Dr. Keener makes me crack up. His dry sense of humor is the best.

This man is a blessing to all in the faith.

I really appreciate Dr. Keener's testimony, as it demonstrates how salvation is a work of the Holy Spirit, not of man's words. We plant the seeds and God grows the fruit.

I love Dr. Craig Keener. He is wonderful, humble and the person who makes everyone enjoy and laugh. That is why I love reading his books and listening to him.

You bring up issues thst I struggle with due to unanswered questions regarding my faith. I apreciate you Brother! Keep up the Amazing work, your making a difference in ppls lives.

Love this interview and so appreciate your passion, insights. I’m going to look into his commentaries. Thanks Sean and Professor Craig. 🙂

Craig Keener is an absolute unit

This was really great! My copy of the book will be here tomorrow!

I consider Dr. Keener to be one of the best NT scholars out there. The few of his books that I have read from cover to cover have been compelling to me and “keep me honest” as I do not believe that the NT is historically reliable. It’s always important to keep up with what the best on the other side has to say, otherwise, if I’m wrong, I may never know it!

@brockgeorge777

3 жыл бұрын

Well I would say it’s the other way around (assuming you are an atheist or agnostic). If you are *right* you won’t know it-at least not post death.

Awesome conversation!

So exciting. Am just going through Acts right now, and am so interested.

@SeanMcDowell

4 жыл бұрын

That's cool to hear!

Thanks for the discussion :)

@SeanMcDowell

4 жыл бұрын

You bet!

Great discussion! Learned a lot.

@SeanMcDowell

Жыл бұрын

Glad you did!

Amazing!

Excellent.

Awesome! Love Dr. Keener. He is so illuminating. Lol

@johnrevelation37

3 жыл бұрын

😁😁😁

EXCELLENT man

Thanx, Gentlemen 🌹🌹🌹

Thanks very much🎉🎉🤗🤗

Defnitely reliable!

His love for God is amazing!

so cool

Dr Craigs testamony really resonated with me , i experienced the holy spirit in a similar way over 20 years ago. coming to God in great confusion and anxiety i experienced a wonderful peace and feeling of unconditional love which is is impossible to forgot. Thanks for all your great videos sean and thankyou craig for your knowledge on the wonderful book of acts. God bless you both

@gregbooker3535

Жыл бұрын

I wonder why God doesn't provide "wonderful peace and feeling of unconditional love which is is impossible to forgot" to many children while they are being sexually abused and thus enduring "great confusion and anxiety". Does God love you more than abused children?

Keener is great. Awesome interview, Sean. BTW, I recently listed some Gospel elements, facts of Jesus' life, that are present in the speeches in Acts. Jesus was from Nazareth. Acts 10, Acts 22, 26 He was from David’s lineage. Acts 13 Jesus was a miracle worker. Acts 10 He cast out demons and healed everyone. Acts 10 He was baptized by John. Acts 10 John denied he was the Christ, and said Jesus was greater than he, Whose sandals he was not fit to untie. Acts 13 This is from John 1. The Apostles were His companions and witnesses. Acts 10 Pontius Pilate wished to release Him. Acts 2 Pilate and Herod worked together, with the Jews and Gentiles, to crucify Him. Acts 4 He was the Prophet (like Moses). Acts 3 and 7 He was betrayed and murdered. Acts 7 He was crucified Acts 2, hung on a tree. Acts 10, Acts 13 He was buried in a tomb Acts 13 He was raised (Acts 2, 13, 17, 26) the Third Day. Acts 10 He appeared to His witnesses. Acts 10, Acts 13 He is received back into Heaven, to return again. Acts 3 Son of Man, sitting at the right hand of God. Acts 7 The Apostles are commissioned to give witness specifically to His resurrection. You receive forgiveness of sins by believing on His name. Acts 10, 13, 26 This is what is meant by “being saved”. Acts 2. And is acquired by faith. Acts 26 You are baptized into His name.

Paul was Hebrew of the tribe of Benjamin (he emphasis this fact), not a Jew from the tribe of Judah. What does Paul never mention anything about a virgin birth if this is such an important doctrine?

