2 Top Historical Scholars PROVE that Jesus Rose (Gary Habermas and Mike Licona)

[@jenniferdefrates733]

The first time I heard Gary Habermas I wept. He was answering all the questions atheists were throwing at me. I felt like I could breathe again. I don't have all the answers, but I was able to see that intelligent, careful, thoughtful scholars have answers. And I so appreciate Mike Licona's ministry as well.

[@ericbess4477]

Too bad Habermas absolutely sucks at this.

[@Bill_Garthright]

Gary Habermas sounds convincing to you only because he's telling you what you already believe and want to keep believing. Your "intelligent, careful, thoughtful scholars" don't have _valid_ evidence, but no doubt they're comforting to Christians who just want to be comforted. It's the same reason why Muslims are comforted by the "intelligent, careful, thoughtful scholars" who make Muslim videos on KZbin. If you actually care about the _truth,_ I suggest also listening to intelligent, careful, thoughtful people who disagree with them. Like Paulogia, for example: kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y4XNiXiueKeAlbc

[@nonprogrediestregredi1711]

I would probably argue that you're using confirmation bias. Perhaps you should research the scholarship that actually scrutinizes the Hebrew and Christian bibles; it doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

[@spectre8533]

@@Bill_Garthright Paulogia sounds convincing to you only because he's telling you what you already believe and want to keep believing. Your "intelligent, careful, thoughtful" youtuber don't have valid evidence, but no doubt he is comforting to Skeptics who just want to be comforted. It's the same reason why Muslims are comforted by the "intelligent, careful, thoughtful scholars" who make Muslim videos on KZbin. If you actually care about the truth, I suggest also listening to intelligent, careful, thoughtful people who disagree with him. Like Michhael Jones, for example: kzbin.info/aero/PL1mr9ZTZb3TW70EEo4e2onJ4lq1QYSzrY

[@Bill_Garthright]

@@spectre8533 _Paulogia sounds convincing to you only because he's telling you what you already believe_ OK, that sounds reasonable. So let's put this to the test, shall we? How about *one piece of good evidence* that your god actually exists, or else *one piece of good evidence* that _any_ of the magical/supernatural stories in the Bible actually happened. Your choice. Just *one.* I'm not looking for a book. I'm not looking for a series of videos where someone else can _preach_ at me, without me being able to ask questions. I'm _certainly_ not looking for a Gish Gallop of vague claims. I just need *one* piece of good evidence in order to take you seriously. Just *one.* Do you _have_ anything? Here's your chance to prove it. Obviously, one piece of good evidence might not be enough to convince me. Typically, we all require more than that, huh? But one piece of good evidence would be enough to show me you actually _have_ something. One piece of good evidence would be enough to convince me to take your claims seriously. One piece of good evidence would certainly be more than I've got now! So, do you have *one?* Face it, if you don't have *one,* you have nothing at all. Well, here's your chance to demonstrate whether you have something besides wishful-thinking or you don't. I'll be interested to hear your reply.

[@allanmichel1041]

1 Cor 15: 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is worthless, and so is your faith.

[@kathygrant39]

Exactly! That is just what I replied to someone above. Does the guy on the right not believe this?

[@tomgreene2282]

Yes indeed.

[@johnlinden7398]

The ressurection of this Jesus is a myth / fable ! What about his promise in revelation, chapter 22 that he was coming soon or quickly with his father yahweys kingdom, and repeated this promise three times ! So what happened ?? How much longer are you committed christians going to wait in futility ??

[@Old_Demon04]

@@johnlinden7398 Lol

[@childofGodandMary]

@@johnlinden7398 God is outside of time. If you are not patient that’s clearly your problem

[@AgileLily]

“Btw, Jesus rose bodily from the dead.” About 3 years ago I repented from an awful/miserable lifestyle I was living and the identity I was portraying and practicing. After that transformation I am basically an entire 360° turned around and doing so much better, but I am still struggling with my belief specifically in Jesus Christ and him being a person AND God (resurrection must prove this, I think). My bf is a believer and stronger in the faith than I am and he has been pressing me to search things out and helping me. I ask for prayers if anyone sees this and I want to say thank you for your work. I hope that I may grow stronger in my faith and know that I am secured in salvation.

[@cracker5556]

the historical proof that jesus was a real humen is SOO STRONG!! that even atheists belive that jesus was a real humen they just dont belive he ressurected

[@cracker5556]

plus everyone has those moments, its not strugling with faith its just your thinking " what if when i die i dont see jesus and if we just black out or something " i had thhose moments before so did my mom your just thinking later youll get over with it trust, read the bible that helped me as well as evidence jesus was real

[@nachoooooo800]

Awesome! Mike Winger has a channel that’s really helpful for spiritual growth as well!

[@alexyordanov6250]

@@cracker5556 But even the blackness is something . Here`s another prove ageints atheism , there is no such thing as true nothingness. Even if there was true nothingness , the nothingness itself would be something .

[@cracker5556]

@@alexyordanov6250 but when you sleep you go unconscious and your not aware your asleep that’s what I meant

[@journeyfiveonesix]

I'm just going to say it. Gary Habermas looks like he's making a list and checking it twice with those glasses on.

[@1aaaaaaw]

I don't believe he exists

[@ronboyd9]

Santa believing in Santa.

[@20july1944]

@@ronboyd9 How do you explain our universe, Ron? I'd love to discuss God's existence purely from science and logic and NEVER refer to the Bible. Are you interested in that?

[@ronboyd9]

@@20july1944 I don't claim to know how the universe came to be. But I know it wasn't through some anthropomorphic human inflated to Godhood. Scientists figured that out long ago. If the whole system makes more sense without that superimposition, then it's better to do away with it. Any explanation is better than that one!

[@ronboyd9]

And which 'God' would you even be arguing for? Allah fits the bill just as well as Yahweh or Jesus. If you establish a 'God' in any way, you STILL have to invoke special pleading for YOUR God.

[@amberfreitag42]

I know Jesus rose from the dead amen he brought me back to life so I’m a witness to the world that Jesus is the Christ

[@EduRB99]

He brought you back? I would love to hear your story brother, could you share it with me? Thanks

[@cjbrown8245]

Amen

[@erichetherington9314]

How?

[@arelygomez8710]

It doesn't matter how. Only because you are living doesn't mean you are not dead by your sinful nature. We all are dead in our sins, and Jesus brings us back to life. A newness of life, so we live for God, not to the world.

[@arelygomez8710]

​@erichetherington9314 He brought you and me back to life, for we were dead in our sins and gave us new life with his Holy Spirit so we are not longer dead but alive in Christ obeying his commandments and not follow the mindset of this world. We were dead now we are alive. Rejoice and be glad not a doubter

[@michaelewbank2988]

Amen i am 19 years old and when i was around 11 or 12 i wanted to know the truth, i started studying science history archeology and religion. I'm a Christian and i can assure anyone there is evidence if you seek it. Matthew 7:7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye. shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: 8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh. findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened

[@Bill_Garthright]

_I'm a Christian and i can assure anyone there is evidence if you seek it._ Well, I'm 70 years old, and I've been an atheist for longer than you've been alive - _much_ longer. I looked for evidence and never found any. All I found were vague claims. So, if you've actually _got_ something, something specific enough and in enough detail that I could judge it for myself, I'd love to hear it. How about *one piece of good evidence* that your god is real, rather than just imaginary? Alternately, since you're a Christian, I'd accept *one piece of good evidence* that _any_ of the magical/supernatural stories in the Bible actually happened. (I will _give_ you a guy named Jesus who was crucified by the Romans.) Just *one.* That's not too much to ask, is it? One might not be enough to convince me, but I can't even take Christianity _seriously_ without even *one* example of something distinguishable from delusion and wishful-thinking with indicates that your religion is actually _true._ Thanks. (I know this is an old comment. I just happened to notice it, when someone replied to an old comment of mine.)

