Let me summarize this comment section: a bunch of unqualified, non-historians, blinded by their existing bias, laughing at a qualified, professional historian who is explaining how her historical professionalism forced her to challenge her previous bias.

@houmm08

20 күн бұрын

Let me summarise your comment. She's got letters after her name, so whatever she says about anything, however preposterous, we plebs need to take it seriously.

@noelhausler2911

20 күн бұрын

@@houmm08 Bart Ehrman an equally qualified scholar has argued with the best evangelical scholars on the resurrection and he has become such a pain that they have created a special channell to defend themselves Bart suggests reading the gospels horizontally. If you do that with the resurrection accounts you find contradictions. In Matthew it is an angel sitting on the rock, in Mark it is ONE angel inside the tomb and in Luke it is TWO angels INSIDE the tomb. John's gospel i equally confusing.

@noelhausler2911

20 күн бұрын

@@houmm08 In Matthew and Marks gospel accounts the two thieves badger him but come to Luke there is a long comment. How was that remembered. Did someone have pitman's shorthand "I say unto you today thou shalt be with me in paradise" This passage is used in debates among Christians as to whether man has a soul. Did that thief go to heaven? But it seems Jesus had not ascended yet?

@DarinL

20 күн бұрын

@@houmm08 No, that is not at all what I’m saying. That would be an appeal to authority. What I’m saying is: when an expert in an area speaks to a matter within their area of expertise, they are not guaranteed to be correct. However, detractors need to explain where, specifically, the alleged expert has gone wrong. Perhaps you could show all of us where - specifically, in your view- this historian has clearly erred?

@DarinL

20 күн бұрын

@@noelhausler2911 And Bart Ehrman’s critiques have been answered by NT scholars (as evidenced by numerous books, blogs, websites, and debates.)

This hard working, clearly inspired woman sure is getting a lot of hate from people with 0 expertise

@TiaKruimel

28 күн бұрын

Exactly how Jesus predicted….🙏Amen!

@greglogan7706

27 күн бұрын

Because her pronouncements are seriously problematic - as anyone who is involved in apologetics already is aware. As a Christian theist, I can see through her reasoning with very little effort. Tribalism is not a good look for one who is a follower of Jesus of Nazareth - a man - attested to by God.

@thetabletopskirmisher

26 күн бұрын

​@@greglogan7706what are you trying to say? She's speaking from the POV of an actual historian.

@mbabbitt98011

26 күн бұрын

Yes, I noticed the mockery and condescension in many comments from the willing-to- avoid truly listening.

@EndWach-gi1nh

25 күн бұрын

@@greglogan7706?

Fascinating. She is so expressive.

@vhawk1951kl

16 күн бұрын

You are merely saying she lies well.

@constantgardener19

15 күн бұрын

@@vhawk1951kl No, that's what you are saying.

@williamjohns9322

13 күн бұрын

@vhawk1951kl just because she is saying something you don’t agree with doesn’t mean she is lying. Go on, attack her ideas but don’t lower yourself to ad homonym.

Thank you for this. Subscribed.

The NT contains the only account for the resurrection of Jesus. Although anonymous, the church has attributed the Gospels to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The Gospels were written in the third person. While these points are not a deal breaker, the Gospels do not contain any first hand eyewitness accounts for the resurrection. A historian should not accept such weak evidence unless they have the epistemic standard of Low Bar Bill.

@TheSulross

14 күн бұрын

Well, the writings of Paul are first hand accounts and he met directly with Peter, a direct disciple of Jesus, and is thoroughly mentioned in those NT gospel accounts and Acts, and with James the brother of Jesus. James the brother of Jesus gets cited by Josephus and there are a number of other accounts external to the NT writings that mention James the brother of Jesus. These are all very impressive aspects of historicity to history academics in respect to the ancient world time period. And so Paul cites not only his personal experience of encountering Jesus, but he recounts others that he knew of directly that saw Jesus as alive in the aftermath of his having been put to death by crucifixion (in one case he mentions there was a group of 500 that together saw the risen Jesus - Paul traveled twice to meet with James and Peter in Jerusalem and spent a few weeks to compare notes, so to speak, so he definitely had the opportunity to hear lots of such accounts from these original Christians). Were Peter and James the brother of Jesus real people? Paul says in his first person writings that they are, and so does the author of Luke and Acts, etc., etc. And of course the author of Acts accords that Paul was an actual person. Lots of multi-attestation all way round. And of course there is still the Shroud of Turin that forensically accords with the NT account of what was done to Jesus.

@damianedwards8827

11 күн бұрын

Incorrect. There are various documented accounts of Jesus and his activities, influence and divinity But we must Always remember… With atheism, comes a passion to hate Jesus. In the faith people Follow that God is Love. So if an atheist claims Love is insignificant, the issue isn’t about documentation on Jesus. This atheist ego adds into people’s deflection from Caring about these experiences with Jesus .

@Jimmy-iy9pl

10 күн бұрын

Well, I'm not sure what an "account" of the Resurrection would even look like outside of a Christian context. If I had to guess - it seems obvious to me, our presenter probably thinks the Gospels are historically reliable. Considering she cited the work of Richard Bauckham, she would probably deny that the Gospels do not contain any eyewitness testimony.

@austintriggs995

10 күн бұрын

Read the Gospel of John. And try Price’s intro to his translations.

I have followed the scientific investigations of the Shroud of Turin for many years. For only one reason. So that I could believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Then I had two ‘Wow’ moments! The first was the that the disciples heard Jesus’ teachings, but never really listened. When He was crucified, they seemed to lose faith and they went into hiding. It was like, Jesus was not the King they were expecting. Now, Jesus appeared to over 500 people after he was resurrected, but we never really hear about what those 500 did after. However, the disciples suddenly found their faith again and went out spreading the Good News with such vigour and passion. John was eventually imprisoned on the prison island of Patmos and the rest were martyred for their faith. The ‘Wow’ moment was: Why would they do that for a lie? At least one of them would have cracked and the whole house of cards would have come tumbling down! That means only one thing. Jesus appeared to the disciples out of thin air in a locked and shuttered room! There is no other explanation! The second ‘Wow’ was Saul on the road to Damascus. Jesus, now in Heaven, asked Saul “Why do you persecute me.” Saul, became Paul and became a most devout follower of Jesus! Why did Jesus choose Saul? Jesus could have chosen a Christian. But wait. Had He done so, that person would have simply become a footnote in the Scriptures with barely a mention. No, Jesus chose a tax collecting persecutor of Christians whose life did a complete about face on the road to Damascus. Again, why would a fairly wealthy man who hated Christians turn his life the way he did, suffering imprisonment and eventual beheading, for a lie! He wouldn’t! Both of my ‘Wow’ moments demonstrate to me that Jesus was crucified, resurrected and then ascended to Heaven. The Shroud of Turin is now just an interesting artefact. Something said to me “Read the Scriptures again!” When I did, it was like ‘WOW’

