christianity is filled with ridiculousness…
Derek people are gunna be bingeing Mythvision for centuries as they get to the age of seriously questioning their dogmas.
I have a difficult time believing that the people who listened to Jesus had perfect recall since people now do not seem to have the ability to recite exactly what a modern speaker says especially years later. So what do we know what did Jesus actually say. I have a high I.Q. yet I cannot remember in detail what Bart says in one of his talks. I can remember the gist of what Bart says but I guarantee that 10 years from now I doubt I can remember much of what he said.
TT//// See "Antiquity Unveiled" and "Caesar's Messiah"
High IQ doesn't = excellent memory and vice versa.
The most effective method for most people to become non theists or atheists or agnostics , etc ; is simply to get them to seriously read these bronze / iron age books and let them evaluate the authenticity of the stories and claims made by the so called authors of these books which are supposedly divinely inspired ! A good percentage who do just simply " drop out " from believing these incredulously nonsensical
narratives !
What is surprising when I think about it as a very long term churchman is the fact that I have not heard from anyone in the church in all that time a single comment on the scholarship like Prof Ehrman on the Bible. Not once in thousands of interactions!
While I cant comment of course on your annecdote, what strikes me as an ex christian is this.. if the message of jesus is the most important message ever, why dont top theists, such as the pope, not spend ALL their time debating his existance. Have a moderator panel with theist and non theist scholars in the middle, and the various popes, and church leaders v secular scientists and aethiests. When either side says.. the bible says this.. then prof bert etc step in. If the world depends on religion, then the debate should be constant and totally public 😳 👍
I say this, cos what strikes me as an aethiest, is what bart says in this interview. He has not heard an arguement he has never heard before.
@@TheScotsalan because that pope dude is no fool
@@scambammer6102the Vatican and what it stands for will get their judgement
Need another horde of heathens to roll thru
What IGNORANCE !
There are no "gospels" ( plural ).
There is ONLY ONE "gospel" ( GOOD NEWS MESSAGE ).
You can hang all the pieces of paper on your wall all you want, but your "education" will not give you "understanding".
Dude, I'm so sorry & you're so right! I really shouldn't use my brain for these issues and just drink the koolaid. Forgive me
@@MythVisionPodcast ....That's ok, I forgive you.
And you're right, you shouldn't use your "brain", you should use your MIND ( "SPIRIT" )
because that's WHAT "GOD" IS . ( John 4:24 )
Funny how that "koolaid" works.......isn't it.
@@MythVisionPodcast ......"Father" = MIND
"Mother" = THOUGHT
"Son" (Child) = CONSCIOUSNESS
Ummmm, good "koolaid".
All religious Interpreters and Instructors should be licensed, monitored, be required reporters and to have a Social Workers certification. Govt can use secret shoppers to make sure they arent abusing or grooming the general public.
Great conversation gentlemen. I find fascinating the topic an sobering eye given to it by people like yourselves. 👍
This is one brave man to change the way he did. He gives an objectivity to what he teaches that is unique.
Hi. May i ask the following question: " if God pre-existed Nature and actually created it, us, life, the whole thing.... what was he all loving, all powerful and all knowing of/about before he created everything?"
Please consider joining MythVision Patreon to help me in continuing doing this work! 💯
www.patreon.com/mythvision
-💥Get early access to 100's of videos not made public
-💥Ask questions for scholars I interview and potentially have a video recording from the scholars
-💥Private message me
Good old Bart he’s a real Bible expert!
Professing themselves to be wise they became fools
That is because they are nonsensical jibberish.
My favorite gospel story is Baby Jesus taming the dragons. Haven't seen it in a movie, though. Then again, I've never seen a movie where, when Jesus dies, all the dead rise up as zombies, presumably hungry for human brains, although it's "gospel truth." Would make a hell of a movie.
Hoping for that to show up in Passion of The Christ 2
Really appreciate this video n I love listening to Dr. Bart Ehrman.
... did someone think that the bible was writen by one peron ?????????!!!! Oh this is worse than I thought !
yeah, god
Dont hate the sinner,
hate the Christian.
Thanks to Derek and Bart for these explorations and explanations of the biblical material.
I am amazed at the number of Christians I have known who actually DON'T read the Bible and have no idea other than a basic 'Merry Christmas, oh, but he dies at the end' grasp of the Good Book.