[@manifold1476]

Yeah, nice quote, . . . "evidence" *of what?*

[@paulhayes5684]

​@@manifold1476The resurrection. You're kidding right?

[@erichetherington9314]

You can rest assured all you like; that doesn't make it factual. I rest assured that Tolkien's "Silmarillion" is the truth about how the world was made.

[@ronaldlindeman6136]

How do we figure out what stories are true and what stories are not true? It has to do with making an analogy with stories that we can believe happened, and an analogy with stories that we believe did not happen. And use the thousands, hundreds of thousands and millions of stories that humans have created, both true and not true. Do we think the stories of the moon landings are true? Do we think the stories of Star Trek are true? Why do we think the moon landings and coming back to the Earth actually happened? Because Neil Armstrong was a great pilot of jets, Buzz Aldrin had a PhD from MIT in orbital mechanics. The Scientists and Engineers knew how to build rocket ships. Why might we think that the stories of Star Trek are not true? Aside from the timeline problems. Because the stories don't contain knowledge on how to make Warp Drive Star Ships, Photon Torpedoes, Transporters. In order for us to think the stories of Star Trek are true, we would have to be able to build a Warp Drive Star Ship and fly to Vulcan and look and see if there is anybody there that looks like Spock. Then we might think that Star Trek is true. It is all about knowledge vs story claims. In order for someone to turn a 3 day old stinky body to new again, that being would have to know a lot about the human body, about blood, skin, bones, eye balls, liver, heart, etc.. Did Jesus tell us anything about the human body? Anything about first aid that we humans can use? Anything about CPR? Anything that would start Science to research into starting Medical Science so humans can build hospitals, medical research facilities and ways to prevent diseases naturally? All Jesus of Christianity gives us is Story Magic. Jesus of Christianity is a Supernatural Superhero. Jesus of Christianity is not a Nature's God. Did Jesus tell us about Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Geology, Geography, etc.. If Jesus was a God, Jesus should have been able to fill entire books on economics, much more than Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, 1776. Instead of just telling people to give to the poor. If Jesus cared about humans, Jesus would have talked about how to build more wealth with good economic practices to build businesses and on how to make things. Then lets understand Thomas Jefferson and his phrase in the Declaration of Independence of the United States, "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." Thomas Jefferson did not think that Christianity is true. Jefferson knew that the stories of Christianity only gets to a human created story God, stories created by humans. Jesus is a Supernatural Superhero, who only knows Story Magic. Jefferson thought that a Nature's God would have knowledge of Nature. That is what the Philosophers of the Age of Enlightenment gave us, is to not believe in Supernatural Superhero Story Magic, but to build on knowledge of Nature and Reason. A phrase used to describe the Age of Enlightenment was 'Dare to Know.' It is the Age of Enlightenment Philosophies that gave us the advances of Nature, like electricity, electronics and machine created power, medical care and medical hospitals. Not the Story Magic thinking from the ancient world.

[@lindajohnson4204]

Luke 16:31 "And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."

[@stwitartjacque9267]

Thank you for this finally seeing them (even not in person) out from the book I got since 2015 and kept on reading over and over again ~ Seeking Allah Finding Jesus the two great influences of Nabeel Quereshi’s passionate love for Jesus p148 ‘Gary chuckled’ p149 “Now play nice David” 💕 so much love for you both🙏🏼♥️

[@johncook19]

Gary books may be bigger thank William Lane Craig's but I agree with Gary that his books are better written than WLCs. He does admit that William is the better of the two authors especially in connerie content which in every of Williams books contains at least 5001 pages. Phew 😒

[@johnsonsymon5496]

Thanks

[@lottewied1937]

Thank you,so positve. I am a firm believer in my Living God. Miracles and answering of prayers happened in my life. Thank you for this programme.I listened to a lecture of Gary. So true: Atheïsts tell you very quickly they are atheists,without me mentioning religion! They like to start an argument about religion. I love life and not scared of death at all.

[@stevenhazel4445]

These guys are powerhouses. Every Christian should know this stuff. Btw I really like the theme and tenor of this show.

[@Indorm]

Jesus is risen. 🎉🎊

[@bradleyrm]

He is risen, He is Risen indeed!

[@doncassavaugh8884]

First time listening. I listend to Mike before and Gary it was great. The reason I wanted to listen in is I'm giving the sunrise service and wanted more information and resources. Thank you for having them on. Great job God Bless

[@salt.colladocollado578]

GOD IS UNSTOPPABLE

[@tony.kmullinsstudio818]

"BTW, Jesus rose bodily from the dead." I can testify to this because I met Him. :) Outstanding interview guys.

[@Kristian-ql8zw]

What do you mean?

[@erichetherington9314]

You MET him?? Where? Starbucks? Did you tell anyone else, "Hey! This guy's Jesus!"?

[@wandacrowell6766]

BTW, Jesus rose bodily from the dead. I came to this video by Mike Winger. This was so interesting.

[@nonprogrediestregredi1711]

Btw, there's no historical reason to believe that Jesus of Nazareth would have been given a proper burial. But thank you for the baseless assertion.

[@gobblin10]

@@nonprogrediestregredi1711 Here’s an article for you to read. www.desiringgod.org/articles/historical-evidence-for-the-resurrection

[@nonprogrediestregredi1711]

@@gobblin10 Oh no, not THAT apologetics article! Someone posted that to me a couple of years ago. It's a confirmation bias article for Christians that's fraught with inaccuracies and poor reasoning. I tell you what; instead of watching J. Warner Wallace, Razi Zacharias, Kent Hovind, etc., how about actually learning about antiquity, the Roman empire, the second temple period, the sects of Jews in the first century, the literary genres of the Hellenistic first century, and especially the historical method by actually reading scholarship done by historians and scholars. If you would like a comprehensive list of scholars and historians, I'd be glad to supply one. Perhaps then you would understand how the canonical gospels are not historically reliable. And I'm correct, per the historical evidence, that there is no historical reason to believe that Jesus of Nazareth would have been given a proper burial. The Roman practice of crucifixion included leaving the body on the stauros(Greek word meaning pike, pole or cross) as a disincentive to others and to be eaten by scavengers. It's extraordinarily unlikely that Pilate would have let an insurgent, such as Jesus of Nazareth, be taken down for a proper burial, especially considering what we know about Pilate from extra biblical sources(Philo of Alexandria, Flavius Josephus), as he had no regard for Jewish sensitivities. There are other aspects of the canonical gospels that make little to no historical sense also. The three women going to anoint the body on the third day is historically implausible also, given what we know about Jewish burial rituals, for example. Beyond that, scholars, historians and archaeologists have demonstrated through literary and archeological evidence the origins of Yahweh/Jehovah, the primary god of the Hebrew and Christian bibles, and the polytheistic/henotheistic origins of the Israelites. There are many antecedents that were borrowed and adapted from the surrounding cultures. It's a fascinating history.

[@Mike00513]

@Non Progredi Est Regredi, There is actually good evidence for Jesus burial thanks for the baseless claim.

[@nonprogrediestregredi1711]

@@Mike00513 "...thanks for the baseless claim."?! Well, since I actually laid out much of the historical evidence for said claim, it's not exactly baseless now is it? "There is actually good evidence for Jesus burial..." Are you claiming that there is good evidence for a proper burial or just a burial? You see, it's likely that he would have been thrown into a mass grave when finally being taken down from the "stauros" after having been left to scavengers. So sure, it's probable that he would have had a dishonorable burial, given what historians know about crucifixion victims. There's not, however, good evidence that he would have had a proper burial.

