Thank you for all of your hard work, scholarship and academic integrity. You're a RUclips treasure, myth buster and knowledge bomb! Your content is right up there with potholer54.
Hardly. His modus operandi, like James Somerton, is to delete comments that point out his errors and then block the user. Silencing critical/discordant voices is quite literally the antithesis of good academic practice. This guy’s a fraud
Huh, I avoided Schwerpunkt because I worried about the quality of his work, considering how often he uploads. Knowing he is translating already written lectures makes me want to check his channel out again.
I have a few things to say about Schwerpunkt and will make a video on him, because he is explicitly and unashamedly a total trad-con ideologically, but I can't fault his qualifications for the content he produces. The man makes two hour videos packed with detail about niche history, straight from his lecture notes. If he's making mistakes, they would need someone with real subject knowledge to identify.
I’ve been watching this channel since Mid 2023 and you’ve become a perfect channel to binge whenever I’m eating lunch or cooking. Your style is concise yet informative and I’ve learned a lot from you. I hope you keep making more and always enjoy making these videos as we have watching them!
Congratulations, I know this channel costs you not just financially, but it truly is a blessing and on a personal note has reignited by academic interest after feeling burnout in the past few years. For that thank you.
Thank you! I am very glad I've been able to produce so much actual academic work in the process of making these videos. That has been very encouraging. It has certainly been excellent for keeping my CV current. I am delighted that this has re-ignited your own academic fervor.
@@veritasetcaritas That's good to hear! Hopefully, if this channel comes to an end one day for whatever reason, you feel proud of the videos you were able to make.
i got your james somerton video in my recs when it came out and i watched a bit of it but went back and ended up enjoying basically every single vid on your channel. i work in a warehouse with headphones and i love putting your stuff on auto and just learning while i do my thing. keep up the great work!!
That's fantastic, thanks for letting me know! I actually mainly listen to RUclips videos myself, within my commute or at work, so I try to ensure my own are accessible to anyone listening to them without viewing them.
Thank you for answering my question! I would say though, that while I admire your productivity, I (and probably most of your supporters) would rather have you release videos less frequently while having healthier sleeping habits.
Oh we have something in common in our favourite movies. I am looking forward to your video about "The Kavernacle" whose Cyberpunk video I could not finish watching because I found it lacking to say the least.
OMG! Two of my questions answer in a video? Why? I feel so important out of nowhere! Thank you very much for your content. Try to keep up with your social life and your sleep routine. I prefer less videos if that means you are in better shape
You're very welcome! I was glad to receive so many questions, and made a deliberate decision to answer all of them. Recently my work schedule has eased now, and I am sleeping much more. Thank you for your concern.
I dont think anyone would blame you if you reduced your video output by half, its insanely high right now. You also deserve free time and a social life, dont get a burnout
I love his channel, and consider him a very credible source for anarchism. I am a subscriber to his channel and have learned much from his videos. He does his research and cites his sources.
I’d like to ask what you consider to be the proper format for source citation for a youtube video on historical topics. Because I’m not sure if it’s supposed to be APA7 or Chicago style.
