Gary Habermas blows Paulogia out of the water on Resurrection Hypothesis
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 авг 2021
- Renowned Jesus resurrection scholar, Dr Gary Habermas, responded to a question about Paulogia's observation that Peter and Paul are sufficient to explain church history... no resurrection or group appearances needed.
After doing the significant assigned homework, here is my response to Gary.
Source Video on Capturing Christianity -
• Gary Habermas Answers ...
5 Scholars Attempt my Resurrection "What If" Challenge
• 5 Scholars Attempt my ...
Paulogia vs Dr Andrew Loke Debate - Group Appearances of Risen Jesus
• Paulogia vs Dr Andrew ...
Thank you to @ShannonQ for research assist.
PAULOGIA / SHANNON Q HOUSEWARMING WISH LIST
www.amazon.ca/hz/wishlist/ls/...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @paulogia
Support Paulogia at
/ paulogia
www.paypal.me/paulogia
www.amazon.ca/hz/wishlist/ls/...
teespring.com/stores/paulogia
Paulogia Audio-Only-Version Podcast
paulogia.buzzsprout.com
Follow Paulogia at
/ paulogia0
/ paulogia0
/ discord 
Наука
By the end of the video and in consideration of Paulogia's detailed explanations I find myself, as an atheist, in the awkward position of having to admit there now seems to be more evidence for Jesus' Resurrection than of Habermas's critical scholarship.
oops 😆
Hah!!! It's so funny because it's true...
So much burn 🔥
Damned with faint praise?
Thet’s funna ret thar!
Habernas screwed up here. He normally only refers to his own unpublished works that no-one can check. Great job, Paul.
ha!
As a former Christian who suffered from religious trauma syndrome, your intelligent and insightful content has helped me more than you can know, I just have to work on my hatred and disgust towards the religious and religion itself,your calm/cool demeanor is admirable. Much love and respect, thank you Paul.
thank you, Jeremy
The fact that Paul can go toe-to-toe with the top scholars on the subject and pick apart their arguments says a lot about the evidence for the resurrection.
Yup. I'm no one special.
@@Paulogia I think you stand out pretty well with your capability of studying the sources, understanding them, analysing, hypothesising and delivering to your audience. These are skills many recent PhD's still need to improve, and not only the Christian ones. I get so irritated by people like Loke or WLC who act superior because they have a degree while someone like you shows better researcher skills and would easily obtain a degree if it were your priority. Respect.
@@Paulogia
You are a real life Hero Paul.
Only very few Atheists cause so much trouble that they get on the radar of ONE Apologist.
But you are on the radar of William Lane Craig, Licona, Habermas……….,Loke……….. and Cameron.😂
And the best part about it… you are so polite, while even supposedly sophisticated philosophers prefer to attack your character instead of your arguments.
@@Paulogia And yet, by presenting simple, well thought-out arguments, the "experts" fumble around and don't address (or concede) their merits. It's almost as if their world views could come crashing down should they do so.
_The fact that Paul can go toe-to-toe with the top scholars on the subject and pick apart their arguments says a lot about the evidence for the resurrection._
Actually, it says a lot about _Paul,_ too! He's just being humble when he says he's no one special.
Either that or I'm a whole lot _less_ special than I hoped! :)
Your intro with J Warner Wallace was so hilarious 😂
Loved it
😆 👍
Wallace has 2 careers that are on the top 10 Careers of a Psychopath.
Police Officer and Clergy. LOL
Lol
That intro was genius!
Good one, Paul. Spot on!
If even apologist senseis like Gary casually strawman and talk past an opponent’s points, nobody should be in the least surprised that everyone else in the game, from brylcreemed acolytes to hapless AXP callers, act like that too. It’s not a bug, but it’s not a feature either - it’s source code.
Well, to be fair, the question was a very sloppy description of Paulogia's thesis. If he didn't know the full claim beforehand, he would've had to heavily guess the logic behind the thesis, and it was very easy to get it wrong. If anything, that's sloppy - straw-manning by accident. (Of course, that still means he failed to hit his target.)