[@bonnielucas3244]

In August 1984 I had an experience with God which convinced me that Christ is real. My whole mindset changed toward Christ and away from doing my own thing, trying to figure life out on my own. I am 64 now, and I see no explanation for the way people behave who are sincere, humble Christians, compared to people who have decided there is no God, or who think Jesus was " a great teacher.". I cried out to Jesus by name, and Somebody immediately changed me into wanting to talk about Jesus, read the Bible, go back to my home church. For the first time, the Bible was real stuff for me. I was 25. Raised in a very dedicated Christian home, but Christ made Himself real to me personally. I did not see or hear anything unusual, but my heart and mind became fixed upon Jesus Christ and has never become unfixed upon Him since August1984.

[@johncook19]

Gary Habermas is great at writing enormous books which are as Gary often says are special brillant and more than enormous? Long live Gary!

[@barbarahomrighaus6852]

"Jesus rose bodily from the dead." I look forward to being with him and my loved ones at the end of my days. If not for his victory over death, I could not have this.

[@luisdizon2486]

Great presentation! One of the best up to date defenses of the Resurrection I've seen in a while.

[@Bill_Garthright]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y4XNiXiueKeAlbc

[@1chriswessels202]

By the way, Jesus rose bodily from the dead. Great interview, I so appreciate their work.

[@midimusicforever]

Jesus lives!

[@jb1876]

While listening to this on my drive home today, on a road i drove hundreds of times, i noticed a sing high up on a electrical pole witch read JESUS SAVES, i never seen it before, it makes me wonder

[@ToxicallyMasculinelol]

I get so frustrated when people say "do you have any historical evidence?" or "do you have anything outside of the bible to prove this isn't just religious nonsense from a religious book?" and they get such a weak response. we need to constantly remind people that the bible IS historical evidence and it's NOT a religious book. texts don't stop being historical the moment that religious people start venerating them. this is getting the causality totally backwards. the biographical accounts were historical first, and that's what convinced so many people to become christians and compile them all into a "religious book." you have to deal with them as historical sources, not as "religious books," because they didn't start out as religious books. in all of history we use historical sources to verify other historical sources. if there are multiple primary sources all verifying the same thing, that's great, but it's very rare to get that for many details from the 1st century AD. there are often many secondary sources backing up something like a biography of plato, but very few primary sources. we just make do with what we have. it's only in the realm of religion that people decide to apply an extra dose of skepticism, simply because of incredulity. we have only one source to back up a lot of what we think about plato's life, but we accept it because it seems plausible. but who knows? the author could have lied. he could have done any number of things that all would have been plausible. plausibility isn't a valid criterion in the first place, let alone when you're dealing with the topic of miracles. a much more reasonable way of looking at this is through the lens of prior probability. it's improbable that someone could heal cripples, but that's not what is being claimed. the claim isn't that a mere human violated the laws of nature, it's that God himself came down and manipulated the universe. it's not improbable _a priori_ unless you deny the existence of God. if God exists, then this is absolutely probable. so, as with any other historical account, the question becomes "how good is the testimony?" see, I used to assume _a priori_ that God doesn't exist, and therefore considered the accounts of Jesus to be improbable due to incompatibility with my naturalistic assumptions. but once again, that causal relationship is backwards. it's not that God's nonexistence disproves the accounts of Jesus. it's that the accounts of Jesus, taken properly as historical sources attesting to something that is not impossible, prove the existence of God. this is how I became a theist in the first place, after 27 years (since birth) of atheism. I understood the overwhelming probability that the resurrection and healings and other miracles happened, at which point my only explanation for such events was that God must exist after all. whereupon I began investigating metaphysical arguments for God's existence, because prior to that I had only really engaged with atheists' caricatures of these arguments. so I naturally concluded not only that there were no good arguments for God's existence, but that there were actually good arguments for God's nonexistence. I had it completely backwards, of course. I still don't think metaphysical arguments can absolutely prove that God exists, because even if we take them all for granted, the atheist can always retreat to the conclusion that some unconscious "universe generator," rather than God, fulfills all the necessary attributes and conditions those arguments require. but at least from here you can see how improbable that is. it may be possible, but it sounds silly, especially when taken in light of the fact that Jesus apparently had godlike powers. if someone has godlike powers and seems to be perfectly good, you should probably trust what he says. if we accept that the authors were sincere, then we need to accept basically everything Jesus said, including that a personal God exists. this isn't a perfect, 100% guarantee that the conclusion is true, but it's more probable than not, which is all that matters. I have no guarantee that my brain is not going to explode tomorrow, but it's improbable enough that I'm going to operate and live my life under the assumption that it's not going to happen. I struggle with a lot of what Habermas says on these podcasts, even though his written scholarship is great, because he seems to dodge questions like this in ways that are really unsatisfying to skeptics who are full of misconceptions about epistemology of religious facts. it's absolutely vital that people understand that religious claims need to be evaluated as historical accounts. not only the claims of Christianity, but also the claims of every other religion. the Qur'an also makes radical claims, but it's a historical account. if those claims are supported by a large volume of credible eyewitness testimony, if there are additional sources corroborating elements of the story, if they have a high prior probability, and if the alternative explanations for the testimony are less probable than the claim, then the claim is probably true. in the case of Islam, it's very clear that the Qur'an and hadith pass few of those tests. there is a very low volume of credible eyewitness testimony to any of Islam's unique supernatural claims. the literary style doesn't resemble a historical biography and makes little effort to date anything. virtually all external historical support for Islam is in the form of accounts of Muhammad's military conquests, his feuds with Arabian tribes, and his political measures in the later years of his life. there just isn't any support for the facts of the story that would imply the veracity of his supernatural claims. some of his claims have a low prior probability for many reasons, and there are a variety of vastly more likely explanations for the testimony. even the Qur'an itself records evidence that Muhammad was mentally ill or possessed by demons. he himself believed he was possessed by demons. he didn't change his mind about that until some women who weren't present for the event convinced him that he was talking to an angel rather than having delusions or demonic communications. so clearly we can engage with religious sources as historical sources without blindly accepting their claims to be true. there are just a huge number of unique aspects of Christianity (and what led me from a lifetime of atheism to Catholicism) that make it vastly more probable than every other religious tradition that makes supernatural claims. its sources are vastly more credible than those of any other religion. the new testament is written in a style totally unlike that of any other religious text ever created, including the old testament. its intrinsic credibility as a series of historical accounts of real events is what allowed it to sweep over the mediterranean within a few generations, conquering the roman empire that spent centuries trying to destroy it, and eventually convincing a full quarter of the human population. unlike Islam, it was not spread by conquest and force. its rapid ascent can only be explained by its credibility, by divine providence, or by both. people in those days were no more credulous than we are today. even Jesus' followers were instantly skeptical. everyone was. they didn't see any of this firsthand. but the apostles kept track of the eyewitnesses. they went around preaching and, when pressed by skeptics, responded that anyone could go to Judea and ask "who saw Jesus rise from the dead?" and immediately be led to one of hundreds of eyewitnesses. if that wasn't the case, this whole religion never would have worked. this is how they convinced so many gentiles in Turkey and Greece and Egypt and Rome so quickly. many people went to Jerusalem to fact check the apostles and returned as converts. it wasn't until thousands of years later that people stopped thinking of these biographies and letters as incredible. in legitimate historical scholarship, nobody ever stopped thinking of the new testament as historical. it's only the "new atheists" in the general public, who know so little of the history and scholarship in this field, who wound up thinking of it as ahistorical and passed that on to the culture at large. I come from that group myself, and I too knew far less about historical investigation of Christianity than I thought I did. I was spending all my time reading inflammatory takedowns of the religion that I just basically took for granted that nothing in the Bible constituted a credible source, that it was no more historically valuable than my own scribblings in a journal. it wasn't until I started investigating the context in which it was written, and re-reading it in light of that context, and following the work of scholars like Brant Pitre, that I finally dropped the arrogant prejudice that made me dismiss the Bible as intrinsically ahistorical by virtue of its religious veneration. the irony is that my attitude at that time was even more fundamentalist than it is now. obviously, not all "new atheists" are completely ignorant of historical scholarship of Biblical events. but oftentimes it seems like they only learned about the events after their mind was already made up, and they're just holding on so tight that they just can't accept the preponderance of the evidence. nothing is good enough. but I think most people can be open to the truth if they can just be shown the actual credibility of the historical documents that were later compiled into the Bible we know today.