Congrats on the subs. I know I’m one of the new ones here and I have enjoyed seeing what you’ve put out. I have a couple of comments on this video and a couple of questions if you’re so inclined to give me your take. 2001 is definitely one of the best movies of all time. If thinking of the 60s, I would also add Lawrence of Arabia (though historically problematic at times, its visuals are stunning). And you’ve inspired me to pull out my wife’s Viking replica swords and have a few whacks at our faux human dummy! The questions are about your Christianity. I’m not looking at a debate nor am I trolling, I’d just like to hear your takes so please don’t take my questions as adversarial. - Is the Bible inerrant? Old and New. If not inerrant, then how do you trust what has been written? - Matthew 5: 17-18 clearly says that Jesus didn’t come to change the laws of Moses and that not one “one jot or one tittle” be changed; how do you reconcile those verses with what you’ve said in this video? - Have you looked at New Testament scholar Dr Bart Erhman’s work and what is your hot take on his research on the historical Jesus? - And because I can’t help myself, what about the mythicist movement that has sprung out of scholars such as Dr Richard Carrier? A lot to ask, I know. Just curious. Regardless, I’m sincerely glad to see you gaining subscribers! And best of luck to you in the future. Cheers
Thank you so much! Sorry I only just found your comment. 1. Matthew 5: 17-18 says Jesus came to FULFIL the Law of Moses. From the start that was the whole point of Christianity, that Jesus had come to fulfil the Law of Moses, after which its work would be complete. This is explicit in verse 18, which says "not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter will pass from the law UNTIL everything takes place". That word "until" shows Jesus speaking of a time in the near future at which the Law of Moses would pass away. 2. I have been reading Ehrman's works for around 20 years. He's very good on textual criticism, which is his area of expertise. Outside that he tends to be less reliable, which is natural for any specialist stepping outside their specialty. I pay close attention to critical reviews of his works by other scholars, to gain a more balanced perspective. 3. The mythicist argument isn't regarded as credible by the mainstream scholarly consensus, for very good reasons. I've read plenty of mythicist arguments for over 20 years, from authors right across the spectrum (strong denial of existence to much weaker "probably didn't" or "may not have"), including Earl Doherty, Thomas Brodie, David Fitzgerald, Richard Carrier, Robert Price, Kersey Graves, and "Acharya S.", and it's not hard to see why the mainstream scholarly consensus hasn't been shifted on the subject despite over 100 years of mythicist arguments.
@@veritasetcaritas Thanks for the reply and I’m sure you’ll double back to this comment but here’s a response to one thing you said: I find it interesting that you understand academia, research papers, etc, yet dismiss Dr Erhman as just a textual critic. Wouldn’t you agree that it’s impossible to be an expert in everything and that’s why people with post graduate degrees have a focused topic? It’s why colleges and universities have programs and departments. An example of this is my wife works for a children’s hospital and we have learned that a child’s health and treatment is very different from an adult’s because our bodies change in the preteen years. The MDs who specialize in treating children must receive years of additional education and practice to work at the hospital. And it’s at this same hospital where I was treated in one day after spending a month sitting in a rural hospital with 4 beds. So I get that Dr Erhman is often dismissed by believers because they don’t like what he says, and I’m not really here to defend him specifically, but as a researcher, you of all people should know that he is first and foremost a specialized PhD level biblical scholar. But aside from him and textual criticism, academically, there are archeologists, anthropologists, Roman historians and other specialized fields that should put enough doubts on the mythology in the New Testament. There no contemporary secondary accounts of Jesus, Rome didn’t do a census requiring people to travel to other lands, Bethlehem was nothing more than a water well with a few huts at the time, the people who’ve been identified by secondary sources lived and died at different times despite what the New Testament says, there are direct contradictions in the 4 accepted Gospels (was Jesus crucified before or after Passover?), there are all the other, not-canonized Gospels (such as the Gospel of Thomas) that tell different stories, etc. But let me leave that to the PhD level scholars who get dismissed because they put doubts on a person’s beliefs. (I hear very similar arguments when it comes to Islam and Mormons). But I use to believe in Jesus, his miracles and resurrection….but how do we verify those miraculous events happened? How do we prove a creator deity blew life into a pile of dirt? How do we prove God even exists? I get that are a lot of reasons why people believe; familial and cultural ties (sociology), psychological and physiological make up, confirmation biases, a profound and justified fear of death being final, etc. But outside of our academic understandings of sociology, neuroscience, psychology and philosophy, we have no reason to believe in gods, miracles and the resurrection of a person who died on a Friday afternoon and woke up Sunday morning. Sorry if this comes across as an attack, but I just don’t believe in the supernatural anymore, regardless of Dr Erhman. (There are so many reasons why and I could go on for a very long time, but I just don’t have the RUclips character limit to get into it in depth) Cheers mate
@@thelostone6981 you're welcome. I don't dismiss Ehrman at all, and I definitely don't dismiss him as "just a textual critic". I am simply pointing out that when he steps outside his area of expertise then you need to be more cautious with what he says. I am saying this because it's what actual historians have said. You can find plenty of criticisms of Ehrman by actual historians saying that he has one or other error due to the fact that he isn't as familiar with the relevant history as a professional historian would be. I agree we can't be experts on everything, and academia these days is increasingly specialized, but I would also say that doesn't mean a scholar like Ehrman can't have valid opinions on history or that his views of history should be simply dismissed or ignored. As a biblical scholar, especially of the New Testament, he knows a lot about the relevant history, more than many people. I just observe that his writings on history need to be verified rather than simply always taken at face value. Again, I say this because actual historians have said this. With regard to your comments about the historicity of Jesus, I think it's useful to consider why mainstream historians still believe Jesus actually existed. That is still the scholarly consensus, so it's clear they don't share your view of the evidence. I cover that in detail in this video on on eof my other channels. ruclips.net/video/E4B2iy6VzFE/видео.html As for whether God exists, that is not a matter of proof; it's not something we can prove. Like miracles, it's a matter of faith.