@@KaiHenningsen True, but these guys aren't incentivized to capture other peoples beliefs accurately. If your intent is to dismiss and handwave counter arguments you probably "WANT" to make this kind of laziness a habit.
@@KaiHenningsen But Habermas knows (or implies that he knows) Paulogia's hypothesis. So, either he knows it and is dishonest (as indicated by his misleading answer), or he doesn't know it, and dishonestly pretends that he does.
"brylcreemed acolytes" This made me chortle like they kept doing in the vid.
Wtf are these terms 😭
I love that you’ve interacted with these people so many times and they still mispronounce your name…
It would be hilarious to hear Paulogia pronounce Gary’s name as “hah-BURR-mess” haha
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink
at this point I have to believe it's on purpose. if it's not... that's probably worse
It's intentional disrespect.
To be fair, Cameron's video was posted a year ago. Not sure if he still mispronounces it.
Probably one of the most ridiculous and terrifying things is that Habermas is degreed and respected in this field which he seems to demonstrate deliberate misinterpretation of. The fact that he is treated with such respect despite this demonstration is not just bothersome, it also demonstrates how strong of a stranglehold his religion has on his proponents.
He's a dangerous and sad example of how high education doesn't negate a massive ego and a tendency toward believing complete bollocks.
He is only respected by conservative or fundamental Christians. Most scholarly Christians and theologians laugh at this guy.
@@Iamwrongbut I certainly do, he is absolutely ridiculous, as is cameron, and j.Warner Wallace, their arguments are so bad I don't know why anyone take them seriously
@@JayMaverick exactly, just because a person is educated, doesn't mean much, if they are willing to put their beliefs ahead of that education, and are willing to twist their education to fit said beliefs, that education is then basically worthless, it reminds me alot of Georgia on the AIG news show, she is obviously a smart educated person who disregards that education in favor of her preferred beliefs, it is really sad to watch
It's the name. "Habermas" sounds weighty. Sometimes it isn't tho'
I wonder if Habermas would consider changing an incremental portion of his views if he didn’t have to sign that pesky statement of faith from Liberty University.
I think that despite his PhD being in History and Philosophy of Religion signing such a statement of faith means he had given up any claim to be an historian and is merely an apologist. They are not the same thing.
@@TheHookahSmokingCaterpillar facts
Just like those at Answers in Genesis, not one of them can claim to be a proper researcher, they can only ever come to one conclusion.
I think that anyone willing to sign such an agreement is likely already bound by it on the inside.
@@tedonica either that or they don't actually care/believe to begin with and just want to get paid
I de-converted from Christianity about 4-5 years ago, and at the time I didn't think that deeply. I took the same route as Paulogia. I looked into Christian sources trying to find what anything I could hold onto that would be intellectually honest, and I couldn't. What finally did it was an argument that a true loving and just god wouldn't send someone to hell just because they tried and couldn't find him. At that point my fear of hell was over and I stopped caring about why I don't believe. Never looked into atheist arguments, because I didn't need to to prove it to myself. Recently I've been having to defend my stance, and that has pushed me to find Paulogia and others to hear out and form my own conclusions. Thanks for being a source of information to help me become more precise in my arguments. Many many late night binge sessions have been spent watching debates, responses, and analytical videos. XD
I’m so happy for you that you didn’t need to seek out atheistic views & resources when you de-converted.🤗 I’m currently in the process of learning all I can as well as this journey both is & isn’t new to me. I haven’t really believed in any of this for years but since I lived at home surrounded by evangelicals, I sort of just had it drilled into me. Only recently with my first child on the way have I really thought about what am I going to tell them when they ask what I believe? I’m so thankful for this channel & the others I have found so much. My family is literally reliant on Christianity as it is their entire careers at stake, so I really am going to need to arm myself with information whenever it all comes out that I no longer believe.🥲 wish me luck.😂
What fully de-converted me was a phrase.. that I can't remember if I came up with it or I heard it somewhere.
"I will be the best person I can be. If I die and there is a God, and said God judges me based on how moral I was, I will accept said judgement. But if said God judges me based on whether I worshipped said God or not, instead of how moral I was... Then that is not a God worthy of any kind of worship. "
@@lizzymc1300 Good luck!! :)
@@farrex0 I love that quote!