[@jacoblee5796]

Yeah, sorry the bible is just a religious book. It isn't special in any way what so ever.

[@WaterspoutsOfTheDeep]

@@jacoblee5796 Of course it is special as the evidence proves. You weren't paying attention. What is religious is your Atheistic worldview, it's a mythology of magic. Atheism: "A magical nothing created everything and when I die I become nothing, becoming one again with my creator." lmao no mind/God involved that's your worldview not mine. Atheism is a mythology of magic, rationality from irrationality a truly deus ex machina mechanism that can never exist for it's reality breaking. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Ones rational mind that you need to defend your position can't even be a product of naturalism/Atheism! It is self defeating, in three ways no less. Rationality from irrationality, end product of mindless unguided process is unreliable, and naturalism selects for survival value not truth as in whether our beliefs are true. Atheism removes science, it doesn't give any basis for thinking human rationality will reveal anything. Without God as the basis good and evil and truth loses all meaning as it's all relative then. Atheism is dead and science killed it. Atheism is a belief of blind faith that goes against the paradigm of reality that mind is required for creation. Does the author or video game programmer make something out of nothing with magic? No they use their mind. Is the mind immaterial? Yes. Does that mean it's magic? No. Is information immaterial? Yes. Does that mean it's magic? No. Mind>magic. Science does not support the view the universe is a closed system and events can't be fed in aka miracles, that's your blind faith. Believe in magic all you want but don't pretend your illogical pseudo science worldview is the high ground to argue from when it's utter nonsense and self defeating it's so absurd haha.😄😄😄

[@polarischannel]

Very well articulated. Thank you.

[@mikesmithz]

Great post- but I don't understand how you are convinced by the evidence. Let's say you are in court, accused of committing a crime and the jury has to make a decision on whether or not you are guilty. The only evidence that you committed the crime was a document written by who knows who, who knows when. This document looks like it was written by multiple people but it could have just as easily been written by one person. We have no idea who wrote this document, but in it, they accuse you of committing this crime. Would you be happy with this flimsy evidence getting you locked up in jail? Would you be happy with this? If the roles were reversed, would you send someone to jail based on that sort of evidence? Of course you wouldn't, that would be crazy...yet with that same evidence you believe that God came to earth, the dead rose, people walked on water, the blind could see, and miracles happened. So if that evidence isn't good enough for you to convict a person to jail, why is it good enough for you to believe Jesus is God? I'm not being a snotty nosed new atheist here, I'm asking a genuine question. How is that evidence good enough for you?

[@hankstephens5543]

@@mikesmithz The evidence that meets your criteria can be planted. The jury’s decision is STILL based on the assumption (belief) that the evidence has not been planted. I’m curious what evidence would meet your criteria in terms of the resurrection. Also keep in mind any religion for which the end goal is to become a convicted criminal makes no sense. Remember to add the deaths of he & she to your he-said-she-said argument. No one lies just to die.

[@ttuso95]

Btw Jesus rose by a bodily resurrection

[@salt.colladocollado578]

THE WORD OF GOD IS ALWAYS RIGHT ✅

[@johnbrown4568]

Thank you friends for this wonderful information. God’s blessings…

[@shirleysmith9421]

We have personally experienced proof that Our Heavenly Father and Jesus raised our Loved Ones after their earthly bodies died and they are Happy in Heaven with their Heavenly Bodies!😇😇😇😇😇😇😇😇😇💖💞💖💯

[@utopiabuster]

BT W, Christianity provides the best explanation for the existence of the world and human complexity. Extra-biblically, Doctors Habermas and Licona provide some of the best explanations for the validity of that statement. Really great interview Cam! Peace and may God continue to Bless you.

[@Daz19]

Yea?? What plants and 24 hour days before there was a sun?

[@utopiabuster]

@@Daz19 , Given the brevity of your query I must request that you try as much as that single pea in that pea pod you call a skull allows to be somewhat more intelligible. Much appreciated. Thanks for playing.

[@Daz19]

@@utopiabuster lol nice adhominem. Am I wrong tho?? The bible does state that right?

[@utopiabuster]

@@Daz19 , It's obvious you don't understand and thanks. Just because you put a question mark or period after a group words doesn't mean you've said something coherent. Try again. Thanks for playing.

[@Daz19]

@@utopiabusterWhy bother replying if you're going to dodge the question. You claim Christianity best explains the existence of the world. I refer to your religions scripture of creation, scripture which certainly doesn't best explain how the world came to be.

[@luzrodriguez3898]

BTW - Jesus rose from the dead- I recently start washing videos and debates of Mike Licona and few videos of Gary Habermas, I loved it! they are so great to refute their debater with convincing arguments. Glad to find this video, I could say that this video enriched my knowledge about historical points and facts concerning the resurrection.

[@HegelsOwl]

Truth is called "revelation" because it explains questions. There isn't a question which can be explained only by Jesus' R. So, there isn't any truth in the claim, sadly enough.

[@callumclarke1733]

I Define Atheism is Those Who pretend God does not exist. The resurrection is a historical fact

[@duncanbryson1167]

🙄

[@dustywood]

Thank you so much for this.

[@FaithAndFactMarkyMark]

By the way Jesus Rose up bodily from the dead 🙌 Great job Cameron

[@salt.colladocollado578]

WORD'S AND THOUGHT'S ARE INVISIBLE AND POWERFUL

[@brucequinones6951]

Hi Cameron, please do an interview with J. Warner Wallace on this topic. :)

[@cina100675]

Yes, excellent idea👍

[@scottbinns318]

That's who convinced me.

[@brendaninboden9743]

Paul, an proud antagonizer of Christians just so happened to have a vision so persuasive to him that he submitted his life to his former greatest enemy. But if he was actually mistaken and the vision wasn’t objective what’s even more surprising is that he convinced both himself and others that he was able to perform signs wonders and miracles according to 2nd Corinthians 12 and Romans too. What’s more is he mentioned the disciples also found they were able to perform miracles too. Finally, Paul’s knowledge of the more than 500 witnesses (of which he knew who were dead and alive and where to order them in the resurrection appearance chronology) seems very very convincing. Many say Mark is the earliest resurrection account and has none of the additions that built up over the years owing to why it’s the shortest and most bland. However, what’s ironic is that the earliest resurrection account has the most people mentioned and (with the more than 500) is most impressive. All of this is just some thoughts I’ve had and things that help me, but I have other evidences God has given me too. If you disagree with me I understand, God bless you still! Let’s just please foster mutual respect and love despite our differences and respect where one another may be coming from. Thanks if you read this far 😂❤️!

[@ronboyd9]

The verdict has been out on Paul outside of Christendom. And possibly within it also.

[@BernieWeeden]

By the way, Jesus rose bodily from the dead. I have just watched this 2024. Loved it!