@user-bl7oe2md4p

27 күн бұрын

What you have said totally resonated with my own coming to faith process as I was studying the historical evidence that supports the trustworthy accuracy of the biblical narratives. One of the big WOW moments for me was that NO ONE who was an eyewitness denied that Jesus had the power to work miracles, not even his enemies but what they did instead was attribute the supernatural power at work to the devil. It was not only Christians who testify to these facts, even in the Jewish Talmud there are some coded references to Jesus of Nazareth who is mentioned to be a Sabbath breaker, blasphemer, and Sorcerer who was accursed of God by his hanging upon a tree in crucifixion. Another WOW moment for me was the recognition that the newly hewn tomb out of the rock had only one entrance or exit and the body was entombed there the tomb sealed up by rolling a massive stone disc to cover the opening. Jesus's enemies put a Roman guard to ensure that the disciples could not steal the body and then claim that he had been resurrected, because they themselves had heard him prophesy that he would be. This means that all the Jewish or Roman authorities had to do to totally discredit and debunk the claims of the apostles to Jesus's resurrection was to present his dead body. They had the tomb completely under their control and possession and yet there was no body in the open tomb. The only adequate explanation for this along with the mighty power of God at work through the apostles who proclaimed publicly at great personal risk to themselves, that Jesus has been resurrected, was that they were telling the absolute truth! The so called Passover Plot conspiracy theory was used as propaganda against the followers and disciples of Jesus and was a falsehood from the start and falls to pieces when examined closely, in fact ALL the attempts at finding a non supernatural explanation for the events recorded in the gospels are complete failures, even retreating into doubt and uncertainty about how credible the sources of information we have does not work as we have multiple independent corroborating sources, even if each of the sources have slight variations and imperfections in their recollections.

@paulsimmonds2030

27 күн бұрын

@@user-bl7oe2md4p I can only describe a ‘Wow’ moment as like a baseball bat strike to my head. (Without the pain, just the reverberation) Some of the meaning within Scripture can be hidden in plain sight. Many times, you can read and re-read something and still not get it. Then the Holy Spirit, out of the blue, flicks a switch and BOOM! You read the passage again and think “How did I miss that!” I do admit, I am a sinner and fall far short of the glory of God. Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would be sent as a helper to all those that believe in Him. I know that I am being helped and guided, but also know that I am still a work in progress. (But not my works, the Holy Spirit) God Bless you brother. 🙏

@goldenalt3166

27 күн бұрын

​@@user-bl7oe2md4pThe non- supernatural explanation is that the gospels are stories created without any significant evidence just like everything you and the originial poster just said about them. Early christians were no better than modern christians.

@downenout8705

25 күн бұрын

Wow, you read the gospels with a presupposition that they were true. So not much of a Wow that you found them to be Wow.

@vhawk1951kl

25 күн бұрын

How can he Shroud of Turin be relevant to whether or not the impossible is impossible? Of what syllogism could anything-at-all about he Shroud of Turin be a premise? Depending on your breeding wits and learning you may or may not have the information that a particular bit of evidence or information is " relevant" if it can form one or another of the premises of a syllogism

Thanky you, Molly. Very thorough and enlightening!

Wow. Thank you. That was brilliant.

What is said regarding the conflicting facts in the accounts of the Gospels and how this is true with history in general, is spot on. I spent 35 years in law enforcement and 30 as a criminal investigator. The most unreliable evidence is eye witness testimony. Because every witness brings something different to the table, bias, points of view and impressions. We do this generally with religion, and those who have influenced religion. I have come to believe that it is all true… all of it…just not necessarily how we might think that it is true.

@noelhausler2911

25 күн бұрын

In Matthew two Marys arrive witness the stone being rolled away and encounter an angel sitting on the rock. In Mark two Marys and Salome arrive see the tomb is already open and encounter one angel. In Luke three + women arrive see the tomb open and walk in and encounter two angels. In John Mary arrives sees the tomb open and gets peter and john who come and check the tomb and leave (wonder where the angels went?) They leave. Mary later sitting outside the tomb looks from outside and sees two angels. Peter and John just missed them? Who would have provided the writers with the information of what happened? Points of view can be wrong. I have moments when I get further information see where I was wrong.

@JD-HatCreekCattleCo

25 күн бұрын

@@noelhausler2911 I have seen witnesses in criminal cases see very different things and that then creates a problem for the prosecution.

@noelhausler2911

25 күн бұрын

@@JD-HatCreekCattleCo You mean the two Marys would tell each gospel writer a different story? I wonder what Bart Ehrman would make of your theory . I must ask him.

@michaelhenry1763

25 күн бұрын

She is an American history professor who also teaches about Christianity in American history. History is the investigation through literary multiple sources to construct a story or events of the past. However, if there are conflicts or contradictions, you would not include that story or explain that the truth cannot be known but share the different variants.

@noelhausler2911

24 күн бұрын

@@michaelhenry1763 So two Mary's tell the writer of Matthew's gospel the angel was sitting on the rock while the two Mary's and Salomi in Mark say nothing about seeing the rock being rolled away. an invitation "Come and see where he lay" Matt28:6 Mark 16:5 And they entered the tomb and saw a young man (no invitation) Luke they enter notices no body and two men suddenly appear. Bart Ehrman who also teaches the Bible in a University disagrees and has debated with a number of evangelicals. Also was there was person knowing pitman's shorthand standing under the cross. ?

Professor Worthen combines ethos, pathos and logos to present her case. Kudos to her; this is brilliant. Subscribed.

@TiaKruimel

28 күн бұрын

This channel is so cool!!! No ads!! 😂

@greglogan7706

27 күн бұрын

@Robert - It was actually very disappointed.

@Arbognire

23 күн бұрын

@@greglogan7706…because it was lacking in reason or something❔

@vhawk1951kl

16 күн бұрын

She is *Lying*-fine if you like liars and parties to con tricks.

I didn't realize that Molly had become a Christian. Pretty cool.

She’s so right about marks gospel. I heard Alec McCowan recite it from memory many years ago and I felt it was almost reportage and very immediate in places.

@michaelhenry1763

25 күн бұрын

It was written 40 years after Jesus’ death. The author of Mark was not a very good writer. This is why we see Matthew and Luke expand, change, and correct Mark.

@noelhausler2911

24 күн бұрын

@@michaelhenry1763 They could do that? What was the synoptic problem again?

@michaelhenry1763

24 күн бұрын

@@noelhausler2911 yes, they could do that. The synoptic problem is the attempt to untangle the literary relationship between Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Mark was written first. Matthew was written second incorporating 90% of Mark into its gospel. Matthew copied some passages verbatim, others he expanded and changed, and Matthew added his own material. Luke, like Matthew, used Mark as a source. 62% of Mark is found in Luke. Luke and Matthew also share material in common that is not found in Mark. Most ( roughly 60%) of scholars think Matthew and Luke referenced a common sayings source called “Q”. The other roughly 40% of scholars think Luke used Matthew as a source. Luke also includes unique material. The gospel writers did not form their gospels independently of each other. They are similar because they copied from the same sources.