@@farrex0 legendary quote there
How to have a good Monday? Find out Paulogia has dropped a new video. 👍
It must be so flattering to get these guys all worked up!
RIGHT!?!? AND all the time these fools are showing their ignorance on these videos is time they are NOT spending evangelizing and/or creating more religious trauma in the people around them! :-)
@@mizotter Once they realize this they work to curtail our freedoms and become violent. All false religions do this.
When I was listening to this I was put in mind of the Mormon story of the Golden Plates. The introduction to the Book of Mormon has declarations by those who claim they saw the Golden Plates, but in memoirs we find that they did not actually see anything - they were told by Smith close their eyes and 'see; them in their minds. This is just a thought around what people claim to see. It might not be as a easy as the literal words.
Gary Habermas blows Paulogia??
Definitely watching this!
As usual, habermas has no clue what the hell he's talking.
Blown (out of the water) so hard, even I got wet. Haha
Brilliant editing first 3.5mins. I always find Dr. Habermas when pressed has a look on his face knowing he's out of bullets says respect my authority- in so many words. You really counter point well here.
People cherry pick huh, Gary? Take a minute to address the actual arguments sometime bud.
Everyone cherry picks. They need to stop accusing each other of a tactic everyone uses. What one has to do, is learn the context so the picker doesn't catch them with their pants down.
Laughing at somebody for not playing along with popular apologetic assumptions is the most apologist thing to do.
Very disrespecful!
17:44 "Peoplec just make this stuff up" A perfect summary of the book they are all trying to authenticate.
Duh!!!!!!!!!
As someone who was born an atheist, I've always found the tail chasing in Christianity astonishing. Much ado about nothing. But I very much enjoy these exchanges for their intellectual content and much appreciated schadenfreude. Keep up the good work Paul(ogia).
Born an atheist?.Where'd you come from? Mars?
How can you be expected to keep up with endless Christian channels making the same arguments as those made for centuries? You do a bang up job as it is. I'm sure when any apologetic comes up with a new and unique idea we'll all get to hear about it for several hundred years until the next one.
I am still amazed that books INSPIRED by a deity are so poorly written that they NEED apologists.
@@australianandrew128 you'd think if those books actually were the "word of God," an all knowing, all seeing, omnipresent being of infinite wisdom, then apologia even existing wouldn't even be a think. Neither would endless conflicting translations. Nor a charismatic person to interpret it for others while telling them that they should fork over 10% of their earning to him due to "God's will."
It's almost as if it's all a big grift.
Almost, lol.
@@australianandrew128 Yeah,that says it all,right there.
Can't expect much when they are relying on turning up new twists from within and old plot. Sort of the Shakespeare set in modern days tour de force. Can work but it's dependent on a lot of quality work. That's some thing seriously lacking in most apologetics. Scholarship quality doesn't come equally from the poorly argued.
I love the quality of production and research. Thank you
Less than 2 minutes into the show and I'm already love'n it!!! Thanks for starting my weekday on the right foot.
So glad!
Absolutely
Paulogia, this was great. They contradict themselves to feed the illusion that you are wrong, yet never address anything you actually said, lol. It is sort of verbal stroking to reassure themselves, in fear of doubts!👍🤎🥰✌
your research skills and determination to be thorough and fair is a refreshing method of engaging with theologians. Thank you soo much for your video!
Wow, thank you!
That opening sequence was just GOLD 😁
The one thing I can say is if Jebus existed he was nothing more than a first-century Galilean cult leader. They seem to come a dime a dozen back then. And all the people that I know that have died, they're still very dead.
Yes, around that time there were about 10 Messiahs every 12 years.... most liked the name Joshua/Jesus and James/Jacob... instead of Emmanuel. But the Avatar of Vishnu is also an interesting story, and is even MORE Easterling.
Also, I don't take the word of a couple fishermen to diagnose properly death, 2,000 years ago. By the mid 1800´s a ton of people where buried alive, declared dead by up to date physicians. So Jesus could have been in a coma, or passed out, and then returned... or never returned at all. The most imposible of all theories is that he actually resurrected.