@@veritasetcaritas Did you make this video yourself? Because I’ve seen it thrown out before and it’s still not convincing that Jesus is our savior, his miracles happened, and that he died and was resurrected. So I would like to know specifically, using your criteria for good or reliable history,do you base your beliefs in a resurrected Jesus who is the savior of our souls? Here’s my questions: 1) When was Josephus/Tacius born compared to when Jesus was said to have been crucified? How are we to think that Josephus/Tacitus had first hand knowledge that Jesus was resurrected? To rely on them as contemporary sources doesn’t make any sense and is a stretch my friend. 2) So what contemporary, second hand sources can you point to that Jesus performed the miracles and was resurrected outside of the conflicting Gospels? Once again why not the Gospels of Thomas and other Gospels? 3) And what proof can you point to that a god even exists in the first place? A couple of other points; you poison the well when you say things like “actual historians” because, fine; Jesus existed (it’s not a point I’m arguing against)…but a person still holds an empty bag as to wether the miracles and resurrection happened. And not to get to personal, but you don’t seem to hold yourself to the same standard as those you attack when it comes to your religious belief. Instead of illustrating Jesus was miraculous, I get a video about 1) “criteria of authenticity” and the garbage of “embarrassment”, “plausiblity” (which is utter nonsense because it’s plausible Joseph Smith found gold plates), and my favorite; “natural probability” and the “non-supernatural […]”…how is THAT logical to justify your belief?! I sure hope that this is not you in the link because that video is so fundamentally flawed and I can NOT get why you put that forth as good history??? I don’t want to leave on a bad note so do you have anything other than knock Erhman and a bad epistemology video??? I really want to understand what your foundation for your belief in miracles and the resurrection using good historical evidence?
@@thelostone6981 yes I made that video. It does not even attempt to justify the belief that Jesus is our savior, his miracles happened, and that he died and was resurrected. I never said any of that was "good history", nor did I link to to that video as historical evidence that those events happened. You asked me for why I accept the historicity of Jesus, so I linked to a video explaining why I accept the historicity of Jesus. I didn't knock Ehrman, so I don't know what you mean by that; I cite Ehrman approvingly in that video. If you read the end of my previous post you'll see I responded to your question about the existence of God by saying that is a matter of FAITH, not historical evidence. The same goes for the belief that Jesus is our savior, his miracles happened, and that he died and was resurrected. That is a matter of FAITH. So no, I do not hold two different standards. Obviously you have some gripes with professional historians, and think their methods are "garbage" and "utter nonsense", which I don't, but I'm not going to try and convince you that mainstream historians are reliable.
Will you ever make a video explaining your reasons for being a Christian Catholic ( I assume you are one, but maybe i am wrong) and not any other religion or why you do not have no religion? I don't know if you would find it an interesting topic to cover, but i think your insight about this might be intristing for some people here ojn yt. Or just get some sleep man, I am not your boss, I would prefer for you to be healthy.
Thanks! Well I'm not a Catholic, I belong to the Christian tradition known as the Radical Reformation, as well as the historic Christian peace tradition, and I am a Christian anarchist. But if you want more on my beliefs about that you can see my Radical Reformation Christianity channel, linked to in the description of this video.