As we are in reality aliens ourselves, aliens from another planet is more likely than positing something supernatural. As we’ve no evidence for aliens visiting us, the better answer is, I don’t know.

One thing that I thought more people, more Christians, would latch on to was her final statement about how many ideas she had to admit she had as a secular person to make a leap of faith on.

Excellent.

I enjoyed all of her explanations, but not all of the exaggerated hand movements.

@markstang23

10 күн бұрын

This is your contribution?

@juneschlebusch6679

10 күн бұрын

It is a bit much. Far to expressive

She is just too animated to watch

@greglogan7706

27 күн бұрын

And painful to listen to

@mchristr

16 күн бұрын

Perhaps she developed that style in order to keep the attention of contemporary university students.

@johnnymomascaro

10 күн бұрын

You must hate italian restaurants too

@juneschlebusch6679

10 күн бұрын

I also find her to overwhelming., even though she is interesting but to much. Over welming

@greglogan7706

10 күн бұрын

@@juneschlebusch6679 I do!

Recommended reading. "The text by Bailey and Vander Broek, Literary Forms in the New Testament: A Handbook (1992) provides definitions of over thirty literary forms, including examples of their use in the New Testament and comments regarding the value of genre recognition for interpretation. Various descriptions and labels include historical literature, historical biography, popular biography, Graeco-Roman biography, a folk book, tradition in a Middle Eastern peasant culture, cultic legend, document of faith, drama or mythography, letter writing (e.g., Paul’s epistles), memoirs, Midrashic, narrative literature, novels, theological literature, and unique genre. In order to answer what genre these texts were written, it is necessary to determine the purpose of their respective authors. At the same time, it is the position of this text that the Gospels are not a biography, and they are not written to record history in a modern sense. " Alter, Michael J.. The Resurrection: a Critical Inquiry (pp. 59-60). Xlibris US. Kindle Edition.

@scottwatson8659

19 күн бұрын

Of course, they were meant, as they state, to deepen the faith of the communities they address. But the reductionist claim that therefore there is no real history in the Gospels, is untenable. This is what Prof Worthen is addressing, IMO. All history, even so-called objectivist modern history, is perspectival and told with intention, to help us to understand our place in the present, in some way.

@tgrogan6049

18 күн бұрын

@@scottwatson8659 Nobody said there is “ no history “ in the gospels.

I also like how she said it's still a leap of faith to believe in the resurrectiion. So dispite her intectual arguments for believing in the resurrection it is still a leap of faith. How does she rule out other religions as not being true? Has she investigated Islam for example?

@andywong9847

19 күн бұрын

You can start by telling us the life of Mohammad as a starting point. Even I don’t know you at all, I probably respect you more than the Mohammad of the Quran. On your mark, get set, go…. Tell us about Mohammad .

I would love to see both of you on Joe Rogan's Podcast. Thank you! That was awesome!

Refreshing point of view, uncommon testimony and real personal inner struggle balanced with a search/need for truth that I just haven't heard elsewhere. Lord Jesus let this be the beginning of many like her that turn and follow you.

4 minutes in and nothing solide yet….

An expert in her field arrives at her conclusion after decades of study, careful thought and personal struggle. Her critics respond with name-calling. Nice.

@anaccount8474

4 күн бұрын

If this is the single most important fact that any human being could know why does it require years of in depth study of ancient history, ancient literature and ancient religion to even begin assessing how likely it is to be true? You would think God could come up with something better if it's so important that we know about this.

@navchaps3449

4 күн бұрын

@@anaccount8474 That is just what this person had to go through because she had to overcome considerable learned defense mechanisms. For others who are not so defensive it's much simpler.

@jake5811 So what is your historical significant evidence that make you think that Jesus resurrection most likely happened? And have you looked into the details of Romuluses resurrection? Because are almost identical?

@georgewagner7787

17 күн бұрын

Belief in Romulus never changed anyone's life.

@constantgardener19

15 күн бұрын

@@georgewagner7787 That's not the point.

Her exact irrationality can be applied to Aladdin and the rest of the fairy tales man has ever devised as artifices.

@hugofernandes8545

20 күн бұрын

Irrationality?? She is an historian and she is not a christian. She is just look at the Gospels through an historical view. Your analogy is fallacious. Aladdin was not a historical person, there is no historical ir acheological record of his life. You are just saying nonsense. Being irrational is believing that the entire Universe came magically from nothing and by blind and that all things ordered themselves into a such vast, orderly, beautiful, complex, marvelous, tangible, mathematical structured, fine tunned Cosmos with natural laws and mechanisms and with bilions of galaxies, planets, stars, solar systems, supernovas, black wholes, atoms, sub-atomic particles, chemistry, biology, genetics, life, evolution itself, biodiversity, information, counscious, rational, moral and loving beings. That's a logical nonsense.

@suelingsusu1339

20 күн бұрын

@@hugofernandes8545 .... hahahaha....🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣

We make it all up.dream it all up the kingdom of heaven is within you.dreamt . from within

What is the first inspiring book on the resurrection that she mentions at the start?

@daveg-j1866

25 күн бұрын

N.T.Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God. As she said, it's very thorough but not always an easy read.

Amazingly honest and eloquent statement!

Okay, now I really want to get that book by NT Wright and “slog” through it with the one by Tim Keller by my side - as an aperitif maybe?

@danieldoherty5034

22 күн бұрын

N.T. Wright, "The Resurrection of the Son of God" (Fortress Press 2003). I read it about 10 years ago, but good to be reminded how good it is.

@user-sq9td8nu9i

12 күн бұрын

@@danieldoherty5034 there's a lot of theological problems with Wright, he backed a book/wrote a forward to a book by Steve Chalke - ''the lost words of Jesus'' - which declared God is a 'cosmic child abuser' ....and Christ not being the once for all substitute on the cross for mans sin

Sounds like they're just trying to rationalize what they want to believe.

@georgewagner7787

17 күн бұрын

No that's exactly what she said didn't happen between 1 and 2 minutes.

@ecisme10

17 күн бұрын

@@georgewagner7787 and yet that's what she was doing.

@user-eg2iy6hp9x

16 күн бұрын

If you think you don't rationalize what you want to believe, then you lack self awareness

@gsytrey

16 күн бұрын

In what world do you decide to separate an endeavor in rationality and what you choose to believe as true and false. You would propose discarding rationality in pursuit of beliefs?

@ecisme10

16 күн бұрын

@@gsytrey you can rationalize your beilfs with facts and critical thinking instead of myths.

She still expressed that it is still a leap of faith. It is interesting when she said that she an all or nothing type of person where she needs to decide after going through her own investigation. I wonder what motivates her to decide firmly even she have not experienced the mystical experience.

@user-lr2sq5qx2r

22 күн бұрын

Exactly It's still a leap to believe in the supernatural

frustrating that can't understand the name of the book she references at the beginning ------any help?