@@HeinrichGossler I've argued this often and for a long time. I point to the frequency of stories like (search duckduck or your favourite search engine)
"woke up in a morgue" or
"woke up at the funeral house"
@@SanjeevSharma-vk1yo Fun fact, the Morgue was invented specifically to avoid burring people alive, to determine with higher degree of certainty if in fact someone was actually dead.
@@HeinrichGossler Too bad (for the Christians) that they didn't cremate JESUS. That would have been a real miracle IMHO - just waking up from "being dead" ... meh.
"dead for 3 days" takes on quite a different meaning at that point.
It's the difference between "miraculous" recovery from cancer, and (actually miraculously) growing an eye that was lost to embryonic infection.
Great work! Thank you for all you do!
I really really really appreciate the work you did for this video! It is obviously the result of a lot of research, reading and editing. 🏅
I do sincerely hope Dr. Habermas appreciates it too because you actually take on his arguments point by point; and there are few things more delightful to an intellectual than a worthy interlocutor.
Habermas' status as an "intellectual" is suspect: Apologist, Sophist and like terms seem more apt.
"Renowned resurrection scholar" carries as less weight with me than "renowned dog walker" because at least the dog walker provides a beneficial service to the planet.
Demonstrably so. I find that part quite important. People claim that apologists do good work that benefits many. Demonstrably, they only contribute to the abusive behaviour of encouraging people to rely on faith to come to conclusions in spite of evidence against it. It basically encourages delusional behaviour, which isn't just abusive but dangerous. Two of billions of examples: (symptoms of) mental illnesses can be triggered or worsened by such encouragement, even just by giving the example of asking or giving respect to accepting claims on faith, the fucking mess in American conservative circles, especially around and definitely not exclusive to T******
Dogs exists so a dog walker deals with reality. A resurrection expert as dealing with fantasies likr a fairy photographer or an expert in unicorn riding.
I’m only a 1:12 in and while I can’t speak for other subscribers but I personally find Paul’s content to be top quality. His content is always kind and respectful, he never seems to get irked by people, even those who take shots at him. Could it be that that’s the reason he has the following he has? I got $5 says it is. Keep up the awesome content.
@paulogia I'm always impressed by the amount of research that you put into your response videos. Great job.
The time period of Schillebeeckx's life really caught me off guard.
1914 to 2009.
That is a hell of a life.
Paul, while you know we disagree on many issues, I must commend you for your careful scholarship which causes the best of the best to respond to you.
So cool to say, “I knew Paulogia when he only had 500+ subs.”
Kenny
Thank you, my friend.
@@Paulogia You are more than welcome!
I must be intellectually honest and commend (because of my love and desire for truth and ethical academic practices/principles) when I see it in others, even if it works against my position or arguments.
This is why I was quick to compliment Matt (Dillahunty) when he answered a question I couldn’t gather my thoughts for, I was mentally exhausted at that point. You can’t step into the ring with someone of Dillahunty‘s stature and not expend a tremendous amount of emotional and cognitive energy. I was a nervous wreck jumping into that debate. It was only my fourth official debate. But, I would rather exemplify integrity over making a point. Maybe I’ve grown up- LOL.
By the way, I always make use of your videos and Genetically Modified’s for my students (@ Regent U) to train next-generation apologists who listen, learn, and love those whom they seek to engage in dialogue. Today’s apologists have ‘dropped the ball’ and vilified those of contrary positions.
Anyhoo …
I watch your channel pretty regularly to learn, I’m always available to contribute whenever or whatever I can, which may not be much. But the thought of dialoguing with you in an area of agreement as a ‘cartoon’ is very appealing-LOL. Add a Shannon Q avatar into the mix and it could be a small slice of heaven for me ;-)
And … The offer still stands to officiate you all’s wedding when the time comes (no compensation needed or desired, it would be an honor). We could even do it online as cartoons!
Kenny
OMG I have only finished the intro and I just think it’s delicious, the way you interweave Jim with the other two. My goodness but that tickles me.
I live this channel. Thank you. Great video. High quality.
Sir... You're out of this world! Keep the good work! Hopefully we can have more sincere dialogues around these subjects.