Utopia (UK) is amazing, always reminds me of Severance another great show although also very different more about office work. If you ever get the chance that or the paper mache animated film The Wolf House is amazing surrealist commentary on fascism, colonialism in chile. I will trailer to both in the replies if you are interested
@veritasetcaritas as someone who did some academic modules outside my history/politics degrees on film history. I would love to see a video on that or generally say a selection of media you enjoy and want to analyse in some way. If you want any recommendations, feel free to come back to this thread and hit me up. As a result of those studies, I've watched plenty of amazing projects, and there are so many that are not known in wider public consciousness.
@@vispian7688 have you seen this one I did on the artistic connection between Viktor Antonov and Lebbaeus Woods? It's one of my favorites, and I loved making it, but unfortunately it hasn't seen much interest in the two years since I uploaded it. ruclips.net/video/qa-MtHrliXc/видео.html
@veritasetcaritas I haven't yet. I have only had the time so far to watch the past year or so of your backlog. But I love half-life, so I will definitely put that one on at work tonight! , I don't know much about Antonov, so I it should be a nice learning experience. Thanks!
Thank you for all of your hard work, scholarship and academic integrity. You're a RUclips treasure, myth buster and knowledge bomb! Your content is right up there with potholer54.
Thank you! Comparing me with potholer54 is a real compliment!
Hardly. His modus operandi, like James Somerton, is to delete comments that point out his errors and then block the user. Silencing critical/discordant voices is quite literally the antithesis of good academic practice. This guy’s a fraud
Huh, I avoided Schwerpunkt because I worried about the quality of his work, considering how often he uploads. Knowing he is translating already written lectures makes me want to check his channel out again.
I have a few things to say about Schwerpunkt and will make a video on him, because he is explicitly and unashamedly a total trad-con ideologically, but I can't fault his qualifications for the content he produces. The man makes two hour videos packed with detail about niche history, straight from his lecture notes. If he's making mistakes, they would need someone with real subject knowledge to identify.
I also had questions on the validity of schwerpunkt, thanks for clearing it
@@zaidahmedkhan4103 you're welcome. I will make a video on him one day.
As a fellow Christian anarchist and a history student myself, finding your channel was an absolute joy, keep up the good work!
Thank you!
I’ve been watching this channel since Mid 2023 and you’ve become a perfect channel to binge whenever I’m eating lunch or cooking. Your style is concise yet informative and I’ve learned a lot from you. I hope you keep making more and always enjoy making these videos as we have watching them!
Thank you so much! I like the idea that my videos are good binge watching background content.
Congratulations, I know this channel costs you not just financially, but it truly is a blessing and on a personal note has reignited by academic interest after feeling burnout in the past few years. For that thank you.
Thank you! I am very glad I've been able to produce so much actual academic work in the process of making these videos. That has been very encouraging. It has certainly been excellent for keeping my CV current. I am delighted that this has re-ignited your own academic fervor.
@@veritasetcaritas That's good to hear! Hopefully, if this channel comes to an end one day for whatever reason, you feel proud of the videos you were able to make.
Happy Christmas. A top-notch, excellent history YT channel.
Thank you so much, Merry Christmas!
i got your james somerton video in my recs when it came out and i watched a bit of it but went back and ended up enjoying basically every single vid on your channel. i work in a warehouse with headphones and i love putting your stuff on auto and just learning while i do my thing. keep up the great work!!
That's fantastic, thanks for letting me know! I actually mainly listen to RUclips videos myself, within my commute or at work, so I try to ensure my own are accessible to anyone listening to them without viewing them.
Legitimately one of my favorite RUclips channels on the come up.
Thank you!
Thank you for answering my question! I would say though, that while I admire your productivity, I (and probably most of your supporters) would rather have you release videos less frequently while having healthier sleeping habits.
Thank you. I am going to try to manage my time and sleep better next year, for the benefit of myself and the channel.
Thanks for the video and the hard work. I hope you find the sleep you need. Happy holidays everyone.
Thank you! I finally hard nearly 9 hours of sleep last night.
Well done! Hope you are able to keep it up :)
@@veritasetcaritas
Congrats on this milestone. Found you thru that JS/history plagiarism vid, then stayed for your other well-researched bangers. Rock on.
