Evidence for the Resurrection (Dr. William Lane Craig)

[@GulfsideMinistries]

I shared a presentation like this almost twenty years ago with a young man. After about an hour of discussing the evidence, he finally suggested (after trying all the other debunked arguments) that maybe aliens had stolen Jesus' body and then impersonated Him to start a world religion. I've told people THAT story many, many times to illustrate two things: 1) the extent to which people will go in their irrationality to deny the clear facts of the resurrection of Jesus; and 2) how strong those facts must be to force people into such ludicrous positions. Christ is risen!

[@jounisuninen]

You know, that's just one more example of the fact that this "war" in deeper level is the war between atheism and truth, between Satan and God. Atheism is a godless religion and you can not convince an atheist with any facts. We should remember that after all the miracles Jesus did while He was dwelling on earth, the pharisees still demanded from Him "a sign" as if any sign could change their denialist mind.

[@atheistangel007]

"the clear facts of the resurrection of Jesus" Yeah...except there are none.

[@Matthewa0227]

He is Risen INDEED

[@atheistangel007]

@@Matthewa0227 Viagra works!

[@ramigilneas9274]

Or… the gospels are mostly fiction…

[@markwalters4797]

A clear, reasoned, and concise argument for the historic resurrection of Christ! Truly enjoyed it. Thanks Dr. Craig!

[@atheistangel007]

And completely full of shit.

[@renemartin5729]

According to legend, Jesus got so blasted that he woke up 3 days later in a cave not remembering how he got there.

[@deniswallace-vp9tb]

All I hear is blah blah blah bullshit, all Christians will say anything no matter how it sounds

[@adarsh9928]

I lived a very wretched life before I knew Jesus. But Jesus came into my life and he changed me and gave me peace that surpasses all understanding.

[@dajusta87]

Praise God! Your story should be told to so many people.

[@tylerhickey7070]

I say, praise God for saving you. Rejoice that your name is written in Heaven.

[@catbilota2492]

Turu Turu Turu ae Turu tu tata ta 😂 love bro live from india

[@the_adherent6717]

This brought tears to my eyes! Amen, Come Lord Jesus!

[@ricabel321]

@Greg W Just to let you know.... I am Still HERE! Haven't been hit by a Bolt of Lightning.... ... ... ... YET!!!!!!!!

[@zweihander7309]

I couldn't accept Christianity as the true word of God until I looked into the historical accountability of the resurrection of Jesus but I always had some sense or dare I say belief in a higher omniscient god and now this TRUE FACT that Jesus was resurrected by God on the third day, after he had died for our mortal sins, now stands as my foundation for my belief in the true god and the holy spirit, this is only the beginning and I have much to learn but I am grateful for this knowledge of the truth of Jesus 🙏

[@renemartin5729]

According to legend, Jesus got so blasted that he woke up 3 days later in a cave not remembering how he got there.

[@josephtattum6365]

Finally, after many years of searching for truth, I have become a Christian. It just makes sense. The end.

[@chavedaffee520]

One of the funnier comments out there, simple as.

[@josephtattum6365]

@kst kst Not sure what you mean my dude, sorry but I don't understand your issue. You don't know me or what I have searched for. What does any of what you said have to do with whether or not Christianity is true? I am not sure what your beef is bro.

[@ISAiah.42]

@kst kst Shut up you idiot you dont know anything about the Truth you moron haha hahha you hellbound moron you promote no religion and wishful thinking m.. hahah truth , you dont even know Jacksh*t about the Bible lol and you're trying to lecture others on here, you're nothing but a moron we all just found out after talking to your dumbass

[@ISAiah.42]

@@josephtattum6365 Don't listen to that idiot, he has no clue where he is going in the afterlife, he dont believe in none of the sh*t he preaches, after talking to him, we found out he's nothing but a confused idiot, using the Bible to prove there is no God hahahahhahaha how logical does that sound

[@ISAiah.42]

@kst kst Nope, Im a former Christian and I'm an American you stupid ass prejudice bigot, we're all from a third world country to your swine eating stupid ass LoL shows how Ignorant you are.

[@jesussotelo4775]

William Lane Craig is an absolute soldier of Jesus Christ our lord and savior, God bless this man.

[@dallasburns7806]

Jesus Sotelo His main evidence is from people who were members of the Christian cult. 🤦‍♂️

[@jesussotelo4775]

@@dallasburns7806 what constitutes a Christian "cult"?