The commentary starting at 28:05 is SPOT ON, and highly under-appreciated. The skeptic doesn't need to offer a single extremely specific alternative that defeats the resurrection hypothesis on its own (but clearly having such an alternative would be fatal to the apologists' case), since the debate is not "Resurrection v Swoon" or "Resurrection v Mass Hallucination," its "Resurrection v Literally Anything Else." And, coincidentally, that explains why your theory may not have many (any?) scholarly advocates: Resurrection hypotheses are all the same, but every alternative hypothesis is alt in its own way. Nothing wrong with that! It boggles the mind that certain apologists can't grasp this...
The simple answer is, You have a story and fail to prove it happened in reality. If someone writes that unicorns dance on the full moon then it is up to the one who claims this is more then a story to prove it. We have storytelling that is as real as Harry Potter or Star Trek. Leia will vouch for Luke. Well they are both characters in a story, but even if the have lived we could not fact check anything as there is no evidence at all. Just like for Jesus and his story telling fan fiction.
@@TorianTammas Star Wars really happened a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away! It says so right there in the opening crawl of every movie! 😂
very nicely done Paul. Well researched and you used every source Gary sourced against him. It shows that scholars throw out names in the hope that nobody actually knows the positions of said sources
Nicely done. Thanks for your efforts.
Holy moly, that was one of the funniest intros I've seen in a long while. Fantastic work!
Eraserhead?
@@shriggs55 Yeah, it's a weird movie. I chose the avatar because I have a similar hairstyle tho.
Outstanding, thorough analysis
I applaud your intellectual honesty and I love your illuminating and educational style of making this video! Thank you for your great research and taking time to explain facts patiently and clearly. One little nitpick: the "non-event" Christian scholars you mentioned as "not influenced by secular bias" may have such bias without realizing it, even though they practice Christian faith. Modern western Christianity (post Protestant reformation and Roman Catholic counter reforms) grew up along with secularism. The contradictions inherent in Christendom (Christian empire) even created the world in which secularism thrived.
Thanks for being you. I know who else could you be, but none the less I appreciate who you are, or at least that of which I perceive of you. Which is to say I am full of my thoughts of thinking you to be a decent person.
Yay Paul - just realised you have podcasts! Now I can listen while driving as well as watching when i am not!
yes, you can!
Man, I am a ‘collapsed Catholic’ who never doubted his faith until I was 40. Then after intense reading desperate to prove the atheists wrong I de converted against my intentions, took 10 years but only 3-4 years ago became comfortable with my atheism. I’m now 54 and I love your channel. I hope you never, ever doubt for one moment that what you do is vitally important. Love your work….
This is some of the most of the most skillful shade thrown I've ever seen from Paulogia, I like it.
I love it when Paul takes of the Gloves. This was great!
Thank you for your attention to detail.
Nice to see you back.
For the first time I catch a premier...
Me too didn’t know they existed
I don't do them very often. should I do more?
@@Paulogia yes, and just more videos are good too. Love your work.
Well, i find a little bit of excitement being among the first watching a video l like. But I wouldn't catch many as I was watching it at midnight due to my timezone.
Mental gymnastics are strong within this one.
Great webcast, Paul on this one.
Great take down! I love your videos and the depth of your research. I guess it’s easier when one just believes in facts based on evidence like you do, rather than having to juggle with fallacies to defend the supernatural and biblical fantasies …
👏
If the position of those scholars is so strong, why do they ALWAYS have to misrepresent their opponents?
The same thing was going on with WLC (who still uses the same debunked arguments like the Kalam).
And they not only misrepresent their opponents, they also misrepresent their own positions to give it a better foundation.
Really interesting...
You watch/listen to them and think how do they not know this is a strawman? Then you realize that they absofuckinglutely do know. They have to. They are scholars. They know exactly what they are doing and why. They are fully aware that they have been called out and backed into a corner and their continued livlihood and tours depend on weasling out so they resort to this. It is just like the psychics busted for being 100% wrong. Well, the room polluted the vibe and the unbelievers chilled the spirits and, and, and. It's hard to watch. It's so cringe.
There is a strong comparison to RUclips flat earthers, they use the same debunked arguments over and over again and many don't really believe in their claims.