👏

Gotta love some glowy Craig Keener. 💡💡💡💡

At 11 min, i don’t know how he uses luke 21 “when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies” as a reason to date it after 70. It seems an obvious prediction of AD70. The Christians did exactly what Jesus told them to do. They took advantage of a Roman retreat, and fled to the hill country to Pella. Not one perished. Craig would know that.

Something awesome is happening in Acts 16: 11 Things that could never have been known at the time by anyone except the Alpha and Omega, if you want proof checkout “Truth is Christ” called “What on Earth is going on in Acts” for an amazing deep dive 🙏❤️

_"Although Acts nowhere identifies its author, by the end of the second century it was argued, as Irenaeus (ca. 180 Ce) does, that Luke was the obvious candidate, and that attribution remains conventional today. This identification was based on the reference to a “Luke” in Philemon 24 and in two other letters attributed to Paul (Col 4.14; 2 Tim 4.11), in conjunction with passages in Acts in which the author seems to present himself as a traveling companion of Paul. Irenaeus pointed to these passages (Acts 16.10-17; 20.5-15; 21.1-18; 27.1-28.16), in which the text shifts from third-person to first-person plural narration, as proof that Luke had been Paul’s inseparable collaborator (Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 3.14.1). Many modern scholars challenge the assumption that the “we” passages demonstrate personal familiarity with Paul. In fact, Luke’s larger narrative construction results in a presentation of Paul that is inconsistent with biographical and theological details in Paul’s own letters. For example, Luke’s denying Paul the formal status of “apostle” is almost unimaginable for an actual companion of Paul. In his letters Paul repeatedly claims to be one divinely called to be an apostle (e.g., Rom 1.1; 1 Cor 1.1; Gal 1.1), and he recognizes the existence of other apostles besides the twelve (1 Cor 15.5-7)....Although there is good reason to doubt that the evangelist Luke was a companion of Paul, it is clear that Luke greatly admired Paul and viewed his missionary career as decisive for establishing Christianity in Asia Minor and Greece....According to its opening words, Acts was written after Luke’s Gospel, which scholarly consensus dates to 85-95 Ce (though some arguments have been advanced for an early second-century date). The considerations on the relation between Luke and Paul just reviewed support a late first- or early second-century date. Discrepancies between the undisputed Pauline letters and the narrative about Paul in Acts (including Luke’s restriction of the title “apostle” to the twelve) have long been recognized, and a temporal gap between letters written in the 50s Ce and Acts written forty to fifty years later does much to clarify the situation. At the end of the first century Paul’s image was undergoing revision (as is shown by the Pastoral Epistles; see 1 and 2 Tim; Titus, pp. 1725-44). For example, Luke does not hesitate to portray Paul as subject to Jewish law; this depiction is consistent with Luke’s emphasis on the continuity between the history of Israel and of the church. Moreover, according to Luke it was not Paul’s theological arguments but the conversion of Cornelius through Peter, ratified by the apostolic council (Acts 10.1-11.18), that established that Gentile Christians were not required to observe the law of Moses in its entirety. Such contradictions arise because Acts preserves an image of Paul from a period many decades after his death, and because Luke’s rhetorical presentation addresses new issues for Christians of his day who lived in changed circumstances (e.g., the inclusion of the Gentiles was the major issue for Paul, while for Luke it is the retention of Jewish believers in community with them). Thus Paul’s role in Acts is dictated not primarily by actual biographical details but rather by the needs of Luke’s theology and the social circumstances of his readers."_ - OAB 5th ed, pp. 1557-1558.