Thanks!
Oh we have something in common in our favourite movies. I am looking forward to your video about "The Kavernacle" whose Cyberpunk video I could not finish watching because I found it lacking to say the least.
My script is about 20 pages long already.
@@veritasetcaritasTake all the time you need.
OMG! Two of my questions answer in a video? Why? I feel so important out of nowhere!
Thank you very much for your content. Try to keep up with your social life and your sleep routine. I prefer less videos if that means you are in better shape
You're very welcome! I was glad to receive so many questions, and made a deliberate decision to answer all of them. Recently my work schedule has eased now, and I am sleeping much more. Thank you for your concern.
Merry Christmas & get some sleep!
Thank you, will do!
First. The only video where it's appropriate.
I dont think anyone would blame you if you reduced your video output by half, its insanely high right now. You also deserve free time and a social life, dont get a burnout
Thanks, I'll definitely need to reduce it to some extent after February.
Congrats!
Thank you!
You're welcome
What do you think about Anark? Is he a credible source for anarchism?
I love his channel, and consider him a very credible source for anarchism. I am a subscriber to his channel and have learned much from his videos. He does his research and cites his sources.
@@veritasetcaritas Thanks for your feedback!
5:30 Same
You might enjoy the Sam & Max series if you enjoy absurdist, cynical, satirical humor.
I’d like to ask what you consider to be the proper format for source citation for a youtube video on historical topics. Because I’m not sure if it’s supposed to be APA7 or Chicago style.
It's entirely a matter of choice. I use SBL Second Edition since it's what I am used to and I find the format very efficient.
Congrats on the subs. I know I’m one of the new ones here and I have enjoyed seeing what you’ve put out. I have a couple of comments on this video and a couple of questions if you’re so inclined to give me your take.
2001 is definitely one of the best movies of all time. If thinking of the 60s, I would also add Lawrence of Arabia (though historically problematic at times, its visuals are stunning). And you’ve inspired me to pull out my wife’s Viking replica swords and have a few whacks at our faux human dummy!
The questions are about your Christianity. I’m not looking at a debate nor am I trolling, I’d just like to hear your takes so please don’t take my questions as adversarial.
- Is the Bible inerrant? Old and New. If not inerrant, then how do you trust what has been written?
- Matthew 5: 17-18 clearly says that Jesus didn’t come to change the laws of Moses and that not one “one jot or one tittle” be changed; how do you reconcile those verses with what you’ve said in this video?
- Have you looked at New Testament scholar Dr Bart Erhman’s work and what is your hot take on his research on the historical Jesus?
- And because I can’t help myself, what about the mythicist movement that has sprung out of scholars such as Dr Richard Carrier?
A lot to ask, I know. Just curious. Regardless, I’m sincerely glad to see you gaining subscribers! And best of luck to you in the future.
Cheers
Thank you so much! Sorry I only just found your comment.
1. Matthew 5: 17-18 says Jesus came to FULFIL the Law of Moses. From the start that was the whole point of Christianity, that Jesus had come to fulfil the Law of Moses, after which its work would be complete. This is explicit in verse 18, which says "not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter will pass from the law UNTIL everything takes place". That word "until" shows Jesus speaking of a time in the near future at which the Law of Moses would pass away.
2. I have been reading Ehrman's works for around 20 years. He's very good on textual criticism, which is his area of expertise. Outside that he tends to be less reliable, which is natural for any specialist stepping outside their specialty. I pay close attention to critical reviews of his works by other scholars, to gain a more balanced perspective.
3. The mythicist argument isn't regarded as credible by the mainstream scholarly consensus, for very good reasons. I've read plenty of mythicist arguments for over 20 years, from authors right across the spectrum (strong denial of existence to much weaker "probably didn't" or "may not have"), including Earl Doherty, Thomas Brodie, David Fitzgerald, Richard Carrier, Robert Price, Kersey Graves, and "Acharya S.", and it's not hard to see why the mainstream scholarly consensus hasn't been shifted on the subject despite over 100 years of mythicist arguments.