@mbb--

19 күн бұрын

It's N.T Wright's Resurrection of the Son of God

@alberg6290

19 күн бұрын

@@mbb-- thanks, really appreciate it

Molly is just great!

Wow!

Encouraging, although the professor seems a little driven to intellectualize her way to spiritual illumination.

@TiaKruimel

28 күн бұрын

That’s on account of all the schoolin’……she’ll have her moment 🙌🙏

@wtillett243

27 күн бұрын

Educated people tend to do that.

What's the name of the author of that book she mentioned at the beginning? (The one she called "a slog") I'd didn't quite understand it

@terrytigner9600

22 күн бұрын

N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God. Widely respected. This is part of an in depth, scholarly series on Christian origins.

@robertd9965

21 күн бұрын

@@terrytigner9600 Thank you so much! I work at a theological library and just saw that they've got it, so I'll check it out :)

Yes if a supernatural event was written to take place during the civil war then no, we don’t have good evidence to believe that either

It’s a belief based on biases not facts. There was no resurrection, if there were we wouldn’t need a new religion. It’s all mythology

@rudysimoens570

5 күн бұрын

Exactly!

Thank GOD for these 2 intelligent and honest women.

@vhawk1951kl

16 күн бұрын

what is "honest" about a fraudulent put-up-job pseudo interview which is a complete fraud- the old I-have-changed-my-mind con?There is and cannot be any evidence of the impossible; there is *absolutely_no*difference between the resurrection lie and the jesus ate his own head lie. If it*cannot* be true -is impossible, it *Is* not true, and what do we call people that say things that are not true? You got it, you sing out loud when you know the answer.

Great discussion.

The biggest error most scholars - even the critical ones- make about Jesus and his followers: they grant without question sincerity. Ask yourself, "What do faith healers throughout history and today have in common?" They are running a con. They are a cult of personality and their religion affords them a life they would not otherwise enjoy. If someone is raising the dead today, we all know it's a scam, and the past was no different. Here's another 2 big ones against the resurrection: First, why did Jesus only appear to his followers? Why not also appear to the Sanhedrin? Why not appear in Rome? Or the Temple? Secondly, the world obviously didn't end and the dead rise as Jesus and Paul predicted (I don't think Jesus' and Paul's teachings are the same on this, but nevertheless what they taught didn't occur).

@housechristoph3633

16 күн бұрын

Got a list of all the other cons where the conman purposefully angers the authorities to the extent he gets himself tortured and killed? Then all his partners do the same, one after the other?

@theunlearnedastronomer3205

16 күн бұрын

Yeah, most cons end not so well. Judas probably had enough of Jesus' bull, and that's what did him in.

@bennewby9600

15 күн бұрын

Jesus appeared to his brothers (previously skeptics, didn't believe in Him) and also to Saul (who was actively killing Christians at the time). If Jesus hadn't appeared to skeptics and enemies in addition to His followers I think you would have a valid point. Even then, the followers of Jesus were all absolutely sure they saw Jesus alive in many instances over an extended period of time, ending in Him visibly ascending to heaven.

@theunlearnedastronomer3205

15 күн бұрын

First off, you can only say that Paul claims to have had a vision of Jesus, not that “Jesus appeared” to someone. And Paul is not a credible person anyway. Whatever Jesus’ brothers may or may not have seen or what their motivations were we have no firsthand accounts. A couple of the “appearances” in the Bible were actually strangers and it later dawned on the followers that they had “really” met Jesus. So again I state: a real badass move would have been appearing in the Sanhedrin or Temple for ALL to see and not incognito as the gardener or something. Then they could say, hey, that’s the dude we killed 3 days ok!

@housechristoph3633

15 күн бұрын

@@theunlearnedastronomer3205 You say Paul isn't credible, but he spent the next 40+ years of his life preaching the gospel and founding churches. He never took a dime, was imprisoned on more than one occasion, and in the end was beheaded for refusing to state it was all a lie. Paul's miracles were personally witnessed and attested to in the Acts of the Apostles by Luke and others.

So does she believe the graves of Jerusalem opened up and the dead walked about? That Jesus withered a fig tree for not bearing figs when it wasn't the season for figs? That Pilate released a Jewish criminal on the say so of a Jewish mob? That Jesus flew up into space?

Her voice reminds me of Sandra Bullock in Miss Congeniality. Great clip!

As a believer for many years I find this uncommon narrative very intriguing.

@TbLj____

17 күн бұрын

Check out NT Wright’s “Simply Jesus” if you want more about this historical perspective. It’s a much shorter read than his tome “The Resurrection of the Son of God” (mentioned in the video).

@theunknownatheist3815

15 күн бұрын

Name does NOT check out. 🙄

Finally an honest intellectual who was willing to really examine all the evidence that cumulatively makes for a very compelling case supportive of the first century apostolic testimony as being factually and historically grounded. However it is often necessary for modern people to recognize that their own presumptions and implicit or explicit biases about the nature of reality can get in the way of being able to understand the history regarding Jesus Christ and the biblical record and it's frame of reference and interpretive construction which is given by those writers of those historical events.

@terrybedtelyon8225

28 күн бұрын

What evidense, its all hearsay. Written 40 years after the fact.

@greglogan7706

27 күн бұрын

Oh geez...your comment simply reflects an ego-centric tribalism.

@phillipsugwas

25 күн бұрын

Examining the evidence does not amount to "ethno centric tribalism."..- ( tautologist ?) I venture neither does it resort well to American snobbery?

@noelhausler2911

24 күн бұрын

@@greglogan7706 Did the reports of what was happening on the cross between the two thieves and Jesus require someone down below who knew pitman's shorthand? "I say unto you today thou shalt be with me in paradise " Is there a comma needed somewhere which would cast doubt on the existence of the soul. A number of evangelicals at Fuller Seminary and elsewhere don't accept that man has a soul. See Nancy Murphy ed Whatever Happened to the Soul? Does a comma come after "you" or "today"?

@greglogan7706

24 күн бұрын

@@phillipsugwas Sorry my friend - this is as weak a "critical" examination as possible - shocking she is employed. Ehrman has gone over the failure in these kinds of approaches countless times - She is NOT respecting the basic historical approach - but evidently desperately wants something to be true Either God has manifested to her - or not - for our faith is NOT based in the wisdom of men's words (the "evidences" she claims) - but in the POWER OF GOD!

He is risen!

“They were not fools who would believe in a lot of crazy things”. Really? It was an age of rampant superstition! Nothing has changed…

It is understandable how people seeing the same event could perceive it differently to some degree but that is not what we have in the New Testament, these are researched accounts, not eyewitness accounts. We can see that Matthew and Luke borrow from Mark's gospel and we can see them also take liberties in altering the story and adding to the story that Mark presents. We can tell that Mark must have been a Gentile because of the mistakes he makes that no Jew of that time would make. I don't doubt anyone can change their minds, where a historian is a bit like a detective in collecting the clues and attempting a best guess as to what the clues add up to. The question from this video should be how good of a detective is this particular historian and how does her case stack up to others in the field? I would at least agree that Christianity is a bit of a mystery and depending on how you look at it, could be convinced into or out of Christianity and sometimes both.