[@dallasburns7806]

Jesus Sotelo I mean his main source is the Bible. It’s easy to Mark it as evidence when it says it’s inspired by God. How do you know the Bible is inspired by God. Because the Bible says so?

[@jesussotelo4775]

@@dallasburns7806 let's remove theology for a moment, do you believe in some sort of God or higher power?

[@dallasburns7806]

Jesus Sotelo I was a Christian for around 30 years. Now I would argue that I’m quite agnostic on that point of a “higher power”

[@jamalkhan3708]

Greetings from Pakistan. Dr Lane Crage you are an inspiration. Your messages touched my heart and mind. thank you !

[@emkfenboi]

Bruh, I've seen you everywhere , I can guarantee that you are a certified Islamophobe 🤣.

[@TheOtherCaleb]

Study Vlog kzbin.info/www/bejne/aqDJXoOYh9uXp9E Watch it.

[@sharnsam2840]

@@emkfenboi Read carefully. He didn't mention Islam in this comment of his.

[@amenjamal8454]

We have same name and im from Pakistan too

[@jamalkhan3708]

@@amenjamal8454 me too from Pakistan ❤️

[@agentjs09]

The bit at the beginning about his parents really struck a chord for me. This past February I went to Kansas for my grandfather's funeral. I realized that this was the first time anyone close to me had passed away. I was really hit with a profound sense of loss. Being in that house without grandpa around was very sad. And like Dr. Craig, on my 12 hour drive home, it made me long ever more for the resurrection.

[@benjaminb3957]

Jesus bless you. I know it's been 5 months, but I pray your pain has grown easier to carry.

[@yumeniya]

It’s the same for me. My grandfather died because someone killed him and it was also almost 8 months ago and my first loss (I’m 23). And it made me overthink everything but I was a Christian who blindly believed and his death shattered my whole view of a loving God because he didn’t hear my prayers to save my grandfather (he was in hospital for 10 days prior to his death and there was a 50% chance of surviving the incident which caused his death). But now, reading and informing myself about Christianity, I came to long the resurrection to be true.

[@nateboy123]

@@yumeniya My grandpa (the most of a father figure I’ll probably ever have) passed away 10, almost 11 months ago. He passed unexpectedly. I’ll be praying for you and your family 🙏❤️

[@jaynerulo6785]

I too long for a resurrection. Who wouldn't? However, being an adult, I have to deal with reality as it is. I would rather deal with a sad truth than a comforting lie. This life is all we have and...it's glorious and should be enough.

[@Joshcaldwell24]

@@jaynerulo6785 while I would agree I hope you don’t mean Christianity as the comfortable lie. A lot of anti theist would disagree that it’s comfortable they believe it’s even immoral but have no standard to judge it.

[@JacksonLGarner]

This is a great watch/listen. Packed with an incredible amount of information, which makes a half an hour video feel like a few minutes.

[@erickjmedina]

Thank God Dr. Craig! Keep sharing the Word of God! You are such a blessing to people in all walks of life.🙌🏼❤️😊😇🙏🏼☝🏼

[@rationalsceptic7634]

Ha..what a load of Bullshit from a big Liar kzbin.info/www/bejne/q33GfGaLpZ2tbcU kzbin.info/www/bejne/mILQfnmHr9d4qcU kzbin.info/www/bejne/o6i4i4KQg5JsmsU kzbin.info/www/bejne/p3XXaKqZatOhbac kzbin.info/www/bejne/bWq4coyvgr6ebas kzbin.info/www/bejne/aGmzm4mXjJmegas kzbin.info/www/bejne/hKSte2hsm96ciaM kzbin.info/www/bejne/h5Kof4Nnh5KfmLs kzbin.info/www/bejne/o32Uloyef8iCqas kzbin.info/www/bejne/oZPbaYuFgLukpJI kzbin.info/www/bejne/oZ-ahXildp6UqM0 kzbin.info/www/bejne/goXPnXZticeAbq8

[@プレイフルクラウド]

@@rationalsceptic7634 Unfortunately for you, Colin, this sort of comment i.e posting multiple sources to mascarade as 'evidence' for the conclusion, which in this case is to suggest that Craig is a "big liar", merely serves as to indicate your inability to express any fortuitous argument for the affirmation. The appeal to authority has gone to show the rather vacuous and complacent attitude you possess.

[@aidank2108]

@@プレイフルクラウド Yeah what a loser

[@Dr.vonKrankenhausen]

@@プレイフルクラウド Why don't you take a look at those videos if you have the balls and tell us what you think. Try to use that lonely brain cell of yours for once. WLG is a liar and you are dumb enough to buy his shit, there's no doubt about that.