@@veritasetcaritas Thanks for the reply and I’m sure you’ll double back to this comment but here’s a response to one thing you said: I find it interesting that you understand academia, research papers, etc, yet dismiss Dr Erhman as just a textual critic. Wouldn’t you agree that it’s impossible to be an expert in everything and that’s why people with post graduate degrees have a focused topic? It’s why colleges and universities have programs and departments. An example of this is my wife works for a children’s hospital and we have learned that a child’s health and treatment is very different from an adult’s because our bodies change in the preteen years. The MDs who specialize in treating children must receive years of additional education and practice to work at the hospital. And it’s at this same hospital where I was treated in one day after spending a month sitting in a rural hospital with 4 beds.
So I get that Dr Erhman is often dismissed by believers because they don’t like what he says, and I’m not really here to defend him specifically, but as a researcher, you of all people should know that he is first and foremost a specialized PhD level biblical scholar. But aside from him and textual criticism, academically, there are archeologists, anthropologists, Roman historians and other specialized fields that should put enough doubts on the mythology in the New Testament. There no contemporary secondary accounts of Jesus, Rome didn’t do a census requiring people to travel to other lands, Bethlehem was nothing more than a water well with a few huts at the time, the people who’ve been identified by secondary sources lived and died at different times despite what the New Testament says, there are direct contradictions in the 4 accepted Gospels (was Jesus crucified before or after Passover?), there are all the other, not-canonized Gospels (such as the Gospel of Thomas) that tell different stories, etc.
But let me leave that to the PhD level scholars who get dismissed because they put doubts on a person’s beliefs. (I hear very similar arguments when it comes to Islam and Mormons). But I use to believe in Jesus, his miracles and resurrection….but how do we verify those miraculous events happened? How do we prove a creator deity blew life into a pile of dirt? How do we prove God even exists? I get that are a lot of reasons why people believe; familial and cultural ties (sociology), psychological and physiological make up, confirmation biases, a profound and justified fear of death being final, etc. But outside of our academic understandings of sociology, neuroscience, psychology and philosophy, we have no reason to believe in gods, miracles and the resurrection of a person who died on a Friday afternoon and woke up Sunday morning.
Sorry if this comes across as an attack, but I just don’t believe in the supernatural anymore, regardless of Dr Erhman. (There are so many reasons why and I could go on for a very long time, but I just don’t have the RUclips character limit to get into it in depth)
Cheers mate
@@thelostone6981 you're welcome. I don't dismiss Ehrman at all, and I definitely don't dismiss him as "just a textual critic". I am simply pointing out that when he steps outside his area of expertise then you need to be more cautious with what he says. I am saying this because it's what actual historians have said. You can find plenty of criticisms of Ehrman by actual historians saying that he has one or other error due to the fact that he isn't as familiar with the relevant history as a professional historian would be.
I agree we can't be experts on everything, and academia these days is increasingly specialized, but I would also say that doesn't mean a scholar like Ehrman can't have valid opinions on history or that his views of history should be simply dismissed or ignored. As a biblical scholar, especially of the New Testament, he knows a lot about the relevant history, more than many people. I just observe that his writings on history need to be verified rather than simply always taken at face value. Again, I say this because actual historians have said this.
With regard to your comments about the historicity of Jesus, I think it's useful to consider why mainstream historians still believe Jesus actually existed. That is still the scholarly consensus, so it's clear they don't share your view of the evidence. I cover that in detail in this video on on eof my other channels.
ruclips.net/video/E4B2iy6VzFE/видео.html
As for whether God exists, that is not a matter of proof; it's not something we can prove. Like miracles, it's a matter of faith.
@@veritasetcaritas Did you make this video yourself? Because I’ve seen it thrown out before and it’s still not convincing that Jesus is our savior, his miracles happened, and that he died and was resurrected.
So I would like to know specifically, using your criteria for good or reliable history,do you base your beliefs in a resurrected Jesus who is the savior of our souls? Here’s my questions:
1) When was Josephus/Tacius born compared to when Jesus was said to have been crucified? How are we to think that Josephus/Tacitus had first hand knowledge that Jesus was resurrected? To rely on them as contemporary sources doesn’t make any sense and is a stretch my friend.