[@harleygirl4life6]

I just bought both of their books!!! Can’t wait to start reading them !!! I’m also a brand new subscriber. Just found your channel. Can’t wait to dig in to more!! This was great. I always say too. The women being the first ones to see Jesus & testify to the Resurection. If you were going to make it up back then WOMEN being the first to see him would be the LAST thing they would have made up. In their culture women could not even testify in court at all. No one would listen or believe women. So if it was faked that would be the WORST way to make the account begin. They never would have made it up using woman as a witness to it & the first to discover it.

[@CedanyTheAlaskan]

By the way, Jesus rise bodily from the dead

[@paradoxology5928]

By the way [I really hope, wonder and still struggle with the claim that] Jesus rose bodily from the dead! Thank you very much for hosting this interview.

[@lindajohnson4204]

"Ye believe in God; believe also in me".

[@Peter-qz8qs]

Both Habermas and Licona ignore important parts of what the critical scholars are saying. The majority of critical scholars would not agree that Jesus died on the cross if they thought that the evidence adequately established Jesus was alive three days after the crucifixion. Ehrman has said this himself explicitly. An essential part of why these scholars agree that Jesus died by crucifixion is because they have dismissed the claim that Jesus was alive afterwards as a falsehood or a legend.

[@tomdallis4105]

History teaches: 1. Jesus died by crucifixion 2. His followers believed they had postmortem encounters with Jesus 3. The sceptic James, brother of Jesus, suddenly changed and became a Christian and died for his belief. 4. An enemy of the Christians, Saul of Tarsus, suddenly became a Christian claiming to have seen Jesus alive and died for this belief. My questions: 1. If you are skeptical of these, of which one or ones are you skeptical? 2. What explanation do you offer if you accept these historical statements?

[@marlyn9341]

Jesus rose bodily from the dead💕🙏

[@cameronrobson7309]

Jesus rose bodily from the dead!

[@jadenjackson4078]

Jesus rose bodily from the Dead 🙏✝️

[@tornay131]

Hyperbole.

[@hookmuiyb]

Great interviews ..

[@randypacchioli2933]

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is the most established event in antiquity. 👍✝️

[@carsonwall2400]

Cameron, would you be able to get Bart Ehrman on the show with Gary Habermas?

[@tigistyiheyis5737]

Bart is confused scholar bro !!

[@nonprogrediestregredi1711]

@@tigistyiheyis5737 No, Bart is an honest scholar.

[@Djdu7228xnxj]

@@nonprogrediestregredi1711 Really? Compare his scholarly articles with other works. He contraicts himself a lot of times.

[@nonprogrediestregredi1711]

@@Djdu7228xnxj Please cite source material for your assertion.

[@Djdu7228xnxj]

@@nonprogrediestregredi1711 Read his book 'Misquoting jesus' and the scholarly work he did with his mentor in the same frikkin year! He contraicts himself in it

[@ddannydaniel3340]

Dr Habermas is amazing.

[@Hieiman]

😂

[@WaterspoutsOfTheDeep]

@@Hieiman Atheism is a mythology of magic =)

[@maraboboia5130]

Hallelujah Jesus rose FROM dead!!!!

[@britanylara8780]

Jesus rose bodily from the dead. He loves all of us and I love all of you. Amen❤

[@Turt51278]

At this time in my life I can honestly say I believe the Bible with every fiber in me. I don’t know if I could convince a nonbeliever. But in my heart of heart I believe the Bible is the inspired word of God. For me I think what has convinced me the most is because of the accuracy of prophecy that was fulfilled in the past and the prophecy that is still yet to be fulfilled. I think at this point you can see unfulfilled prophecies lining up circumstances in order to fulfill the ones yet to be fulfilled.

[@jacksonhoward740]

BTW, Jesus rose bodily from the dead!

[@GARYWERSLEY]

oh no he did'nt..

[@TyrellWellickEcorp]

@@GARYWERSLEY Did you even watch the video?

[@nilsd.8625]

Whats the name of the book Gary mentions? The one with 18 non christian sources? By the way, Jesus rose bodily from the dead.

[@vacationsaway]

THE HISTORICAL JESUS

[@joshw3010]

I remember seeing a show a few years back that was talking about Jonah and the whale. They were saying the "mouth of the whale" was an astronomical term. So the story was that he was fleeing in his boat at a certain time of the year based on the stars, not that he was actually eaten by a whale.

[@lindajohnson4204]

It actually says a big fish, not a whale. It could have been something like a whale shark. Believe the Bible, not mere men.

[@conrad2902]

Great show fellas.

[@gracearmor]

Btw Jesus rose bodily from the dead! Excellent video! 3 gentlemen! God bless brothers!

[@cherokeegypsy2617]

Two of my faves! God bless Gary and Mike! Thank you for this upload !

[@dco8886]

What an awesome video Cameron! Keep them coming. Some of the atheists questions 😬🤭🤦🏻‍♀️

[@ChillinwithMarq]

By the way, Jesus rose bodily from the dead!!! 🙌🏾🙌🏾🙌🏾🙌🏾🙌🏾🙌🏾🙌🏾🙌🏾🙌🏾

[@alexandralee8889]

He is risen!! Amen!!

[@preciousayawei4695]

I am watching this video in 2022😃 and by the way, Jesus rose bodily from the dead. I definitely enjoyed this chat. Thanks Cameron, Gary, and Mike.

[@theHentySkeptic]

Landed here one year later - from Mike Winger's channel. There is really good content available these days. Thank you all for your great work rescuing souls from damnation.

[@joeb2588]

When is Gary's book coming out? I can't find any specific dates...

[@ronaldmendonca6636]

Can someone put a time stamp on the proof in this video, please?

[@ronaldmendonca6636]

@Speckolog Thank you

[@20july1944]

@Sandcastle • The Bible has a lot of history in it. A history book doesn't have to be inerrant to be a history book. Are you an atheist?

[@ronaldmendonca6636]

J w I watched the stream live. First 20+ mins is their "testimony" and background.

[@kaufmanat1]

@Sandcastle • you do realize archeologists rely heavily on the Bible for constructing history right?

[@kaufmanat1]

@Sandcastle • you can't see a difference between the illiad and Paul's letters to Corinth? Seriously?? It's like you're trying to make bad arguments...

[@CaseyCovenant]

Definition of proof 1a: the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact b: the process or an instance of establishing the validity of a statement especially by derivation from other statements in accordance with principles of reasoning -Merriam Webster

[@bititid]

So according to Webster, they did, in fact, prove the resurrection.

[@thatonechristian2487]

@@bititid Naturally. But even if the title were misleading, it doesn’t even invalidate their case, that’s the funny part.

[@billhesford6098]

We can't prove yesterday happened. Without faith it is impossible to please God.

[@tornay131]

Why not?

[@billhesford6098]

@@tornay131 In reducing all provable facts to observable physical phenomena - science and empiricism we are forced to add other things from the mind. Rationsal thought which almost invariably entails assumed beliefs. Or faith. Nobody actually believes yesterday did not exist. (I think) Take Hume a radical empiricist. Hume's mature version of empiricism was considered radical by his fellow thinkers because his approach restricted all knowledge to only direct sensory input, assuming that anything purported to be known from the activity of the mind separate from observable data must be deemed worthless.

[@tomdallis4105]

Extraordinary claims and extraordinary evidence. Jesus claimed He would “destroy this temple (his body) and in three days raise it up.” Evidence - He arose from the tomb.

[@Blablablahx3]

Btw, Jesus rose bodily from the dead. ☺ God bless you guys and all who watched this. ♥

[@johnkneeshaw8008]

Anyone else notice how Habermas' fact that "the disciples had experiences that they believed indicated a risen Jesus" suddenly transforms into "all of the disciples and 500 other people saw Jesus"? Normally one would be expected to submit some kind of evidence to make a jump like that. Lucky for these guys they're Christian apologists.