Read Who moved the stone? By Morrison

Which book, exactly, is she referring to?

@TiaKruimel

28 күн бұрын

The Gospels

@douglasschafer6372

28 күн бұрын

@@TiaKruimel Thank you

@TiaKruimel

28 күн бұрын

@@douglasschafer6372 Anytime 😊

@rupertknapman9639

25 күн бұрын

The Resurrection of the Son of God by N T Wright. I think that was the book she mentioned at the beginning.

@phillipsugwas

25 күн бұрын

Try Jesus and the Eyewitness Accounts by Richard Bauckham...

She also said about putting ones supernatural biases aside well again what does she think about the supernatural miracles of say Islamor Mormonism? If she dismisses these on what grounds does she do so?

@mbb--

19 күн бұрын

That old canard that "if you believe that miracle, then you must believe all alleged miracles" is absurd. People repeat it without thinking about the shoddy reasoning behind it

@theunknownatheist3815

15 күн бұрын

@@mbb--it is NOT absurd. Why is Mohammed ascending to heaven any different than Jesus resurrection? They are both extremely unlikely, to the point of impossibility. You just have a bias toward YOUR particular miracle. Of course you just happened to be born into the “one true faith”, right? 🙄

@user-sq9td8nu9i

12 күн бұрын

@@theunknownatheist3815 The body of Christ had/has no earthly grave, no rotting body - the tomb was empty.... while Mohammed was buried, did have a grave, a decomposing mortal body ; nor was he was seen as, or declared himself God

@theunlearnedastronomer3205

11 күн бұрын

The preponderance of nonsense has led them to that delusion

@Cantstanya

11 күн бұрын

@@mbb--my superstition is better than yours 🙄

Historical facts outside of the Bible show that all 12 Disciples including Paul were martyred. Not a single disciple retract his 'lie' to save his own neck. Would you die for something you know is not true? I find this even more remarkable than the resurrection itself.

@CMVMic

4 күн бұрын

Ppl die for what they believe is true or they see their death as having a greater purpose or may result in a reward in the afterlife. Many muslims martyr theirselves for their beliefs, does that mean what they believe is true?

@isaiah5399

4 күн бұрын

​@@CMVMic Did I mention 'believes'. My comment has nothing to do with believes.

@CMVMic

4 күн бұрын

@@isaiah5399 I never said it did. I am responding that ppl die for what they believe is true. You have to prove that they died for what they knew was true

Interesting. Reading the gospels wasn’t enough for her. She needed N.T. Wright to convince her. Lol

She should be teaching in university. Not the characters that are in our schools today. God bless her. ❤😂🇨🇦

@drzaius844

20 күн бұрын

You mean preaching in schools? That sounds gross and unconstitutional.

@theunknownatheist3815

15 күн бұрын

While I agree that wokeness is garbage- this is almost as bad. The woke and the religious teach things as true only because they were told it was true. Both have no correspondence to reality.

I recommend the book “Liberated from Religion”, by Paulo Bittencourt.

don't you love her gestures? I would like to talk with her in person. I bet she is a good professor.

The speaker is impressed by authors but mumbles their names and neglects to post them in the Description.

2:40 never had that either.

There were quite a lot of resurrections mentioned in the Bible? There are even a couple in thew Old Testament.

@jake5811

Ай бұрын

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is quite different. For one thing, throughout his ministry He predicted his ultimate demise and subsequent resurrection. And His resurrection was an affirmation from God the Father that Jesus was precisely who He claimed to be. And, there were hundreds of eye witnesses to the post mortem appearances of Jesus.

@Enzo012

29 күн бұрын

@@jake5811 How did they manage to lose hundreds of eyewitness accounts? Those would have been fairly sought after and they had a few decades to collect and preserve them in writing the time. It's a bit like how no-one really knows where the tomb of Jesus's burial and his resurrection is located. It should really have been a major Christian holy site from day one, how did that slip people's minds who were alive at the time?

@jake5811

29 күн бұрын

@@Enzo012------What you are inferring is that the authors of the Gospels and the letters and epistles of Paul, James, Peter, etc. in the New Testament were composed to deceive, mislead, and fool. That is what you are presupposing. And I find this viewpoint cynical, absurd, illogical, and irrational. You have not done your homework on this topic.

@neilf6740

29 күн бұрын

@@Enzo012 finding Jesus’ tomb was never important because he rose from the dead. And recording 100s of witnesses wouldn’t make a difference to one who doesn’t believe. As Jesus said to Simon, Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven

@Enzo012

28 күн бұрын

@@jake5811 The New Testament wasn't written by eyewitnesses that's generally well accepted, but I would be genuinely interested to know to all the eyewitness material they must have had at the time all went and why wasn't the tomb of Jesus seen to be a location of any special interest? You'd think that would be the most significant place of pilgrimage for Christians around the world from the 1st century onwards. Personally I don't think it was deliberately concocted as a lie. It'll be something that developed over time from a blending of Jewish and Roman pagan spiritual beliefs, but that's a long story.

Well there is a bit of a difference between accounts of wars that we know have happened vs miraculous events that need one heck of a lot more evidence.

@user-lr2sq5qx2r

22 күн бұрын

Exactly, There are no supernatural miracle claims regarding the civil war

she following the golden threat. if one is honest and curious the evidence is fantastic and irresistable

@greglogan7706

27 күн бұрын

@fatalberti I am a Christian theist and I don't buy the standard evangelical evidence that some think are so sufficient. This women is simply ignorant of the issues with these matters. I would question what kind of historian she really is.

@vhawk1951kl

16 күн бұрын

TAhere neither is - nor could possibly be " evidence" of the impossible. Hearsay is not repeat *Not* evidence Why?- Because evidence that cannot be tested *cannot* be evidence because evidence that cannot be tested in cross-examination or otherwise is so utterly worthless that it is not evidence, and that is why there is no.....evidence.... whatsover, that jesus rose from the dead. There *could_not* be any such evidence because it is *as* impossible as jesus ate his own head sandwiched between two unicorns-they are*equally_impossible* The so-called resurrection is *utterly **_irrelevant_*_ to christianity as is the god fantasy*Neither has*anything_ whatsoever* to do with the teaching-there is simply *no_ need* for absurd and fantastic lies like the resurrection lie which is *irrelevant* to the impossible namely being a christian which - incidentally , is why *there_are_no*christians just as there are no standing-on-their-own-heads_ians. Christianity has.....nothing..... to..... do..... with *belief* and anyone that suggests otherwise understands_nothing* of Christianity which is now extinct.

Wow, a non-woke history professor. Imagine that.

@terrybedtelyon8225

28 күн бұрын

Woke means awareness, so go back to sleep as the world continues without you.

