3:10 that would be very wholesome

this word salad of a response is hardly saying anything significant. I appreciate your effort in trying to refute habermas (he’s not the best), but this video is the theological equivalent of a Ben Shapiro video - fast talking & waffling without much actual sustenance in the points being argued. A whole lot of “big uhs!🤓” instead of actual referencing to scholarship. You’re both just as incompetent as each other.

Wine was not invented by Dionysos, and we know this, due to modern-day scientists finding out that modern wine and its distribution and production comes from the Caucasian regions from around ≈ BC 6,000. Jesus used the miracle of turning water into wine to send the profound message that He had the power to change the very nature of things-to transform not just the state of liquids, but the state of lives. That is the difference between Him and a false god: one has come down to earth to spread salvation and has proven it though divine miracles, and one cannot do anything as they are not real.

The prior probability of a physically impossible event is zero. People saying it occurred doesn't alter the probability. I think than does something well from a rhetorical point of view. He says so many wrong, and nonsensical things in such rapid succession that it would take an interlocutor hours to pick through it.

Paul, You may be disappointed to know that anti-intellectualism has taken center stage in the west. but Its purpose is not to destroy intellectualism, rather to co-opt it. When intellectualism as it exists today (left leaning) is successfully discredited in the eyes of the public, the conservative activists responsible for this smear campaign will flip their positions on it and reclaim it. The classist walls of intellectualism will be rebuilt, only this time with conservatism as its Shepard. The purpose is not to destroy it, but to capture it and restructure it into a conservative propaganda machine.

Stupid take. Intellectualism and being a university professor are not the same thing. And Tyson's intellectualism doesn't make him an authority on biology or on sociology.

Robyn's caricature did not do her justice. She's a very nice looking woman and I would like her caricature to be more accurate with regards to that.

There's a huge difference between not knowing everything and not knowing anything. How presumptuous of these apologists to claim to know what is in our minds (motive or knowledge or what have you) just because we're comfortable with saying "I don't know" rather than making crap up in order to fill in the gaps.

If any secular extra-Biblical texts existed, Christians would have no problem presenting them instead of sneering at people for asking for evidence.

For people who claim they don't care about addressing the concerns of skeptics, they sure do spend a lot of time talking about skeptics. Or rather mocking, dismissing, and/or deriding them, but whatever.

As an alien I can confirm, aliens don't exist

Isn't it Christians that get a free pass on their sin? As long as they say, mea culpa and say they believe, at least right before they die.

It’s a well done video full of one-sided arguments. Even with the arguments presented supporting the burial, he only presented the elements he thought could be refuted. Let’s just ignore the text, except the parts you think you can use in your arguments. Jesus wasn’t an enemy of the state. Pilot washed his hands of it and said he found no fault in him. Still, he let Jesus be crucified to appease the Jews. Nothing about this case was a typical crucifixion. This very well known story could have been refuted by Roman or Jewish writers of the time period. Where are they? Arguing it wasn’t what was typically done in the Roman empire, therefore it must not be true is a weak argument. He also says Craig can’t extrapolate certain evidence to any or all examples, yet that is what he is trying to do. There are a number of other weak to ridiculous arguments made.

What part of non-Biblical sources do they not understand?

Seconded Paulogia. He has to assume physics is wrong to have a deterministic universe. Quantum physics isn’t.

Thank you.

I'm so tired.

I have taken to using "Minimizing harming and maximizing flourishing for human beings" as my foundation for deciding right or wrong. Thank you.

Lol, Christian apologists are applying “but this is what he means” to works with living authors.

I didn’t find this funny, more cringey, if I’m being honest. My critique doesn’t end at “this is juvenile humor, and unfunny juvenile humor at that” but it does include it. Loud =/= funny, guys. I prefer Paul’s thoughtful analysis, and his own humor when he provides it, thank you very much. And, in case anyone writes me off as some pearl-clutching prude….that’s not where I’m coming from.

How can a school system buy Trump bibles for education if all it takes in this case was a letter to attorneys explaining the laws to the lawyers, oh wait...

Sorry can’t watch this with the brexit traitor rationality rules…love your other content though dude

Apologists giving ground on Exodus or Paul undermines the theology to a degree that everything else becomes moot until they hold a new ecumenical convention. The monotheist deity worshiped in Christianity centered himself around salvation theology. The covenant with humanity to be monotheist, the first step as Christians understand the Exodus as establishing, MUST exist. It has essential theological importance regarding how a human should understand our relationship with the deity and the agreement to follow his commandments to be reconciled to him. Paul is Christianity. So, “well…it’s spiritually true, not literal history” cannot count. Humans owe nothing and CANNOT be punished eternally by a deity whose covenant was symbolic and misrepresented as literal.

1:00 Bart Ehrman clearly doesn't get deadpan irony XD (also, Bart laughs at his own comments all the time, when none of what he says is funny) I'm not sure the man understands humor.

Thank you for making a Hovind cry.

Elon Musk would not be made better by having more Christianity. Quite the contrary, imo. Mr. Dork MAGA is already intolerable as he is, not to mention intolerant.

So if I just take all the parts where facts disprove them and say those weren't historical then everything that is left is historical?

Jesus cursing a fig tree for not bearing fruit out of season is in the Bible.

The Heritage Foundation is an anti-LGBTQ hate group. Of course, AiG is citing them.