I've gone cover to cover three times now starting as a young teen. I love the study of this book but I never for one second believed the supernatural angle. And if Jesus actually existed, I not sure he did either. It's a whopper of a story either way.
Add Bart with Elaine Pagels and you’ve got it.
Question about Dr. Ehrman's claim that the gospels dont claim to be written by the disciples: Doesn't the gospel of John claim to have been written by the "disciple whom Jesus loved"?
Edit: Here's the verse referring to:
This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.
John 21:24 NIV
They just give half truths and full lies.
you are assuming that "John" was the "disciple whom Jesus loved." That doesn't follow automatically. You are assuming that based on later interpretations. Also, the Gospel of John was written long after the alleged events (at least 80 years) and was certainly not by an eyewitness.
@@scambammer6102 wrong.
@@feliperodriguez4187 Am I? Rats. I hate it when that happens.
@@scambammer6102 you're welcome.
maybe it's metaphorical in nature? 1 son (sun), 4 gospels (seasons) & 12 disciples (months)?
Ten logical, historical arguments proving Jesus never existed.
1. There is no original account of the life of
Jesus originating from the time he supposedly lived.
2. All Later Accounts Of The Life Of Jesus Are Pure Hearsay.
3.The Gospels Were Writlen As Christian Propaganda.
4.The Gospels Are Unlikely To Have Been Written By Disciples Who Knew Jesus.
5.The Earliest Books Of The New Testament,
The Epistles Of Paul, Do Not Ever Refer To Jesus As A Living Being.
6.The New Testament Was Designed At
Council Of Nicea in 325 A.D. To Promote
Christianity Not Document Historical Fact.
7.There Is No Historiceal Evidence Of An Eclipse, Earthquake Or Rending
Of The Veil In The Temple SupPposed To
Have Happened At The Moment 0f Jesus' Death.
8.There Are No Tangible Historical
Artifacts Linked To Jesus.
9.The City of Nazareth Did Not Exist During
The Time Jesus Is Reputed To Have Been Alive.
10.The Life History Of Jesus Parallels are to close
to older Pagan gods, like Horus and Mithra to be real.
aBrahamic logic , Moses/Jesus/Mohammed believing. (Judaism Christianity Islam) is based on messiah hero worship.
They constantly over hype their 'son of god ' to market themselves as they are Godless...
Brahmic logic ,SELF believing (Sanaathan Dharma, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism) is based on Cosmic laws, Nature laws/worship, knowledge gathering, defining divinity as symbolism thru images, Stone dietes..etc
Worshipping Nature's forces, elements, animals birds plants is a core part of Faith....combined with individual Self consciousness, self inquiry , self realization..
This is a blessed video. God bless you!
Great discussion and really good questions!!
The gospels are midrash on the eyewitness prophets Haggai and Zechariah who NAMED Zerubbabel as Christ.
Haggai 2:23 NKJV - ‘In that day,’ says the LORD of hosts, ‘I will take you, Zerubbabel My servant, the son of Shealtiel,’ says the LORD, ‘and will make you like a signet ring; for I have chosen you,’ says the LORD of hosts.”
Zechariah 4:7 NKJV - ‘Who are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain! And he shall bring forth the capstone With shouts of “Grace, grace to it!” ’ ”
Jesus and John are direct swaps for Zerubbabel and Zechariah.
The NT is a midrash script... that got hellenised just like everything else did.
“Is it not written: ‘My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations’? But you have made it ‘a den of robbers.’”
why are we being led by people from 2000 years ago..hope the medical profession is a little more updated ?
best explanation i've heard for many myths and religious writings is that they are scientific astronomical writings in story form. Just as hypothesized in Hamlet's Mill.
Chritian Jihad Sariya Law)
If your brother, son, daughter, wife, or friend asks you to serve another god, what must you do, according to Dt 13:6-10?
Stone them to death
(You must throw the first stone.)
If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;
Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;
Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:
But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.
And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die.