It's all about income and ego.
How has the Kalam been debunked? show a refutation of it.
@@Mr.Goodkat watch Craig vs Carroll.
The kalam has no basis.
@@BluePhoenix_ I have seen parts of that debate maybe the whole thing can't remember and I don't recall him refuting it, I'll need to re watch it sometime but Carroll isn't compelling usually so I doubt he'll be the one to do it.
I left a few months ago, came back and you have ten times the subs. Amazing!
So happy you are gaining momentum. This content is a cognitive dissonance destroyer, and sanity saver.
welcome back!
A new Paulogia Video, today is a good day.
That opening series of clips was brilliant, yo.
If any university requires a "statement of faith" in order to work there, it's a place to avoid. Statements of faith indicate that whatever institution is using it has already reached a conclusion and will not be shaken from it. It does not matter how much evidence there is to show that conclusion is wrong, they will stick to their conclusion....Not a place I'd consider working for, nor would I consider taking courses there...
If it requires a "statement of faith," it's not a university.
Thanks for the video Paul, I wanted to offer some further context on your description of demythologizing at 24:28. An important nuance of Bultmannian demythologizing is the desired outcome. In the context of this video and the larger conversation of your naturalistic explanation of the Christian narrative, "the removal or reinterpretation of the mythological elements of a text" may lead some to understand that Bultmann's goal was in line with Liberal theology- stripping away the myth to find the history underneath. This is explicitly NOT Bultmann's goal. In Bultmannian demythologizing, the historicity of the events is ultimately inconsequential. In fact, even if the Gospels represented the "historical facts" perfectly, they still cannot objectively tell us the *meaning* of those events. You correctly name that Bultmann's goal is ultimately existential. It looks at the myth of the New Testament (which Bultmann would say is anything we know is scientifically impossible) and asks two questions- which myths simply describe events that they didn't have the science to understand yet (we can disregard these) and 2- which myths are trying to explain something that cannot be explained in scientific terms, i.e., meaning? Demythologizing then attempts to find the transcendent, existential meaning within that second kind of myth.
I had an "Aphasia STROKE", the only reason I came to your network-site was I remember "Gary Habermas" because of Liberty Univeristy professor becuae I could not remember a 'CERTAIN WORD'. Then I viewed your Paulogia, then I remembered that certain work APOLOGIA (previous written defense of one's opinions or conduct) the word is "APOLOGETIC", then I remembered. Many thanks to you and for feat. Gary Habermas..Now, I will write that down, in my notes. God bless you again.
As a person raised into a holy roller family, I really appreciate your break down on the "gospels" Thank You.
And Luke and Acts, according to the author of both, are not eye witness accounts, but rather accounts of what had been passed down from the original eyewitnesses. It is like me trying to write a history of the Korean war relying only on stories that Veterans of that war had told others.
North Korean veterans at that. Or in the case of Paul, a random japanese person who visited north korea 10 years after the war 👍.
Spoiler: War isn't supernatural!
"I talked to some people who say they saw Bigfoot. Therefore, Bigfoot is totally real, bruh!"
I find it really funny that Gary Habermas seems to think that your hypothesis about who actually saw a resurrected Jesus is mirrored by so many other prominent scholars in the field, yet Andrew Loke calls that same hypothesis a "fringe theory" and has written a lengthy dissertation about it on none other than Capturing Christianity's blog.
The 2 should meet up and compare views.
Loved the intro!
I am presently backtracking through Paulogia's work, it's fantastic, his voice is as pleasing to listen too as Seth Andrews and his work is very insightful, I now know what I'll be doing with my off time as I start college in a couple days to unwind, I'll be watching/listening to Paulogia's masterpieces!
The Friendly Atheist had been analyzing Genesis and Exodus chapter by chapter for awhile, and while he's very tongue in cheek about it, it struck me how much the constant glorification of war crimes and focus on and requirement of ritual sacrifices and mutilation is pretty much a How To guide on turning non-sociopaths into sociopaths. Which in turn is like that incident where someone described seminary school to a psychologist (or something along that line) and they said that it sounds like a system designed to create sex offenders.