"Oh Lord, sorry to bother you, 'cause we're sure you're very busy (probably) but "we just" feel it's necessary to remind you, even though we've decided that you're omniscient, to keep an eye on everyone who draws different conclusions than we do after paying attention to anybody but us. Keep us ever convinced that the reasons you don't do whatever's needed to convince everyone of your reality, so they can jump through the whole believing in Jesus hoop, is that you already know who's up for it or you simply pick and choose who to save. (or some combination thereof) Never let us forget that we know better than they do, because believing and knowing are synonyms, and to live and die by whatever the early church councils and the Reformers of our choice decided! Amen! Why do so many prayers begin with "We just..."? (We who?) (Oh, prob'ly the sound guy reverently bowing his head but actually thinking about levels)

Dumb that he got censored. He was hilarious and really great at debates.

I'm so proud of Leah for being willing to speak out and for daring to think for herself. I wasn't expecting that I'm-an-agnostic turn. Ken Ham et al sound like such smug, sanctimonious jerks. How hard is it to just treat people well instead of retaliating against them for just being human and having human needs?

Actually, the word "universe" outright means:all of space, time and matter, so to go before these things means to go to a state of nothing which is timeless, spaceless and immaterial

AiG sounds like a cult

Can’t wait to see who wins. I hope it’s Bart!

A terrible cut & paste patchwork made by the supposed winner of the debate which twisted the discussion to say "realibility" is what he said

Great advice. I hope the readers going through this take it seriously

You haven't heard of Pannenberrg😮

Paul, I have a question for you or Bart that I haven't seen addressed anywhere - about your namesake the apostle Paul. Paul was supposedly a roman citizen. By law, Roman citizenship was confirmed by the use of three names. In the Bible, and I see no reference elsewhere, Paul is referred to as just Paul or Saul, the Hebrew version of his name. Now, what I have read is that "no one" would claim to be a roman citizen because if you got caught, the penalty was death. But interestingly, Paul was supposedly finally killed by having his head chopped off- supposedly he didn't want to be crucified like Jesus. But if the penalty for falsely claiming to be roman was having your head chopped off, that seems to be self serving. Also, as a supposed roman living outside Rome, most would have carried their diptych with them to prove their citizenship. Paul didn't seem to have one because the Bible always refers to him "telling" a guard that he was roman. He could have just shown his diptych and gone on his way. Finally, Acts telling a story to a Roman audience would seem to have added his 3 names to convince romans that Paul was actually Roman? It just seems odd that something as "normal" as that would have been left out.

The thing is, Christianity is, in practice, Paulology. I don’t mean to imply he maliciously created what we call Christianity, but even the Church will admit that he’s a primary pillar of theology (justified to them by the miracle told in THREE contradicting ways in the Bible). The Church itself, Christian nationalism, the Crusades, Christian nationalism, colonialism, and CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM are all justified through Paul. Paul is why repentance stopped being about actually being contrite and changing your behavior and became just saying “sorry” at the end of a day of sin. Paul is why a sect of Jewish Apocalypticism became the largest persecutor of Judaism (and other religions). Paul is the reason that somehow the omnibenevolent creator and lover of ALL creation for some reason, just hates consenting adults of the same sex in a relationship above all else in history. Paul (and Pseudo-Paul(s)) and the resulting theological contradictions are why Christianity has spent two millennia trying to define itself with violence and death rather than…idk, doing what Jesus said and feeding the poor? Oh, but Paul is why despite Jesus directly telling his followers that rich people WILL NOT go to heaven, it’s okay to be rich and indeed, actively elect governments hostile to the impoverished and marginalized because Paul said “all men fall short”. Paul says you can have 3 wives, be a criminal, a thief, and a violent person, and still be the Christian choice for President of the (Dissolving) United States. TL;DR: If Christianity was EVER going to sit down and be honest about the origins of the Bible, Paul would be the absolute last can of worms they’d want to open. Defeating Paul (ironically), defeats Christianity as understand it.

Apologists are over-jealous advocates who lie. Frank Turek is an apologist. Therefore, Frank Turek is a liar.

why do people not use ai to find a true non bias answer

Also, Occam’s Razor used by Christians itself defeats the purpose of the movie. If “God did it” solves a flaw in one aspect of the flood evidence, then you might as well just use that explanation for everything else. Why try to invent terms and try and use pseudo-science at all? If a divine miracle can override the entirety of geology, and your god allowed the process to resemble geology, and is comfortable with our eternal damnation because we accepted this overwhelming evidence instead of a book (which other scientific disciplines ALSO heavily throw into question), then you might as well not waste millions of dollars trying to prove it. Give your money to the poor, and when people question the flood, just say “God did it”. There’s literally no logic in building a museum under the pretense of showing a “scientific” perspective of a literal flood if ANY part of the equation is “god did it”, because Occam’s razor then makes “god did it” the acceptable and preferable answer for EVERYTHING.

…how did the violent, catastrophic flood cause uniform sedimentary layers? The Grand Canyon, for example, has ~40 exposed sedimentary layers. The global flood of churning waters and mud and the gd continents themselves moving around. But 40 neat, distinct layers QUICKLY formed AND managed to stay completely isolated despite outflow lakes that caused the canyon itself actively rushing through them?

The christian apologist's argument seems to be that the bible is literally true because it gets the details wrong.

Idea for a future video: Contemporary stories of the period (ie. from 2000 years ago) that make similarly supernatural claims about well-known figures but that Chistians reject.

Isn't Jay also admitting any personal experience he has had is God coercing him?

Lord Jesus bless you all! CHOOSE LIFE!

I’m sorry, is his argument that “a man sits on a gold throne wrapped in ermine and controlling billions while being called Holy Father” and that proves that Jesus rose from the dead?

28:10 that Breaking Bad meme; *chef’s kiss*