[@journeyfiveonesix]

Well why don't you read his 5000+ work when it comes out and see if you can find some evidence? What have you read so far of Dr. Habermas' work? Does he make the same jump there or does he provide more evidence which isn't addressed in this interview?

[@johnkneeshaw8008]

​@@journeyfiveonesix So you agree, then, that the facts he uses to defend the resurrection are not the same as the facts he tells us are accepted by historians. Like I said, it's lucky for him he's a Christian apologist. This kind of leeway is not granted in other disciplines.

[@Sam-lt1pb]

Appearing to the 500 and the disciples is all in the same source, accepted as historically accurate even by sceptical scholars like bart ehrman

[@johnkneeshaw8008]

@@Sam-lt1pb Sorry, dude. "I myself don’t think the vision to the 500 is historical." - Bart Ehrman Mind you, that comment is from 2013, so he might have changed his mind since then. If you have new information, feel free to present it, but I think you're just making things up.

[@Sam-lt1pb]

@@johnkneeshaw8008 sorry, all I meant was the appearing to the 500 was definitely believed by paul, since its what's written in Corinthians. In corinthians paul is nothing who jesus appeared to, such as the disciples and 500.

[@stevenwilcox4877]

"By the way, Jesus rose bodily from the dead"

[@evangeliumproductions3856]

Thank you Cameron for this great discussion !

[@keithziegler8881]

great at showing christans STILL don't understand evidence, burden of proof, or what it means to prove something

[@evangeliumproductions3856]

Keith Ziegler Teach me then , I’m all ears friend. Help me help you , amirite ?

[@keithziegler8881]

@@evangeliumproductions3856 I'm not the one that needs help. You and those LIKE you, with irrational beliefs are the ones that need help.

[@matthewbonaldo4137]

@@keithziegler8881 you going to answer him or ....?

[@keithziegler8881]

@@matthewbonaldo4137 I did

[@bethsnider5796]

Love this content! Jesus certainly rose bodily from the dead!!!

[@blackestjake]

Beth Snider except if he didn’t Beth, ever think about that?

[@drooghead]

That's just a fairly tale for children and those adults whose thinking processes haven't matured.

[@sally9352]

He sure did.

[@alexandralee8889]

AMEN!!!

[@flamingswordapologetics]

Very good! Will add this to a playlist on our site. And BTW, Jesus rose bodily from the dead.

[@livewireOrourke]

Skeptics: Extraordinary claims require evidence...unless we don't like the conclusions, then you will need "extraordinary" evidence. It's like a judge hearing this his son was accused of murder. The police come back to the judge with enough evidence that would convict anyone. However, because it involves his son, the judge now demands "extraordinary" evidence. In his defense, the judge says it's because his son is an extraordinary person who hasn't even had a speeding ticket, much less commited murder.

[@WaterspoutsOfTheDeep]

Except for their naturalism predicated on a non-existant deus ex machina mechanism that produces rationality from irrationality. Then extraordinary claims don't require extraordinary evidence in fact no evidence at all!

[@damontunstall3129]

If you close your eyes, Peter Griffin becomes a theologian.

[@RandysCandy77]

By the way..Jesus rose bodily from the dead 💕

[@biblicus8204]

Evidence of Jesus Resurrection: 1) Main Source: Bible 2) Jesus really died, and his body was placed in a tomb that was found to be empty 3) Empty tomb 4) Apparitions of Jesus after death 5) The Disciples believed that Jesus aviates resurrected 6) Testimony of Women 7) Conversion of Paul (Paul was a Pharisee, the opposite of the Sadducees, therefore, he believes in the Resurrection (Extra-Biblical Sources) Flavian Testimony & The Passing of Peregrinus Archaeological Evidence: 1) Empty Tomb 2) Inscription of Nazareth (First half of the first century [41 after Christ] 3) Altar to the Unknown God (Where Paul preached the Resurrection, has an altar in a museum in Rome that is in Acts 17) Jewish evidence: 1) Talmud 2) Toledot Yeshu. Both of them mention the Empty Tomb, they only claim that the disciples "have stolen the body of Jesus", Matthew 28: 12-15. Against facts there are no arguments!

[@EduRB99]

Amazing summary brother! God bless you!

[@truckdriver8416]

I found one error in your statement. It's about Pharisees and Sadducees being the opposite. Both Pharisees and Sadducees were in direct opposition to the levitical priesthood which was handed down by Moses at Mount Zion. Jesus condemned both the Pharisees and Sadducees because they were man-made religions mocking the Mosaic law and priesthood

[@jesuslovesyou836]

By the way Jesus rose bodily from the dead

[@jenniferdefrates733]

By the way, Jesus rose BODILY from the dead!

[@Bill_Garthright]

Evidence?

[@commentfreely5443]

@@Bill_Garthright thomas had a video camera and filmed the resurrected Jesus. he even showed the tape to pontius pilate. where's the evidence that you exist and are not a bot?

[@Bill_Garthright]

@@commentfreely5443 So, nothing, then? Not even *one piece of good evidence* that the claim is actually _true?_ Yeah, that's what I thought.

[@OdysseyMMA22]

@@Bill_Garthright well read his books and make up your mind

[@Bill_Garthright]

@@OdysseyMMA22 I don't have an unlimited amount of time. After all, Muslims want me to read the Quran - in the original Arabic! Heh, heh. That's what they keep telling me I need to do. But I need to have some reason to think that it will be worthwhile, first. So, to Christians and Muslims alike, I just ask for *one piece of good evidence.* Just *one.* Now, one piece of good evidence might not be enough to convince me, true. But it would be enough to get me to take your religious claims _seriously,_ at least. So, basically, I'm just asking for *one example.* After all, if you don't have *one,* then you have nothing at all, and I needn't take _any_ of this seriously. Well, do you have _anything at all?_ I'd be happy to be convinced - I _wish_ all of the people I've cared about who've died were just laughing it up in Heaven! (I would _volunteer_ for Hell, if that would make Heaven exist for the people I care about.) - but it's going to take more than _nothing._

[@aprildoucette9552]

By the way, Jesus Christ rose bodily from the dead. ;) (I know this is an older video but I just found it today). Thank you, Lord! I absolutely love anything on the resurrection. This was wonderful! Thank you, Camera! God bless, brother!

[@ronaldlindeman6136]

Maybe you won't like this. How did Jesus of Christianity and God of Christianity know, just know, that the Roman Empire military would be there to torture, kill and murder the people of Judea/Palestine and then also be there to torture, kill and murder Jesus. So when Jesus was born on planet Earth, Jesus knew, just knew that the Roman Empire would be there to torture, kill and murder the people of Judea/Palestine 33 years after his birth. 30 years to adulthood, 3 years ministry. Did the Roman Empire military have Free Will? Could the Roman Empire military just left Judea/Palestine and left the God of the Universe with no military to torture, kill and murder him? Then there would be no Christianity. Also, how did the Roman Empire military know just the exact way to torture, kill and murder the people of Judea/Palestine in the way that Christianity needs Jesus to be tortured, killed and murdered? What if the Roman Empire military only stabbed people in the heart to kill them, but not torture them? Then Christianity would not be fulfilled. What if the Roman Empire military only hanged the people of Judea/Palestine or burned them to death. Then Christianity would not be fulfilled because blood would not have been spilled. The torture, killing and murder of the people of Judea/Palestine by the Roman Empire military and the way the Roman Empire military did it, is the most important thing to Christianity. Jesus must have trained the Roman Empire military to torture, kill and murder the people of Judea/Palestine in just the right way, to complete Christianity. Can something like that be left to chance? Did Jesus pay the Roman Empire military to torture, kill and murder the people of Judea so Jesus of Christianity would have the Roman Empire military available for that Gods torture quest? Jesus is not some hippie, that he thinks he can get the Roman Empire military for free, is he? ------------------------------------------------------------ So did the God of the Universe need the Roman Empire military to torture, kill and murder the people of Judea for that Gods torture quest? Or is Christianity an accident of human history. Just a thought.