@SavedbyGraceAlone1962

28 күн бұрын

@@terrybedtelyon8225 No, woke has come to mean ignorant of science and facts, in a nutshell, crazy.

@KingoftheJuice18

26 күн бұрын

@@SavedbyGraceAlone1962 It's exactly 100% the opposite: "anti-woke" means refusing to pay attention to reality, whether in terms of society's problems, historical truths, or scientific facts. People who go on and on about "wokeness" don't want their 1950s white Christian dream to be disturbed.

@user-dy3uh

26 күн бұрын

@@SavedbyGraceAlone1962 Where is that definition? Cause I can point to a court case in Florida otherwise.

@michaelhenry1763

25 күн бұрын

Do you like to oppress people? What is wrong with being woke?

11:08 I concur. At the end of the day, it's one's philosophical beliefs (about how to make sense of anything) that drive the view on history (and everything else). I once watched a debate between Bart Ehrman and Michael Licona on the subject of resurrection. Right at the beginning, Bart said, "Miracles are outside the purview of history (or historical studies)." (I don't remember the exact wording, but it's something along that line.) Now that I think of it, it was rather problematic that Bart made that big of a philosophical claim right there. I also watched an interview where Michael Licona was talking about his debate with Bart Erhman (about the same subject, but probably not the same debate). From what I remember, Michael said during the interview, "God exists, so of course resurrection is possible." (Again, I don't remember the exact wording, but it's something along that line.) I also found it problematic that Michael made that big of a philosophical claim right there. Now, I don't doubt that both have thought long and hard about their philosophical positions. I just don't like how they stated their philosophical positions, which are utterly important, as passing references, in their respective occasions. 12:29 That is philosophy, right there, talking about definition, cause and effect. Ps: Some people say that such a definition of historical method presumes uniformity of human experience.

I would note that a number of Protestant and Catholic critics of Tom Wright's book on the resurrection of Christ, and the promise of resurrection for mankind, characterized his conclusions as being "Mormon" (a nickame for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). Wright does not quote or cite ANY CJCLDS source in his book, or discuss their doctrines at all, or contrast them with other denominations' doctrines. But the CJCLDS does teach that the resurrection will eventually encompass EVERY human who has ever lived, and that resurrection consists of an immortal spirit, which continues to live after death in a realm of spirits, returning to inhabit an immortal, physical body that will never die. That is also the teaching that Wright finds in the New Testament, contrary to the ideas of many modern Christian denominations who don't believe in a physical body continuing in eternity. In First Things journal, in response to the critics who indicted him for endorsing what they thought is an heretical belief about a physical immortal resurrection, Wright said "The Mormons read the Bible more carefully than many other people.". The CJCLDS point out that Christ has a resurrected, immortal physical body, and he is the divine Son of God the Father. They therefore argue that their belief that God the Father also has an immortal, physical body, LIKE THE SON, is also consistent with the Bible. And they teach that all human beings are embodied spirits who are the children of the Father, who are intended to become like Him and his Only Begotten Son, both embodied and immortal for eternity. The LDS explain the reason for the physical resurrection, which other churches cannot.

I think her statement about how radical the notion of the Messiah, who was thought to be a political leader, akin to the Dali Lama, was then killed. It took a while for the people there to „make sense of it.“. We forget, or never knew, how problematic it was for those who were there.

Of Course. Plus there is this: Modern cosmology is presently handicapped by a pre-occupation with “string theory”. A similar gating happened during the early days of modern physics when Galilleo was persecutes by the Church because they’re clung to “classical” physics. Thus they were loath to examine the much more rigorous science of Newton, One result was a hundred years later Greek philosophy was dismissed by Hume. His now outdated anti- supernaturalism has now become orthodoxy.

What I think both speakers have been able to achieve from all they have said is that the narratives in the gospels do not qualify to be of divine origin but rather narratives of some people who claimed to have had a special experience. Experience they narrated from different lenses.

I heard "so I really wanted to believe....then I read this apologists book...and I convinced myself".

@georgewagner7787

17 күн бұрын

No she didn't want to believe. I assure you she's now shunned by her peers.

@EllieBanks333

17 күн бұрын

@@georgewagner7787 I assure you that if she was not predisposed to belief, no academic study of the issue would make her a believer. Apologetics are shockingly bad.

Nice.

💯

NT Wright's book is not a slog he is such a good writer and has a clear argument that is developed through the chapters why wpuld she say that

@freshjellomusic5097

Ай бұрын

I think by slog she means long. It isn’t a short book and takes some effort to finish.

@Greyz174

Ай бұрын

@@freshjellomusic5097 she was talking about needing to take Tim Keller breaks to decompress bc of the content, but i mean yeah its a long book and took a long time to read, but its pretty easy to follow, and nt wright's style is about as readable as what anyone could ask for

@jake5811

Ай бұрын

By "slog" she means the extraordinary detail in his work and how those details connect. I tried to read his book, but it got way way way too far into the weeds (aka slog)

@Greyz174

29 күн бұрын

@@jake5811 i thought it was pretty straightforward...it took a long time to read because there are a lot of pages but its just like "here is what greeks thought about resurrection" and "here paul's resurrection theology in each of the letters" etc etc etc through other examples, and an overall argument about how Jesus' resurrection and its accounts are unique and how people couldnt have come up with all of that on their own

@jake5811

29 күн бұрын

@@Greyz174 ---You are more patient than I am. As an ADHD guy I found it very difficult to remain awake as he went into great detail on the Resurrection narrative.

Molly Worhten's' constant and exaggerated physical expressions are a major distraction to understanding whatever it is she's are trying to explain!

So what exactly was it that convinced her?

@danielholder7979

Ай бұрын

NT Wrights book on the resurrection of the son of God. At least as far as making the resurrection possible she shares in more detail elsewhere what cumulatively led her to become a Christian.

@jacoblee5796

Ай бұрын

@@danielholder7979 That's the thing, I've read most of his book, it really isn't anything new. Just a bunch of old rehashed BS that any cookie cutter apologists writes and talks about. So again, what was it that convinced her?

@danielholder7979

Ай бұрын

@@jacoblee5796 I’m not saying it has to be convincing to you, I’m saying that’s what convinced her. What part of NT Wrights argument do you find unconvincing though?

@jacoblee5796

Ай бұрын

@@danielholder7979 And I'm just asking what about it exactly convinced her? It doesn't have any new information in it, it's full of the same old apologetic BS. It's as if she's done ZERO research on this and read ONE apologetic book and become convinced? Because that's the way it's coming off. Which i find hard to believe for a professor.

@jake5811

Ай бұрын

@@jacoblee5796 ----You are quite an obnoxious person aren't you pal?

The people who reject this, one, know nothing whatever about history, and, two, are determined to sneer and refuse anyway.

I also like to add that evidence for the Civil War is much better than that for the resurrection.

@georgewagner7787

17 күн бұрын

Of course. We had cameras. And also irrelevant.