I really enjoy his Sunday Bible study.
Because people turn themselves into a pretzel over normal sexuality? (which can actually have a pretty wide range)
Because people try to achieve “victory over masturbation” or some such similar nonsense?
The video description should be "Gary Habermas bloviates Paulogia out of the water on Resurrection Hypothesis" ;)
You are a heroic figure.
Such solid content.
You don't want Gary to blow you IN the water....he doesn't look like he could hold his breath that long
Pleuralgia? Proctalgia? ApolloYeehawwww? SacagaPauloWeeeeyaaH? GOSH you're name is super duper hard!
Appalachia???
Top notch intro. You're forgiven for putting out less content during your move.
Just wanted to point out how much I loved the JWW critique of CC's channel in the beginning ;-)
Dr. Habermas sure likes to use poor arguments, arguments a PhD holder should understand are inherently deceitful.
I mean, he has a PhD in Inherent Deceit, so what would you expect
A PhD in Fairy magic or one in unicorn dances is just as credible as his.
Nice work addressing Dr. Habermas, who once again appears to be misrepresenting the views of others and appealing to authority that doesn't even say what he claims it to say. At this point, I have to assume he isn't capable of responding to you honestly and directly, as he has never done so despite numerous opportunities. I hope you get through the rest of Dale Allison's book because it is quite interesting. I am left with the clear sense that his study of the hallucination hypothesis has significantly decreased his confidence in the historicity of the resurrection. He continues to believe there was an actual resurrection, but is now hedging and not claiming any arguments that could or should convince a religious skeptic. Also, I get the sense from his recent statements that he fully acknowledges his beliefs may be heavily influenced by cognitive dissonance and motivated reasoning. What is so fascinating is seeing him wrestle with all the evidence that indicates the plausibility of a hallucination explanation, but ultimately sticking to his guns without making any real attempt to defeat it.
Well said. Habermas is hookwinking his audience to comfort them that a faith claim has serious scholarly backing. Dale allison is fascinating because the seems honest with the legendary material but still wants to hang on to faith. I have a more respect for him
@@wingedlion17 Agreed. Allison is clearly conflicted but at least is being straight about the evidence and why he still has faith
Gotta catch em all!
Best channel on youtube! Criminally under-subscribed
thank you
This has been bugging me for some time now. Does Peter actually claim to have been the physical Jesus student? Like does he claim he's known Jesus before his death?
Ehrman brings up a great point, something I've wondered about for a long time.
Who are the 'twelve' in the 1 Cor 15 creed?
The Twelve: Rock super group? New super hero group from DC? An EDM DJ? There are so many options.
Also, the bible does tend to "...and the rest" a bunch of groups and claim that as proof, like "the 500" who Paul said also saw the risen Jeebus.
if Peter and James came up with this creed, why would it be the “twelve” instead of the “eleven”? That’s not a MAJOR point, but it’s worth thinking about. Even if Paul didn’t know about Judas, they certainly would have - Bart Ehrman
The Essenes had a "council of twelve" mentioned in the dead sea scrolls. The Jewish sect that Peter's Christianity emerged from may have either been the Essenes, or had a similar council.
I thought the gospels (or maybe Acts) said that judas got replaced with another disciple, essentially promoted to be one of the twelve. It sounds extremely ad hoc though, like the writers anticipated this plot hole
@@australianandrew128 It is a major issue as it shows contradicting inventions. Paul did not know about a Judas betrayal as it wasn't invented at the time. So we see the layers of story telling and another contradiction.
Great video thanks Paul!
Thanks
Habermas clearly hasn't studied or attempted to thoroughly understand your positions and arguments. He read or heard a few words and drew his own conclusions. He's clearly refuting someone or something that doesn't exist. Great work Paul.
Isn't that the case with all woo peddlers?
How many people had to have actually seen God in the flesh for Mormonism to establish itself as a religion? None.
Moreover, it only took a few claiming to have had divine experiences to get the ball rolling.
In the case of the christianities, there were dozens, or hundreds of stories evolving simultaneously…. initially just by word of mouth. Then, In a manner similar to natural selection, the most appealing ones of these stories survived. Then, look at the degree to which “John” completely rewrote large swaths of the Synoptic Gospels, and how the Council of Nicaea systematically expunged much of the rest, and you can gain a good sense for how all this came about.