Deuteronomy 13:6-10
Perhaps, only with Contradictions and Extreme Contradictions can Wisdom be cultivated and Knowledge obtained through Understanding; and therefore necessary within the Literature for Higher Learning? How else could more attention be drawn from an audience for "Continuous Working Theories" that require Critical Thinking, Debate, and Discourse? If every word within Literature were as a Diamond then what about the Rough? If every stone was a Pearl then how could the Value appreciate? If there were no dirt in the Mine, or stones in the River, or rocks within the Earth then what need and use would there be for a Sifter or Strainer?
MATTHEW I6:I6,I7 Flesh and Blood can NOT reveal GOD'S Living Word of TRUTH. Only GOD in Heaven.
Everyone is going to figure it out and write a book.
No No No. Just read with The LORD GOD and allow HIM to reveal.
I think 'Mark' would have known eye witnesses. I say this because of Mark 15:21. Mark has Simon of Cyrene carry the cross of Jesus, but his mention of his children, Alexander and Rufus, is a really weird thing to do unless they would be known to Mark and his audience.
@ 22.:30 Erhman states "I think it is very, very difficult to show dependence of one author on another."
@ 13:30 Ehrman states that [paraphrasing] he thinks Matthew, Mark and Luke had a source of information and that Mark is pretty much replicated in Matthew and Luke. He also says that the authors probably believed that what they were recording was truth but that doesn't mean it is right. This is just speculative as it could actually be truth and therefore right. There is no evidence that this is not the case.
There seem to be a lot of speculations in his reasoning based on these and other statements in the same interview.
If, in fact, the events in the canonical Gospels are based on eyewitness accounts (this being the likely 'source' of all the information in the Gospels), then it would be no surprise to find large portions recording the same events. They would also be writing for the express reason of declaring salvation through faith in Jesus's death on the cross for the forgiveness of our sins and his resurrection in the flesh, so recording the main miracles and details of his crucifixion and resurrection would be crucial to demonstrate that Jesus was not just a man, but indeed God incarnate who came to rescue us from our fallen state.
And if these 'elites' who are speculated to have recorded the Gospels had in fact come to believe in Jesus and were disciples of the Apostles, they would have been very eager to write down these accounts as a testimony for declaring the truth about Jesus's ministry, death and resurrection so other's would have a written record and also come to believe through their testimony.
"I say this in order that no one may delude you with persuasive argument." - Colossians 2:4 -
"See to it that there is no one who takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception in accordance with human tradition, in accordance with the elementary principles of the world, rather than in accordance with Christ. For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form..." - Colossians 2:8-9 -
3 years ago I would have enthusiastically agreed with Dr Ehrman and used all his arguments to persuade others that Jesus is not the Author of Life. But praise God because he opened my eyes to see Jesus is the way, the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father but through him.
I pray that the Holy Spirit opens your hearts to believe in Jesus. Amen.
My friend, the remarks about showing reliance were pertaining to a very specific case of Luke knowing Josephus Antiquities 93AD. When you mention the Gospels to try contradicting Bart, i'm not sure your factoring that 90% of Mark is literally used in the Gospel of Matthew. This would be plagiarism according to today's standards. I'm glad that your life is satisfying with your beliefs, but a deeper look into this material and your doubts may arise.
@@MythVisionPodcast It's not plagarism if the authors were in agreement and the author of Matthew was confirming and expanding on Mark. The authors believed in Jesus and had received the Holy Spirit. That is why they wrote the Gospels. Matthew and Peter (the likely source for Mark who was his student) spent 3 years together with Jesus and the other Apostles and were like brothers. If the authors of the Gospels were 'elite' Greek converts, they would have known this. They would possibly even have heard the eyewitness accounts from Peter, Mark (who was an evangelist) or Matthew. Why not? As believers, they would want to confirm both accounts to testify to their truthfulness. There is no indication that the writers of the Canonical Gospels were in competition with one another or wanted to upstage one another. What could they possibly gain?
@@harashq198 We're probably not going to find common ground on this issue, because Matthew's Gospel corrects Mark many times. Luke's Gospel is also correcting earlier Gospel accounts. He says so in his prologue. You're making many assumptions about who Mark is based on later Church father remarks.
What matters most it seems is that your new life with Jesus is better than it was without believing.
@@MythVisionPodcast The prologue to Luke: “…it seemed fitting to me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in an orderly sequence, most excellent Theophilus; so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught.” The author of Luke was confirming, amending and expanding on what had already been recorded. Historians and writers, for example, do this all the time, so how much more someone writing on the subject that is of ultimate importance to all of humanity for eternity?