@user-lr2sq5qx2r

17 күн бұрын

@@georgewagner7787 How so? It means we have morer streams of evidence for the civil war than for thee resurrection

@THESMARTERMAN555

12 күн бұрын

Something that happened 1800 years later. Where we had pictures, a printing press. Do you even understand how hard it is for something to survive 2000 years, 3500 years for the old testament. The Holy Land area has been under so many different hands in 2000 years, so many things get destroyed. We found the Gospel of Thomas in 1945, we knew one existed but never had the text, then the dead sea scrolls found randomly in the desert that have perfect Greek gospels the earliest ever found that match the gospels we have today. Read Luke, archeologist use Luke to find important sites close or in the holy land, super detailed writing. He is clearly a different author than the other 3 gospels.

@vhawk1951kl

10 күн бұрын

The difference between the Civil War and the so-called resurrection, is the the civil war was not a physical impossibility.There is no esential difference between jesus rising from the dead and jesus eating his own head sandwiched between two unicorns. There simply*cannot* be any evidence of either.

4:52 Mark is her favorite? It doesn’t even have the resurrection. The women just run away scared. Then it ends

...so basically she agreed to suspend disbelief. She took the rational logic based approach and shelved it. She choose to "have faith". She's right about having the open mind approach. That's why I'm here after all. Btw, agnostic is the ONLY rational approach. It's the only one that demands proof.

@branver1172

25 күн бұрын

Faith is simply what we believe. She chose to believe what the evidence said.

@michaelbabbitt3837

25 күн бұрын

You confuse certainty with coming to a decision based upon the evidence; confidence, not certainty. You could never be a juror in a trial nor could you have any courts with your belief system. Proofs only exist in math.

@risenchurchbrisbane

24 күн бұрын

That isn't a far assessment of what happens. She as a historian applied her historian skills to these ancient texts and listened to the arguments and ideas of serious scholars like NT Wright, Baukham and wrestled with them. That doesn't sound like setting aside a rational logic based approach.

@michaelfourie345

24 күн бұрын

@@risenchurchbrisbane If I did the same thing with "The Epic of Gilgamesh" (a text that predates the bible by thousands of years) would you consider that, likewise, a rational approach? A lot of very serious historians have studied Gilgamesh - not a SINGLE one has ever maintained that the events therein are fact - you would have to be deluded to think that. This woman is simply deluded. Jesus never existed and dead people do not come back to life.

@elijahlyons9548

24 күн бұрын

⁠@@michaelfourie345 A lot of very serious historians have studied the New Testament (many non-Christian) and the consensus is that Jesus existed. The mythological Jesus idea is fringe and ahistorical.

There is no substitute for finding Jesus' resurrection in the Shroud of Turin. Seeing is believing.

@TiaKruimel

28 күн бұрын

Why does he look old in the shroud? Can you recommend an article or video? Thanks 🙏

@user-tb1gf6kn4w

28 күн бұрын

Put into Google: "Bruce Gerig Shroud of Turin" for a good introduction. The Shroud was likely created by a burst of intense radiation from God in the tomb, so that may have aged Jesus' hair.

@michaelfourie345

24 күн бұрын

@@user-tb1gf6kn4w That is one of the most amusing comments I have ever read. "Intense radiation from God" - "aged Jesus' hair" !!! LOL 🤣

@user-tb1gf6kn4w

24 күн бұрын

John Jackson, a physicist who examined the Shroud in 1978, suspects it was created by an intense radiation burst, so call him a comedian, genius.

@michaelfourie345

24 күн бұрын

@@user-tb1gf6kn4w As he was commissioned to work for the "Holy shroud guild" - I would just politely call that a conflict of interests...but I am not polite. The man was talking BS, if he ever attributed anything to do with that shroud as "from God". There are no gods, angels, demons, devils.

It's almost like the New Testament is trying to persuade you otherwise of the Divinity of Jesus Christ and you get forced into answering the very question that Jesus himself asks - but who do you say that I am?

The gospels are dated late in the 1st Century-with some placing John very early in the 2nd-is because the gospel that is determined to have been written first-Mark-has a prophecy by Jesus regarding the Temple, that it would be destroyed. The Romans destroyed it in 70 AD, and so from thence-in secular academia-the gosoel must have been written in 70 AD, at the earliest, because of that, so Matthew and Luke must have come after, and John even later. Because, it is premised, Jesus cannot possibly have predicted the destruction of the Temple.

When I was 4 years old and heard about a talking snake I knew it was a scam. And rest is subterfuge.

@TulleyAndMe

12 күн бұрын

The Bible doesn’t say it was a snake.

@James-wv3hx

12 күн бұрын

Ok. A talking donkey 🐴 ​@@TulleyAndMe

Why did authors of the gospels write them in the first place?

@marksnow7569

Ай бұрын

Mark is probably a genuine attempt to record the story of Jesus' mission, before all eyewitnesses had died; Matthew is more propagandist, placing heavy emphasis on connections to Jewish scripture to encourage conversion; Luke's main work is Acts, but while researching that continuing history he seems to have found information which disagreed with Matthew, so wrote his own gospel; John, decades later, is massively propagandist, inventing "authentic details" to make the story more vivid.

@jake5811

Ай бұрын

@@marksnow7569 ---seems like you are "inventing authentic details" at this very moment.

@marksnow7569

Ай бұрын

@@jake5811 By "authentic details" I meant things like the whip and the spilling of changers' money added to the Cleansing of the Temple story (which John placed early in the career of Jesus, rather than mere days before the end). Try imagining the money-changers as real people ...

@jake5811

29 күн бұрын

@@marksnow7569 ---Your comment reveals that you either did not LISTEN to this exchange between the two historians, or you did not understand. No wonder you embrace atheism. You are not a student of the game.

@marksnow7569

29 күн бұрын

@@jake581112:26 _"If we define the Historical Method as drawing- our ability to draw analogies between our own experience of cause and effect in our own life and the way cause and effect works in the past"_ ... use that version of the Historical Method for yourself, and try imagining the money-changers as real people. The cause is a man with an improvised whip tipping your business capital (remember this is just before Passover, one of the busiest times of the year) on the floor. What are his chances of ever setting foot in the Temple again?

Celebration of stupidity in modern times. Horrible.

@cloud1stclass372

7 күн бұрын

Can I be like you when I grow up?

I have an axiom- for every “expert”, there is an equal & opposite “expert”. So, I’ll see whoever this chick is, and raise you a Bart Ehrman. But of course, you’ll have an issue with that. 🙄

It's just a threat to unbelievers of many threats. Believe in Jesus. If not, he'll come back and deal with you. The real world doesn't work that way. Only in fiction. Many feel threatened as many threatened that ghosts will harm them.

@michaeltimpanaro5622

Ай бұрын

???

Perhaps she rubbed it a bit faster.