[@tammymullins1151]

I wish the title didn’t say proof. Evidence would be better. I believe, don’t get me wrong but unbelievers balk at “proof.”

[@northernlight8857]

This was not very convincing or plausible. I was hoping for something new.

[@20july1944]

What proof would you expect, if someone rose from the dead in Jerusalem in 30 AD?

[@thstroyur]

Like a signed postcard?

[@goldenalt3166]

@@20july1944 A person who could never die again? I'd expect him to be around answering questions so that believers wouldn't have to accuse each other of unbiblical teaching.

[@brudno1333]

@@20july1944 ++ "What proof would you expect, if someone rose from the dead in Jerusalem in 30 AD?" Why the mystery if it actually happened? IF it was meant as the bible says, to provide a pathway to heaven, why hide the resurrection? Seems like the resurrection story was invented by the Church some years after the death of Jesus. Makes more sense.

[@20july1944]

@@brudno1333 I ask again, what proof would you expect if someone rose from the dead in Jerusalem in 30 AD. People would record it, and they did. Would the Romans record it? No, a political headache for them. Would the Jews record it? No, a political headache for them as well. Give me any contemporary chronicle of early 1st century Palestine that you would expect SHOULD have mentioned Jesus but didn't.

[@mackdmara]

Love both those guys. Good stuff!

[@rocio8851]

BTW, since I listened to the whole live stream, I can say "Jesus has been bodily raised from the dead" 😃 ... And BTW I am a faithful follower of your channel and a patreon. I really appreciate your work. Regarding Gary and Mike: such a blessing to live in these days when we have such great men of God. Mike, see you soon at HBU (in summer, master's degree) 😃

[@utopiabuster]

@@1541965 , After all that you may want to have your DNA checked for the "really stupid gene", although, in your favor, you may just qualify for the "Cut and Paste Award" of the year.

[@jarrod752]

It's too bad this stream is only useful to scare christians into thinking their megalomaniacal god is real. It does *nothing* for _actual critics_ or people of other religions. The bible is _bad evidence_ in demonstrating these claims actually occurred.

[@20july1944]

@@jarrod752 What evidence would you expect if Jesus DID rise from the dead in Jerusalem in 30 AD?

[@utopiabuster]

Jarrod , Ahhhhh! Sounds to me like someone got a lump of coal in his stocking for Christmas. Or, do you project such unbridled hatred at everything you insist doesn't exist? You may want to redirect some of that pent up angst studying Roman jurisprudence as the Romans were quite serious about the Roman LAW and justice, to include the rights of its citizens and those over which they held lordship. If you were able to reason past your evolutionary restrictions you may come to the realization that the event, in question, (the Crucixion and Ressurection), were unbelievable events, one may even call "Miraculous", in human history, and, as such, individuals would have varying opinions on the matter given the God given proclivity for individualism. Or, do you expect that everyone would, and should, be of the same mind, have the exact same statements, much like your cut and paste job, in order to satisfy your ideological biases? Of which you'd likely have equal discriminatory ignorance. The best evidence for God's existence and the validity of Christianity are atheist denier/rejectionist! Stick that in your stocking! Thanks for playing.

[@jarrod752]

@@20july1944 Something more substantial than the hearsay of a possible _schitzofrenic_ who talked to donkeys, and the tales made up more than 50 years after the supposed death of this individual. Something more than *what every other religion* has for evidence the events happened, and, if god wanted to correct the record for me, he could have answered some prayers, or if he wanted to correct the record, he could make some of those double blind prayer studies show a clear winner instead of random chance. But your god chose to use a terrible method of preserving the evidence of miracles, so that the witnesses could *know* god's son, but the rest of us just kinda have to take their word for it. People wrote it down in a book and the same book also claims they were willing to die for this belief doesn't convince me that these superstitious people actually witnessed the laws of physics being violated. And besides the bible, these guys gave credibility to already severely debunked hoaxes like the shroud of turin, and just because you have a box that say a james existed that was a brother of jesus tells us *nothing* about _which_ jesus, or weather or not any of the magic he performed _actually happened._ The idea that _someone wrote it down in a book in 70ad and the name _*_Mark_*_ was added in the 3rd century_ doesn't give me confidence that these are firsthand accounts, esp since they were written after the works of paul, who *still* missed jesus by 7 years and got his information from visions and talking animals. So, _God would know_ what evidence would convince me, but what comes to mind is seeing *actual magic* be performed like the ancients described, and I would *also* find effective prayers convincing.

[@ColbyHiggs]

By the way, Jesus rose bodily from the grave!

[@zenbum2654]

(24:30) "We call this 'PROOF of the Resurrection.' The reason we use that term is to draw people in. We want people to watch this content." In other words: Click Bait. That being said, however, I enjoyed this discussion very much. Thank you.

[@thinboxdictator6720]

if you're here from pinecreek, skip to 1:14:08

[@melissaflanary7]

Thank you I enjoy every minutes with you all

[@melissaflanary7]

Jesus rose from the bodily dead

[@josephgreen1553]

Confession: I like reading the comments before I even watch the video. It’s interesting to see how many people who don’t believe in God/Jesus feel the need to watch and comment. I find it interesting when people devote so much time and effort into something they claim doesn’t exist. I don’t see this as much on unicorn videos, odd...

[@mbb--]

It's an even weirder "hobby" considering they believe they have a finite, relatively short time before their total annihilation.

[@roys1057]

@@mbb-- haha you have a point

[@roys1057]

Personally, I love having conversations about these sorts of things. It's fascinating to have discussions with people whose worldview is fundamentally different to your own. Keeping those discussions fruitful and respectful is a real challenge, as I'm sure you'll agree. It's the kind of challenge I really like. And I'm sure discussions about Christianity interest me the most because I was brought up Christian. When I deconverted as a teen, as far as I knew I was the only atheist around. Basically I went from one paradigm to another, and now I'm fascinated by the distance between the two.

[@roys1057]

Can I ask, why are you interested in Christian apologetics?

[@alonsohdzf]

That's because there are no temples, holidays, institutions, communities and justified massacre/dehumanization of other cultures based on the unproven existence of a unicorn that supposedly rose to the sky more than 2,000 years ago, I'd say. Yeah, I like reading the comments before watching the video too.

[@sowerandseedsministries2203]

In the first century, writing was a costly affair and no one would spend their time and money for a lie. Not everyone could afford those writing materials... So the very thing that many historians in 1st century wrote about Lord Jesus Christ in itself confirms that Jesus Christ was a real person.

[@wolfgerber4839]

Jesus is real .I was dead for 40 min and met the lord ..but I'm going to leaf it there .I don't fear death anymore .now I'm a Christian I love jesus christ .Prince of pease .

[@cloudoftime]

Wow, how much are they going to talk about how many pages and how big the books are? That really doesn't indicate there is any good evidence there.

[@thstroyur]

That's prolly because no amount of evidence will ever be any good for certain people out there.

[@cloudoftime]

@@thstroyur Wait, you think they're talking about the size of the books because no amount of evidence will be good enough for some people? How does that follow?

[@thstroyur]

@@cloudoftime "How does that follow?" The better question is 'How does that _not_ follow?'; we frequently hear the complaint: "Where's the evidence?" - well, there's the literature, sonny...