@SamD-th5tg

4 жыл бұрын

“...[N]o ancient work affords so many tests of veracity; for no other has such numerous points of contact in all directions with contemporary history, politics, and topography, whether Jewish, Greek, or Roman” (Essays of the Work Entitled Supernatural Religion, pp. 19-20). “The present writer takes the view that Luke’s history is unsurpassed in respect of its trustworthiness. At this point we are describing what reasons and arguments changed the mind of one who began under the impression that the history was written long after the events and that it was untrustworthy as a whole” (The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament, p. 81)

@counteringchristianity

4 жыл бұрын

_"There is a broad scholarly consensus that as historiography, Acts is not very reliable. Its main characters, Peter and Paul, for instance, are used by the author as vehicles for his own theological message. There is also a broad consensus that the author used different kinds of literary patterns and motifs to shape and structure his book. As to the genre and the purpose of Acts, however, there is less agreement. The book contains too many miracle stories and divine interventions to be considered ancient historiography, but on the other hand it contains too many facts and details to be a novel._ _However, one of the ancient subgenrcs in historiography does seem to come close to that of Acts. Authors writing in this genre, which is sometimes called "mimetic historiography," tried to "recreate" history on the basis of facts. One of their purposes was to stimulate the reader's feelings. In mimetic historiography, the balance between historical fact on the one hand and exaggeration and fiction on the other was a delicate one. Miracles and divine interventions could be part of the stories. Modern readers would not consider this type of book historically sound, but in certain circles in antiquity it was an accepted form of historiography. The Book of Acts may represent a popular form of this genre. The author interpreted the facts and rumours about his main characters that he knew and recreated their history as it could have happened. In the case of Acts this is history with a mainly theological message. The miracles, divine interventions and exaggerations that link and interpret the facts, support the message the author wants to convey."_ - Rieuwerd Buitenwerf books.google.com/books?id=e6Tvy_oTAx4C&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&lpg=PP1&pg=PA61#v=onepage&q&f=false

@SamD-th5tg

4 жыл бұрын

Countering Christianity The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator-who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

@brockgeorge777

3 жыл бұрын

Sorry. Far more persuaded by anything (in terms of authorship) Irenaueus deduced in the 2nd century than what someone from the 20 or 21st century has “deduced” coming almost certainly from a purely naturalistic perspective and matching assumptions. …Not to mention some of the incongruities between Acts and Paul’s letters have better explanations than what your post suggests above.

@joaomarcos2089

3 жыл бұрын

@@brockgeorge777 it is interesting you mentioned naturalism. To say that Acts has too many miracles to be a proper history is to beg the question. Using this kind of thoughtless consensus in an argument against christianity and for naturalism is circular reasoning at its worst.

Sean, have Keener converse with Richard Carrier who views Acts as matching other myth writings.

If an ancient author is telling the truth in the checkable details....does that imply "honest author", or does it imply "dishonest author who wanted the readers to think his story rang true"? Or maybe accuracy in the checkable details actually doesn't nudge the scale in favor of either possibility, thus, something more than truth in the details is needed before one can justify drawing the "honest author" conclusion? Don't liars realize that the best chance they have at making a lie sound true is to surround it with nuggets of historically accurate detail? Don't smart liars realize that to pile one lie on top of another is to almost certainly guarantee the fraud will be exposed? What if I told you that in 1978 during the Carter administration, I levitated without any physical means while I was at a church praying to god for a sign that he would want me to speak out against false forms of Christianity? Does the fact that I got the checkable details right (Carter in 1978) suddenly obligate you to trust that the non-checkable parts (levitation) were also true? if not, then why do you automatically leap from "Acts was correct in the checkable details" over to "Acts is correct in the non-checkable details".

@PeterOgheneochuko-iq9wu

21 күн бұрын

hello sir, firt Luke wasn't writing to you. He had his audience and so if we picked up his writings two thousand years after, and we search history to see how things fits. It is a very wise thing to conclude that he is right. If the verifyables are right then the unverifiable is logically right as well. Unless your heart is under the oppression of the force of unbelirf.