2) So what contemporary, second hand sources can you point to that Jesus performed the miracles and was resurrected outside of the conflicting Gospels? Once again why not the Gospels of Thomas and other Gospels?
3) And what proof can you point to that a god even exists in the first place?
A couple of other points; you poison the well when you say things like “actual historians” because, fine; Jesus existed (it’s not a point I’m arguing against)…but a person still holds an empty bag as to wether the miracles and resurrection happened. And not to get to personal, but you don’t seem to hold yourself to the same standard as those you attack when it comes to your religious belief. Instead of illustrating Jesus was miraculous, I get a video about 1) “criteria of authenticity” and the garbage of “embarrassment”, “plausiblity” (which is utter nonsense because it’s plausible Joseph Smith found gold plates), and my favorite; “natural probability” and the “non-supernatural […]”…how is THAT logical to justify your belief?!
I sure hope that this is not you in the link because that video is so fundamentally flawed and I can NOT get why you put that forth as good history??? I don’t want to leave on a bad note so do you have anything other than knock Erhman and a bad epistemology video??? I really want to understand what your foundation for your belief in miracles and the resurrection using good historical evidence?
@@thelostone6981 yes I made that video. It does not even attempt to justify the belief that Jesus is our savior, his miracles happened, and that he died and was resurrected. I never said any of that was "good history", nor did I link to to that video as historical evidence that those events happened.
You asked me for why I accept the historicity of Jesus, so I linked to a video explaining why I accept the historicity of Jesus. I didn't knock Ehrman, so I don't know what you mean by that; I cite Ehrman approvingly in that video.
If you read the end of my previous post you'll see I responded to your question about the existence of God by saying that is a matter of FAITH, not historical evidence. The same goes for the belief that Jesus is our savior, his miracles happened, and that he died and was resurrected. That is a matter of FAITH. So no, I do not hold two different standards.
Obviously you have some gripes with professional historians, and think their methods are "garbage" and "utter nonsense", which I don't, but I'm not going to try and convince you that mainstream historians are reliable.
Will you ever make a video explaining your reasons for being a Christian Catholic ( I assume you are one, but maybe i am wrong) and not any other religion or why you do not have no religion? I don't know if you would find it an interesting topic to cover, but i think your insight about this might be intristing for some people here ojn yt. Or just get some sleep man, I am not your boss, I would prefer for you to be healthy.
Thanks! Well I'm not a Catholic, I belong to the Christian tradition known as the Radical Reformation, as well as the historic Christian peace tradition, and I am a Christian anarchist. But if you want more on my beliefs about that you can see my Radical Reformation Christianity channel, linked to in the description of this video.
Utopia (UK) is amazing, always reminds me of Severance another great show although also very different more about office work. If you ever get the chance that or the paper mache animated film The Wolf House is amazing surrealist commentary on fascism, colonialism in chile. I will trailer to both in the replies if you are interested
The Wolf House - ruclips.net/video/RCoYazbA1Ic/видео.htmlsi=vv0RWNj-ykI9M6e1
Severance - ruclips.net/video/xEQP4VVuyrY/видео.htmlsi=xEgwUFoWBWijgDNf
Oh I can't believe I forgot to mention Severance! That is the best show to come out of the US in years, and I need to make a video on it.
@veritasetcaritas as someone who did some academic modules outside my history/politics degrees on film history. I would love to see a video on that or generally say a selection of media you enjoy and want to analyse in some way.
If you want any recommendations, feel free to come back to this thread and hit me up. As a result of those studies, I've watched plenty of amazing projects, and there are so many that are not known in wider public consciousness.
@@vispian7688 have you seen this one I did on the artistic connection between Viktor Antonov and Lebbaeus Woods? It's one of my favorites, and I loved making it, but unfortunately it hasn't seen much interest in the two years since I uploaded it.
ruclips.net/video/qa-MtHrliXc/видео.html
@veritasetcaritas I haven't yet. I have only had the time so far to watch the past year or so of your backlog.
But I love half-life, so I will definitely put that one on at work tonight! ,
I don't know much about Antonov, so I it should be a nice learning experience. Thanks!
numbers
You like _Skinamarink_ ? Unsubscribed. (jk)