Amazing respond.
God I'm so glad I've been following paulogia since a few thousand subs
This i gotta see
Good youtube name. Reminds me of the Banner line in INFINITY WAR - "there's a spider-man AND an ant-man?"
in this case - "there's a harmonic atheist AND a celestial atheist?"
@@SanjeevSharma-vk1yo Thanks
It took me some time to thought up
A good atheist RUclips name
I figured out few more but this one is
The best
My theory is even simpler than Paulogia's. That hearsay alone was enough to start the Christian movement. Paul had a hallucination that came after Christianity was already started, and I'm not convinced Peter saw anything, or ever claimed to have seen anything.
Yes. And I'm not even _entirely_ convinced that Paul had a hallucination. I see no particular reason to doubt it, except that people _do_ lie - lying is a lot more common than hallucinations, let alone magic - and I can see a very good reason for Paul to be lying about that.
I mean, how did _Paul_ become a leader in Christianity? How was it that he could even argue with Peter, one of the disciples! Paul doesn't claim to have ever _met_ Jesus, so how did _he_ become an authority? No, his status is _entirely_ due to his story about persecuting Jews until Jesus came along, isn't it?
I'm not saying that it _didn't_ happen, but I don't think we can just assume that it did. He did have a reason for lying. Or maybe he just got caught in a small lie and didn't want to admit it later? Then again, I'm no expert.
@@Bill_Garthright Good point. Apologists will argue the "no one dies for a lie" thing, but they oversimplify the actual martyrdom in the few documented cases where it happens. Why, specifically, are they being martyred? I doubt that Paul was specifically and only martyred for claiming that he had a vision of Jesus, and therefore, it's not a slam dunk "die for a lie" scenario. Paulogia makes this point in some of his prior videos.
@@kdietz65
Yes, the devil is in the details,... which is why apologists like to avoid talking about anything specific and just be as broad and as vague as possible.
Can’t wait to hear your full thoughts on Dale Allison’s new book! I finished it recently and it absolutely blew my mind out of the water!!
@John Dew it’s a blue book titled “The Resurrection of Jesus”
Cannot recommend more highly.
This book should be put right next to fairy magic and unicorns dances.
@@TorianTammas I assume you haven’t read it if you are saying that. It contains perhaps the most complete collection of all scholarly objections against the resurrection. It also includes the best arguments for it so it is a piece of art that allows you to compare both sides at their strongest.
@@Iamwrongbut The topic of resurrection is one of fairy magic and unicorn mating dance under the full moon. It hold two questions: Why do people make up the story? What did people a story refers in any way to something that has happened?
@@TorianTammas your questions and first sentence are just assumptions. How do you know resurrection is magical? You need arguments to back up your position, and this book provides that.
This is my favorite refutation yet.
The beginning of this video says it all about theists parading themselves as intellectuals.
They really can't stop themselves smugly laughing at any position they don't hold. It's one reason I left the faith long ago. Tiresome arrogance about things nobody could know and that the Bible doesn't even *say.
That beginning part should be a clip like how Pinecreek does it lol it's perfect
Paul, that's a GREAT introduction!!! J Warner Wallace narrating.
Gary is a lifetime member of the Christian woo woo club. I've listened to him many times. He just gets worse. His arguments really don't make any sense, how he gets an audience amazes me. He obviously craves attention and is willing to say stupid stuff to get it.
Wallace is adorable. 😂 For a former homicide detective he's lost. Glad he's in California. He wouldn't make it in the normal North East.
Daaaaaaanm! That intro though 🔥 Paul is savage!
I. Love. This. Intro.
Holy Crap!! Are there NO Christian Apologists that actually know Theology???
If you want to know the Bible - ask a freaking atheist!
If Paulogia is just a RUclipsr, what the hell are these apologists clowns?
Hi Paul.
Has Bart Ehrman ever seen or responded in any way to your videos?
Thanks for the great work you do!
Is there going to be a summary video of your debate with Loke after its finished? No chance I'd read it but want to know what happened