It does seem to be fundamentalist teachings (that the biblical accounts must be literal) and the view of bible inerrancy that really drive a wedge through Christianity. If you are willing to accept that the bible has parables, metaphors and moral stories, then you can take the positive messages without having to deny science or outright claim there is a conspiracy against your position.

I loved watching her express her feelings with her hands

@constantgardener19

15 күн бұрын

It's over the top for me.

The only way to prove the truth of the gospel of John is to go back 2000 years in a time machine. .having said that it has been stated that people who speak the truth can quote conversations they heard. .John 21:23 certainly sounds like someone is quoting an actual conversation(!)

"Secular American snobs..." This was perhaps the best tidbit from this entire video. We all need to be a little bit more humble in any type of exploration into God.

Fortunately, the number of people holding on to these fairy tales is steadily declining with time.

@michaelscheib7693

9 сағат бұрын

Happy 2024 years after (checks notes) nothing special must have happened.....

I'm assuming she means The resurrection of the Son of God, from N.T wrights series Christian origins and the question of God. I've read it, and will need to reread it. Boy is it a challenge to get through. The book is broken into three main parts, the larger graeco-Roman world, inspired by the works of Homer, Plato, pythagorus etc. Then the second part the views of Judaism in the second temple period, including apocryphal works. Then the writings of Paul is a section on it owns, followed by the other authors of the New Testament.

All dreamt up.reality exist within the human mind and nowhere else

So not through evidence then!! 🤦‍♂️

@michaelfourie345

24 күн бұрын

It should tell you all you need to know when she refers to the bible as a "primary source". I think she actually believes the bible IS evidence🙄

@vhawk1951kl

16 күн бұрын

Hearsay is *Not* evidence

To those people who say the gospels are not contemporaneous accounts I counter with this. One of His most famous lines 'Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees' gives us a monster hint. He's talking to scribes, and what does a scribe do...write! And you don't think that maybe at least one of these very religious men, aware of scripture and the works of Jesus just might secretly write down some of what he saw and heard and kept those writings safe until he could pass them on to someone he trusted - the 'authors' of the Gospels perhaps?

@user-lr2sq5qx2r

22 күн бұрын

I don't understand you point?

Hahahahaha.... hahahahaha.... 🤦‍♀🤦‍♀🤦‍♀🤦‍♀🤦‍♀🤣🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂

It always makes me laugh when people put so much emphasis on their own religion, or the religion they have been surrounded by most of their lives, while simultaneously forgetting/ignoring that various cultures existed, flourished, and had a variety of superstitious stories, beliefs, and claims. Why is it that they never consider the superstitious and magical claims of other religions or cultures as seriously as their own? Why do they not believe in oracles and djinn, or the "supernatural" claims and gods of other pantheons who were genuinely believed to have effects on the real world? Why are these discredited as if people didn't base their lives around their apparent truthfulness? Why should anyone take the fabled resurrection of Jesus seriously, but not take the stories of the Iliad, Heracles, the Assyrians, the Chinese, or the Vedas seriously? Would she change her mind about the Norse stories such as how Thor killed all the frost giants? Was the Earth made from the body and blood of Ymir? Let it also be known that being a historian does not exclude you from superstitious thinking. For example, in at least one of his letters, the historian Pliny the Elder, wrote about how he believed in ghosts because he HEARD A STORY from someone. That's it. Not because he had evidence, but because he heard a story. That's something to keep in mind when it comes to the gospels, Christianity, and religion in general. I don't discredit her work as a historian of religion and it's history in North America, however i do find it interesting that she's not saying this as an Ancient Near East scholar, but as a North American scholar.

The truth, no matter how implausible, remains difficult to disregard.😀

@user-lr2sq5qx2r

22 күн бұрын

How so?

@robertpreisser3547

20 күн бұрын

@@user-lr2sq5qx2rWhat is the plausibility of the extent and complexity of life as we observe it on this planet arising by nothing more than undirected accidental reactions and mutations? And yet do you accept that implausible claim as true?

@Wertbag99

19 күн бұрын

@@robertpreisser3547 Surely evolution is a natural answer so works with our understanding of the world. Compared to a miracle, which is by definition a one-time event that breaks all known laws of the universe. Any other suggestion, no matter how unlikely, should be more plausible than a miracle.

@robertpreisser3547

18 күн бұрын

@@Wertbag99 //Compared to a miracle, which is by definition a one-time event…// True… //…that breaks all known laws of the universe…// False. Miracles do not break any laws of the universe. They cannot. For several reasons. First, there is no such thing as “unbreakable” laws in the first place. Scientific “laws” are merely mathematical descriptions of what normally happens when matter/energy interact within spacetime absent intervention, based on the specific properties of those interactions. The mathematical equations don’t CAUSE anything at all to happen. The properties of the matter/energy interactions do. So unlike what many people conceptualize about scientific “laws” as having some power to control or dictate certain outcomes is a fundamental misconception. Which leads to the second key point: laws describe what normally happens “absent intervention.” Newton’s laws of motion explicitly include the phrase “unless acted upon by an external force” for a reason. An object at rest tends to stay at rest UNLESS acted on by an external force. This law doesn’t prevent an external force from moving that object that otherwise would remain at rest. This is true of all natural laws. NONE of them prevent something from changing what normally happens. So, miracles do NOT violate any laws of nature. All they do is identify that something intervened to change the outcome from what would have normally happened absent intervention. Now, it is true that cases where some external supernatural agent directly intervenes to change an outcome in a specific case may indeed be RARE. But RARITY alone does not mean IMPOSSIBLE. It simply means rare. And so I would not at all agree that any other suggestion, including laughably ridiculous ideas like we are all Boltzman brains in a simulation, should be more plausible than a miracle. The RIGHT approach to evaluating any miracle claim is: (1) Validate that the event purporting to be a miracle actually happened as described. (2) Propose multiple explanations for all of the known facts about that event. (3) Determine which of the possible explanations best explains all of the known facts without prejudice. What is never a valid approach is to throw out possible explanations based solely on prejudice BEFORE evaluating how well the evidence supports each explanation. We can discuss evolution separately, but just know there is actually hard evidence that evolution-specifically, descend with modification from a single common ancestor by means of undirected mutations acted on by natural selection-does not actually plausibly explain the diversity of life as we know it. Let alone explain how life first arose. The evidence against abiogenesis by undirected chemical processes alone is overwhelming at this point.

google shroud of Turin. decide for yourself what evidence is.

This channel obviously threatens many unbelievers!

@readynowforever3676

21 күн бұрын

How about mythvision ?😊

@fbcpraise

19 күн бұрын

@@readynowforever3676 sorry, no comprende.

@andywong9847

19 күн бұрын

Nobody is threatened. You are free to believe and not to believe.

@fbcpraise

19 күн бұрын

@@andywong9847 sure. But I don’t troll atheist websites throwing rocks at their beliefs. Why on earth are they here if our faith is a waste of time?

@fbcpraise

19 күн бұрын

@@andywong9847 yeah, I think it threatens them.