@gregbooker3535

21 күн бұрын

@@PeterOgheneochuko-iq9wu "hello sir, firt Luke wasn't writing to you." --------Which is sufficient to justify today's skeptic to ignore Luke about as often as they ignore Tobit. You can't show that any NT author intended to address anybody living in the 21st century, so if a skeptic chooses to ignore the NT, they are about as irresponsible as the adult who refuses to read correspondence that was never intended for him. "He had his audience and so if we picked up his writings two thousand years after, and we search history to see how things fits. It is a very wise thing to conclude that he is right. If the verifyables are right then the unverifiable is logically right as well. ------------Then you are irrational to choose only Christianity, since other religions often couched their unverifiable miracle reports in contexts of true historical details. Under your stupid logic, we wouldn't need juries for trials anymore. As long as the suspect's alibi was logically possible, didn't contradict any known facts, and was surrounded by nuggets of historical truth, you think the Court would be "very wise to conclude that he is right". "Unless your heart is under the oppression of the force of unbelirf." -----------------I view Jesus and Paul as liars and heretics, so if they characterize those who disagree with them, as people who are "under the oppression of the force of unbelief", I conclude that Jesus and Paul were cult leaders who engaged in emotional and psychological manipulation. By the way, you lose this debate: I have a rule: I do not allow Christians to teach me anything about Jesus or the bible until they have demonstrated that they possess infallible teaching authority. You will never show from the bible that this is an unreasonable demand on my part. Nowhere in the bible does God ever demand that unbelievers learn from teachers who have anything less than infallible teaching authority.

Why John, the Baptist never baptised a woman, a Gentile or a Samaritan? He baptised only the Jewish men in the water. Why?

@SamD-th5tg

4 жыл бұрын

From which verse did you get that John ONLY baptised Jewish men in the water?

@tomatosausage4258

4 жыл бұрын

Reading along

@SamD-th5tg

4 жыл бұрын

tomato sausage reading along what

@ChaudhryRajinderNijjharJatt

4 жыл бұрын

@@SamD-th5tg John worked for Yahweh, who was the heavenly father of Yahshua; Yah = Yahweh and Shua, the First Adam. Or Jesus was the Second Adam, an anointed mustard seed. You should know how to turn stones into the sons of Abraham? Do you?

@SamD-th5tg

4 жыл бұрын

Chaudhry Rajinder Nijjhar Jatt no, why should I know how to turn stones into the sins of Abraham? So what’s this got to do with my question?

tbh he didntmake it soundthat accurate.he kind of underminedmy confidence in it

The first time I have read Acts, I marveled at the intentiveness of the author. All this fairy tales, miracles, unprobable plot twists, etc. I was a child then. And here you see an adult, even a professor, selling this as history. Faith makes morons out of man.

He's wearing a mask!!! God's sign

None of the bible is historically accurate. Literally none of it. Acting like only some parts are questionable is hilarious!!!

This is SO UNBELIEVABLY LAUGHABLE! Acts is a ridiculous piece of OBVIOUS fiction! Borrowed ideas from Homeric themes abound, along with contradictions to Paul's authentic writings. Acts was written by whomever the anonymous LUKE was and Luke copied/redacted and added to Mark (not even original lol).

@justincole8039

Жыл бұрын

They debunk all the ignorant and foolish claims you make in the video if you would actually watch it. Acts is more historically reliable almost every ancient literature we have available along with the gospels.

@monkkeygawd

Жыл бұрын

@justincole8039 ouch. I did watch the video. And, it stinks of intellectually dishonest/stunted thinking. The author of Acts and Luke use Honeric themes to CREATE their narratives and plot devices. Ridiculous to believe it as factual history. Get out of the Christian apologetic echo chamber now and then. U might learn something.

@justincole8039

Жыл бұрын

@@monkkeygawd no you are a keyboard warrior. You have little to no knowledge and try to discredit scholars, a normal person may take your ignorance seriously but when it comes to people who study these matters you just sound foolish.

@justincole8039

Жыл бұрын

@@monkkeygawd people with similar levels of ignorance to yours argue the same nonsense. skeptic NT scholars would reject what you are saying entirely. if anyone is reading his nonsense take the time to watch a debate with someone with a similar stance, you will notice how the overwhelming evidence destroys these foolish claims.

@monkkeygawd

Жыл бұрын

@justincole8039 yikes. Terrifying to me that in the modern age, with all the solid scholarship and access to info, that ANYONE intellectually honest could swallow the Bible pill.