[@cloudoftime]

@@thstroyur I'll just lay it out for you since you apparently don't understand logic. *It does NOT follow.* The size of books has nothing to do with the substance, or lack thereof, within them. The size doesn't count as evidence when substance isn't a factor either. Stupid. The "literature" doesn't get to the Ressurection. There is a reason why people like Habermas have to use OTHER "historical facts" to come to his assumption, and why the Ressurection itself is NOT considered a historical fact. There is no prior probability for the supernatural. It is the weakest explanation, arrived at through religious confirmation bias.

[@thstroyur]

@@cloudoftime "I'll just lay it out for you since you apparently don't understand logic" So you're smarter than me, huh? OK, I'm convinced already "It does NOT follow. The size of books has nothing to do with the substance, or lack thereof, within them. The size doesn't count as evidence when substance isn't a factor either. Stupid" Well, did I claim that _sheer_ quantity is substitute of quality? Stupid. Can't take being corrected, have to resort to petty insults; lemme guess, twelve, thirteen? Go back to your Minecraft or whatever... "The "literature" doesn't get to the Ressurection. There is a reason why people like Habermas have to use OTHER "historical facts" to come to his assumption, and why the Ressurection itself is NOT considered a historical fact" In other words, no matter how many arguments are put forward nor that they conform to the standards of historicity, they will _never_ be good enough; gotcha... "There is no prior probability for the supernatural. It is the weakest explanation, arrived at through religious confirmation bias" Lemme guess--Hume? "Now, a miracle is defined as: "a *transgression* of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent." Laws of nature, however, are established by *"a firm and unalterable experience"* ; they rest upon the exceptionless testimony of countless people in different places and times. Nothing is esteemed a miracle, if it ever happen in the common course of nature. [...] But it is a miracle, that a dead man should come to life; because that has never been observed in any age or country." ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_Miracles#The_argument ) Yeah--begging the question is, indeed, the strongest explanation, here...

[@lemuelbach]

I wanted to add something to the discussion of proof vs evidence. When critics of Christianity demand "proof," I don't think they actually know what that would look like. Do they want a video of the resurrection? Videos can be tampered with. Do they want a time machine? They don't have one right now and still need to make a decision. Do they want to directly experience every event they doubt? That's impossible, and people trust good eyewitnesses, such as their friends, all the time. Anyway, the type of evidence that you would expect to exist-ancient documents and histories-do exist.

[@alexandralee8889]

What they have is a heart issue.

[@thecrowing1989]

Atheist here. Do they want a video of the resurrection? No. Do they want a time machine? No. Do they want to directly experience every event they doubt? No. ancient documents and histories-do exist. The issue is the documentation is bad. You and I are looking at the same evidence (letters of Paul, etc). We just don't find the evidence compelling and all of the evidence can be easily explained by natural means. There isn't a single minimal fact that is hard to explain naturally.

[@spanish_realms]

BTW merely repeating the words "Jesus rose bodily from the dead", as some people insist on doing here, has a truth value of zero. You might as well assert "Mickey Mouse is Donald Trump in a tutu."

[@thstroyur]

BTW the same can be said of comments such as yours, as some people insist on doing here

[@spanish_realms]

@@thstroyur You do not provide any evidence of your claim so,unfortunately, have negated any value that might be attached to it.

[@thstroyur]

@@spanish_realms You do not provide any evidence of your claim so,unfortunately, have negated any value that might be attached to it.

[@Hieiman]

@@thstroyur What claim did he make?

[@ronboyd9]

Now, that is something you could prove with a photo of the two compared side by side!

[@ItIsAllgood1219]

By The Way, "Jesus Rose Bodily From The Grave."

[@DamianS1893]

Awesome ✝️🙏✝️👍🤙✌️

[@Syd_3]

Great chat. Oh and by the way Jesus rose bodily from the dead

[@erichamilton3734]

BTW Yashuah ha'Mashiah (Jesus Christ) rose bodily from the grave. Thank you great interview.

[@benjamincain2792]

BTW, he likely didn't, because the suggestion of such miracles is preposterous. Don't take my word for it, whatever you do. Notice that nearly every so-called Christian lives in a wholly secular fashion, as if no such miracle had ever occurred. The reason for such secularization, of course, is that our daily activities require that we be at least half-way rational, to put on our clothes efficiently, to walk around without bumping into things, and to eat healthy meals and so on, which makes it easy to pay lip service to the idea of miracles, to fit into certain social clubs, but next to impossible to actually believe miracles occur. Show me a Christian who gives up all his possessions to take up his cross like Jesus, howling like a crazy person in the streets and totally indifferent to every aspect of secular society, and I'll show you one of the handful of people who actually believe a man named Jesus rose bodily from the grave two millennia ago, because he was actually the creator of the universe in human form.

[@benjamincain2792]

@@directordissy2858 Luckily, I get to dismiss your argument by assertion. But who even knows what you're saying? Are you trying to say there's no evidence in support of what I was saying? Or that what I was saying doesn't merit a critic's effort to provide contrary evidence? Who knows! Feel free to try again, though.

[@aaronfleming9426]

@@benjamincain2792 I find it interesting that many people reject anthropogenic climate change on the same basis as your rejection of the resurrection, to wit: "If Al Gore really believed in global warming, he would live in a grass hut with no electricity". This feels like a great zinger, especially when delivered in a mocking or dismissive tone, but it is neither a logical nor a scientific argument against climate change. Hypocrites are super annoying, but it doesn't mean their arguments or evidence are wrong. It is also fascinating that, while you reject certain aspects of the gospel record, you seem to fancy yourself a better-than-average interpreter of the meaning of the words of Jesus. Among your more bizarre interpretations is that a true believer should be "howling like a crazy person in the streets". I have read the gospels many times, but I just can't imagine which of Jesus' teachings you are referencing. Please elucidate.

[@benjamincain2792]

@@aaronfleming9426 I agree that hypocrisy doesn’t prove the wrongness of the hypocrite’s beliefs. The implicit argument I was attempting to make is that Christian hypocrisy is consistent with the preposterousness of her theological beliefs. I was assuming that the idea of Jesus’s resurrection is preposterous and I was saying the Christian needn’t take my word for it, since she can look at her likely hypocrisy and secularization as corroborating pieces of evidence. Preposterousness is different than falsehood. The point is that the Christian creed is outlandish, archaic, and obviously crazy. The fact that there are so many compromised or secularized Christians shows that they implicitly think the same. That doesn’t prove logically that the creed is false, but it does support the claim that the creed is preposterous on its face and isn’t a worthy contender for people’s attention. Of course, there are many separate historical, literary, philosophical, and scientific reasons to think the resurrection never happened as presented in the New Testament. Regarding the point about how the Christian or any believer in the supernatural should be running around the streets like a crazy person, I was speaking hyperbolically. But the point is about Jesus’s actions, not just his explicit statements. Obviously he didn’t tell his followers to act crazy. From a non-Christian standpoint, though, the actions of authentic, true-believing Christians would appear crazy. That’s why Jesus’s mother regarded him as crazy, according to the gospels. Why would Jesus have appeared insane, given that he was convinced an invisible world is more important than anything going on in the apparent one? Let’s count the ways: his ascetic teachings (sell all your possessions, turn the other cheek, etc) were consistent with those of the Essenes or of the authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls, who segregated themselves from civilization and who hung out in the wilderness. Jesus himself went into the desert for a long time (40 days, which was symbolic for a long time), where he fasted and spoke with the devil, according to the NT. Jesus went into the Temple and violently expelled the money changers. He thought the world was going to end soon and that God required from everyone absolute dedication to spiritual matters or they would burn forever in hell. Also, Jesus allowed himself to be crucified by the Romans even though he knew he didn’t deserve that punishment. Anyone today who spoke and acted like Jesus allegedly did would be diagnosed as suffering from religious paranoia and delusion. So when Christians act more secularized than crazy and Christ-like, yeah, it’s a bit of a letdown.