Additions and corrections in the Synoptic Gospels are to be expected, just as any biographies of a person verified over time by multiple eyewitnesses would become more refined. The authors of Matthew or Luke/Acts would have been collecting information from possibly thousands of eyewitnesses as details were discussed and confirmed over the years. They may even have presented different versions from different perspectives deliberately for the record. This makes sense, especially considering the hundreds of eyewitnesses of the resurrected Christ. In fact, if there were not corrected and updated versions over time, this would be really suspect. All of these updates actually add to the veracity of the record of the ministry, miracles, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The Gospels were written to different cultural audiences, which explains the different perspectives and emphases in the books…so that all in the known world could grasp who Jesus is. It’s actually brilliant composition and decision making for maximum communication.
Why it is that so many people had attempted to make records of Jesus life? If he didn’t perform miracles and rise from the dead, no one would have bothered to record much about him at all. And, if Jesus was just another wise teacher, the whole Bible is basically irrelevant to anyone who is not Jewish. Yet, as Dr Ehrman points out, the Bible is the most read, studied and believed document in history. Why?
Consider this: If the Gospels are true, then God has indeed visited us as prophesied throughout the Jewish Scriptures (OT). If the Gospels are true, the Kingdom of God on earth has begun and it started at Jesus’s resurrection from the dead. That means Jesus is the Son of God, the eternal King of Kings and Lord of Lords who reconciles us with God when we believe that he paid the penalty for our sins on the cross and rose in the flesh, conquering death and granting eternal life in his Kingdom to all who believe. God's Kingdom will be fully established when Jesus returns to judge the living and the dead.
I know I cannot convince you. No one could have convinced me, even if they produced irrefutable evidence that could not be denied…I would have found a way to invalidate it. It was the Holy Spirit of God who opened my eyes. You can ask him to reveal the truth to you.
"He [Jesus] said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven." " - Matt 16:15-57 -
21:30 Luke-Acts, not Luke's Axe, which sounds more interesting 😶🌫️
So we know the bible is fake and false , we know the story of God and Jesus is fake and false and here we are discussing how much of an untruth it is , yep that's humans for ya , still making money from nonsense .
Lot of people have no clue in the ancient Hebrew that there is no New testament there was just only the Father Yahuah. In fact Exodus 23:13 He warned his people about speaking in any other name or deity. That's why the Black Hebrew Israelite slaves came to America because they spoke in another name. Father Yahuah told his people that I do not give my power or glory over to another! Like ecclesiastics 1:9 there's nothing new under the Sun what was in the beginning will be at the end nothing changes. Father Yahuah said his people I am the same today tomorrow forevermore I never change nothing's new what was proclaimed in the beginning will be proclaimed when his kingdom comes.
Great question on his top 3 scholars ..
I am shocked he didn't include Carrier
Dear Derek,The most important work of this century concerning the Bible is that of. Mauro Biglino. After working with and convincing the Vatican translators of his skill and knowledge on some 15 of the most ancient texts known, he has translated the these ealry texts from the original Hebrew and aramaic when only consanants were used. This makes his work not a matter of translation but a factual account of what is actually writen there. He is fond of saying that he has the most simple and basic task of just defining the words as they are written in Proto Hebrew directly. It's pointless to argue with what it acually says because without the later added vowels it's almost impossible to question what the terms there are saying. What he found was so earth shattering, it lead to his dismissal by the Vatican. Derek. I am totally confused by the fact that you have had hundreds of relegioue scholors with out a mention of Mauro Biglino. I would think he is the most important guest you could ever have on the program. His book "The Naked Bible" has had the most profound changes on my understanding of the Bible in my life. As a teaser, did you know that the concept of One God is never even mentioned in the original Bible.
Josephus was the only source available at the time Luke and Acts were written. For example, the author of Luke and Actis could not have learned from anywhere else that, for example, Antonius Felix and Porcius Festus were procurators of Judea, because only Josephus wrote about them. And, for example, the Internet and Wikipedia did not exist in the second century and books were rare back then which is why the author of Luke and Acts had to rely on the only available sources they had.