[@Dr.vonKrankenhausen]

@@aidank2108 found a friend moron 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 you really are the most pathetic troll ever.

[@theseeker6097]

Well done! Praise Christ and our Holy Father and Holy Spirit!

[@JonahGobah]

This teaching is deep and profound. I am convinced beyond every reasonable doubt that Jesus rose triumphantly on the third day and he's seated on the right hand side of God interceding for us. God bless you Dr Craig.

[@duncanbryson1167]

Haven't watched this but you're gullible. Why would mere words whether written or spoken convince you of the supernatural? I've watched/ listened to him and others elsewhere and their "arguments" are puerile.

[@bakermichael9959]

Blessings Jonah

[@zweihander7309]

I could never accept Christianity as the true word of God until I looked into the historical accountability of the resurrection of Jesus and now this TRUE FACT that Jesus was resurrected by God on the third day, after he had died for our mortal sins, now stands as my foundation for my belief in the true god and the holy spirit, this is only the beginning and I have much to learn but I am grateful for this knowledge of the truth of Jesus 🙏

[@Coffee1776]

@Duncan Bryson I can use words to convince you of many things in life. It's called logic. I do not need scientific evidence to prove the existence of some things. Sometimes it just takes common sense. You wouldn't need to conduct an experiment to figure out if people are happy when they win the lottery. Your logic and common sense would just tell you that.

[@duncanbryson1167]

@@zweihander7309 Jesus Christ may have existed but only as a human being. There's no evidence of anyone coming back from the dead, only claims. Nor is there any evidence of deities or anything else supernatural.

[@diegotheservantofgod1826]

The theory of the twin brother of Jesus sound so ridiculous i think even if i were a skeptical i would think that theory so ridiculous. That only shows the desperate way to deny the evidence of resurrection of Jesus Christ.

[@Dr.vonKrankenhausen]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 sure, desperate to deny something that has never been proven in the first place.

[@GreekOrthodox7]

@@Dr.vonKrankenhausen Isaac Newton, the man who discovered calculus, the primary laws of physics, and considered by many to be the greatest scientist of all time, said: “He who thinks half-heartedly will not believe in God; but he who really thinks has to believe in God.” “I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by those who were inspired. I study the Bible daily.” “In the absence of any other proof, the thumb alone would convince me of God’s existence.” “Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind.” Or how about Galileo Galilei the father of observational astronomy, the father of modern physics, the father of the scientific method, and the father of modern science: “God is known by nature in His works, and by doctrine in His revealed Word.” “Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe.” And one of my favorites, René Descartes, inventor of analytical geometry, father of modern philosophy, early writer of optics, and the very one who introduced skepticism as an essential part of the scientific method: “I see plainly that the certainty and truth of all knowledge depends uniquely on my awareness of the true God, to such an extent that I was incapable of perfect knowledge about anything until I became aware of Him.” Also, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz was a prominent German polymath and one of the most important logicians, mathematicians, and natural philosophers in history. He is also credited with discovering Calculus, and he said: “It is God who is the ultimate reason of things, and the knowledge of God is no less the beginning of science than His essence and will are the beginning of beings.” And just one more example; Sir Francis Bacon was the first to formally put together the scientific method, which is what every scientist has used since the 17th century to collect measurable, empirical evidence of something. Sir Francis Bacon said, “A little knowledge of science makes man an atheist, but an in-depth study of science makes him a believer in God.”

[@ramigilneas9274]

@@GreekOrthodox7 Newton also said that believing in the trinity is idolatry and the worst sin a Christian can commit. And he believed in alchemy and lots of other dumb nonsense but he was pretty smart for his time.

[@granjmy]

@@GreekOrthodox7 Oh that is so good! Thank you!

[@lzt2355]

@@Dr.vonKrankenhausen Desperate enough to make bogus claims with less credibility.

[@Sthembiso2020]

I love this ❤❤. He's Risen.

[@laraxx3694]

Dr. William Lane Craig, thank you very much. Great stuff you are giving us here. 🙏🙏👏💐

[@atheistangel007]

If by "great stuff" you mean _"a whole lotta nonsense",_ then yeah I agree with you.

[@atheistangel007]

@Yeshua The Only Truth "The history" of what exactly?