"Lay people" is a telling term for him to use because it's like "laity" - except for Dr. Bart, it's scholars, not clergy. I'm afraid 'lay people' are not interested because they're not there for history or reality even, they're there for religion, not to see the guy behind the curtain working the bellows of afflatus. Now, there certainly is a large group of people interested in the archeology, the history, the scholarship of these religious texts, Dr. Bart and others have done exceptionally well with them, but the vast majority of people are there for things like redemption, salvation, etc. and not, oh, the textual analysis of a 2nd century copy of a copy of a copy of copy of a copy of Mark.
And btw The The BIBLE is one singular message. Why do people follow men, instead of GOD?
When you asked Dr Ehrman about the 3 people who had influenced him, I was desperate for you to ask which three scholars had influenced him the most.
You didn't do it.
I don't give a damn about non-academics. They tend to allow all their biases to colour their points of view which is completely useless.
The bible is a sui generis book authored by God who instituted a church. The historical methods employed by Ehrman routinely ignore the passages in the gospels where Jesus promises to institute a church with the authority to bind and loose, which was subsequently formed at Pentecost and bound the faithful to the negation of the Mosiac law in Acts 15. The same church of the bible is the Roman Catholic church of history with the authority to bind and loose, which has bound the faithful to the inspiration and total inerrancy of the bible as witnessed by the church fathers and Papal statements.
Ehrman's scholarship is generally skeptical scholarship separated from supernatural faith. The problem being supernatural faith from the supernatural divinity is superior to reason, the natural sciences and any of Ehrman's historical methods. Again, Ehrman's approach to the biblical text is flawed by ignoring the divine author, faith and the authority of the church to bind and loose on all matters of faith. By ignoring these supernatural realities Ehrman's scholarship artificially decapitates the supernatural order and inverts reality by promoting the usurpation of the supernatural by natural reason and the natural sciences.
Generally, Ehrman advertises his agenda by highlighting well-known biblical problems which he never admits cannot be proven to be unresolvable. Ehrman's method is deeply flawed to arrive at his problematic conclusions against church teaching, based upon scholarship which includes much that is good and true but much that is speculative, false and not demonstrable. Ehrman seems to be an impressive scholar, but takes an anti-realist position against the nature of God himself, who is uncreated, supernatural reality, far superior to anything in the universe and the entire created order. Ehrman's scholarly position is reducible to a creature of limited means apparently overcoming the supernatural divinity who has infinite power and knows all things by using a flawed method. Evidently, Ehrman's position is not tenable.
I urge people not to take this man's scholarship seriously. One example of many serious flaws is where Ehrman states in another video that James was Jesus's brother as though brother cannot mean cousin or covenant family member. Ehrman's casual affirmation of a point long since contented and explained is an indication he does not care for careful scholarship on factual details of history used within the biblical text. Another point to note is Ehrman's scholarship casually ignores the very strong connection between the biblical text and church history with the conversion of the Roman empire to the Catholic faith and the many miracles of the saints. His scholarly void on these critical points should make readers wonder about his intent to treat the biblical text as a stand alone text of the ancient world independent of church history.
If the biblical text is not historical how does he explain the historical miracles of say Fatima and Guadelupe? If those miracles are true and there is a supernatural divinity which is the Trinity which instituted a church with a supernatural authority to bind and loose on the faith as taught in the bible, how can he maintain a purely natural approach to the text devoid of faith and the authority of the church? He cannot without being subject to the charge of being disengenuous. Ehrman must ignore crucial historical details within church history to found his flawed method. He claims to be a historian but routinely ignores the consequences of historical events when those events do not coincide with his chosen scholarly method.
Ehrman's historical method is born of rationalism and naturalistic pantheism which denies the supernaturalist biblical world. for Ehrman's scholarship to be seriously considered he must demonstrate his agnosticism, rationalism, and naturalistic pantheism are all true before commencing his quest to understand the historical basis for the biblical text. The foundations of Ehrman's scholarly approach includes deep and consequential flaws which which expose his psychological and scholarly bias against the authenticity of the biblical text.
I respect scholars, historians, apologists, thinkers, but could any be correct in their judgement?
Why not Mathew's verbal witness be written by another?
And Mark being the actual writer and researcher of other witnesses?
For anyone who has never read any of his books, I'd recommend you buy one or a few of them. This man explains everything in the simplest manner and makes very sharp point; he also always shoots straight to the point everytime, while providing very comprehensive evidence for his points.
Also, does anyone know a similar scholar and author who deals with the Old Testament?
It might be interesting to ask Dr Ehrman to talk about How He Learned to Write. No one is born knowing how to write a book, high school students do not know thus, nor do college or graduate students. My point is to understand how difficult and time consuming it is to acquire the specialized skill to write a book like one of the gospels,
If you’re not a born again Christian then chances are that you’ll be unable to place your right palm on the KJV and say these words once only->> I refuse to be full of demons.
Holy Spirit or demons,we all have to choose.
Please choose wisely.❤️✝️
Typical confirmation bias, Let's interview someone to reinforce my disbelief rather than ever bringing on a Christian scholar. Got it 👍
The reason that the sited apologists have to not budge on the topic of the resurrection is because without it, there can be no blanket forgiveness and hope for the 2nd coming. All Christians would be left with are the cutesy infant narratives and a set of stories with teachings - all, or nearly all, of which were said and done by other known and unknown itinerant teachers of the day, or some major theologians of the day (e.g., Rabbi Hillel).
So, yes, to be in any sense a Christian, someone has to be willing to "die on the hill" of the resurrection - even though there seems to have been poor evidence for it at the time of its alleged occurrence.
I have to go back and read the gospels. Bart says the dates indicate none of the gospel writers would have known anyone who had possibly walked with Jesus. Do the gospels not talk about walking with the savior?
R B Thieme Jr can easily demolish Barth...i miss the Col teaching with hos greek and hebrew bibles in the pulpit
Before you start studying some reproduced writings. Where are the original texts.
The apologists are those who confine themselves in denominational doctrine. They're asked to explain a verse or chapter and get esoteric as if there's a hidden truth that they only know.
Erhman can’t say the Bible is fraudulent and then believe it. He’s a hypocrite!
He doesn’t believe that there is a divine Jesus and he does think there are some elements of the New Testament are legitimate. Nothing hypocritical at all
They all are
@@canbest7668 if the book is fraudulent according to Him, isn’t the whole book?
@The Art Z Scientist not necessarily
@@theartzscientist8012 That would be the composition fallacy, only because a part of the book is fraudulent that doesn't make everything in the book fraudulent. It also works the other way, only because a part of the book is reliable that doesn't mean the whole book is reliable.
The key is in analyzing each claim and then present which one is reliable and why.
This is a great channel 🌻👍
The only part of the Bible that we can be sure are Jesus' words and not what others wrote he said is The Sermon on the Mount. Those words ring true as from Jesus/
Bart is my Lawrence Kraus for great religious discussion.
Please read the Noble Quran and learn a lot more about Jesus son of Mary, chapter 19.
my dad was a pastor in Dallas but after reading 'misquoting Jesus' I left church trinity trigod for monotheism of islam. Jesus himself was a monotheist
Ah yes.. First Animism, then polytheism and at long last monotheism. Each one getting closer and closer to the real number of gods..... 0
@@samuelpope7798 s pope. another Ann heche in the making Xanax cocaine weed alcohol. the opium of the secular atheists
The Bible expanded universe should be filed under ancient fiction.
No matter the truth of a lot of beliefs help ease suffering in the world and worry about the next life whe it happens
The bible is a western world book. Gilgamesh should be read too and Hamurabis law
23:43 Undesigned coincidences and Bart and Jerry Springer 🫠
Thanks!
Thank you for the support my friend!
"I call Christianity the one great curse, the one great intrinsic depravity, the one great instinct of revenge, for which no means are venomous enough, or secret, subterranean and small enough - I call it the one immortal blemish upon the human race."
Friedrich Nietzsche
Well .... He could have said that about the" Abrahamic religions. "
Period. Hinduism and most of the others , have their nightmarish aspects also .
@@michellebrown4903 Hinduism is not a religion, it's just Culture ( a conglomeration of various living styles)
There are a lot of fiction, a lot of" good", a lot of "bad " ideas, of course. But the Hindus don't think that all that was written actually happened.
I love the color of that shirt. And the vent covers. And the window?
Hear a Christian apologist …. RUN!
I did read it clever man the devil did study more years than you he had millions of years ha ha ha
How can anyone be a scholar and believe the craziness in these books.