[@atheistangel007]

@Yeshua The Only Truth Ah, so please tell us what evidence OUTSIDE of the Bible proves that a man came back to live after being dead?

[@atheistangel007]

@Yeshua The Only Truth "the coward disciples became brave when they saw their Master risen from the dead" And how do you know this happened?

[@atheistangel007]

@Yeshua The Only Truth "If you know Judaism , they don't have a concept of dying messiah" Because according to Judaism, the "Christ" was not Jesus. "Even the apostles before crucifixion cannot believed Jesus' prophecy on His death" And how do you know this?

[@charmendro]

Please Pray for me because i am doubting :(

[@jtheist32]

If your belief can't stand up to a little doubt then you don't have good reason for it. You should be doubting it.

[@JD-ro7xe]

Doubting and asking questions is a sign of intelligence. Rejoice you are not a lost case. Doubt it, ask questions and if it's true, your faith will remain unscathed. Otherwise it was not worth it anyway.

[@kevinroum9343]

Please don't bother praying for me because I am doubting.

[@orbitamusic316]

@@kevinroum9343 you still deserve some prayers. But it's your choice

[@kevinroum9343]

@@orbitamusic316 i dont want prayers that I didn't ask for. I find it intrusive and condescending

[@MLeoM]

Thank you GracePres for supporting WLC's ministry and also for uploading this video.

[@petemartin4300]

The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple

[@puppy172]

He is risen ! ☺️

[@atheistangel007]

Really? Where?

[@solomonyiheyis1623]

@@atheistangel007 i pray for you .for open your eyes.

[@atheistangel007]

@@solomonyiheyis1623 "i pray for you .for open your eyes" To what exactly?

[@atheistangel007]

@Andrew Meawad "Truly HE is risen" In what way exactly?

[@atheistangel007]

@Andrew Meawad "To know Christ , The divine God , Christ blood made the Gentile sons of God" You "know" your interpretation based on your favorite version of a badly written book.

[@mariej6962]

Jesus, i know that you came to save me through your resurrection. When you rose from the dead i was set free. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for me and for the rest of the world. God wins not because He can make it be, yes He do make things happen, but because God is so good and true.

[@louiscyfer6944]

there is no evidence for the resurrection. you are just making stupid assertions.

[@GreekOrthodox7]

@@louiscyfer6944 Hahaha, you didn’t even watch the video. I know so many people who used to be hardcore atheists and literally became devout Christians after specifically studying the history of the Resurrection of Jesus. You are extremely ignorant and deceived; you know nothing. To say there is no evidence is an extreme display of ignorance.

[@louiscyfer6944]

@@GreekOrthodox7 well then present the evidence. assertions are not evidence. i watched the video, it didn't contain evidence.

[@skeensmachine597]

@@louiscyfer6944 the writings of josephus are compelling considering he lived around the time of Jesus. I'd start there if you want to really find out for yourself instead of just relying on one youtube video and some randy in the comment section

[@louiscyfer6944]

@@skeensmachine597 are you stupid? Josephus lived well after jesus. he was born after jesus died. he recorded what the christians believed, and he doesn't talk about jesus resurrecting. that part is a well known later forgery added. i had 8 years of theology you dumb shit, i am not going off of a youtube video.

[@Halo9K]

If Jesus had NOT been raised from the dead, then the last 1,990 years of history would be completely different from what we know! We would not even know He ever lived!! There would have been NO out pouring of the Holy Spirit and therefore no church established. The ripple effect of the resurrection touches everything we know either directly or indirectly! We would have no mention of Jesus in external documents and no New Testament! Btw, it was 33AD, not 30!

[@ramigilneas9274]

The effect from a resurrection is indistinguishable from the effect of a belief in a resurrection.

[@Halo9K]

@@ramigilneas9274 We’ll see, won’t we?

[@Halo9K]

@@ramigilneas9274 The point is that without the resurrection, this conversation would not even be taking place. If not for the resurrection, no one would even know who Jesus is or that He ever lived! Without His resurrection, Jesus would have been just another nameless Jew crucified by the Romans. End of story.

[@ramigilneas9274]

@@Halo9K There were hundreds of saviors just like Jesus… and we know the names of some of them. Jesus is just the most famous version… mostly by accident.😉

[@Halo9K]

@@ramigilneas9274 Really??? Just like Jesus??? None are even in the same ballpark, not even close. Have any of the pretenders affected history for the last 2,000 years as Jesus has? Have any of them been even remotely the focus of so much literature, plays, movies? There are bookstores filled with books about, inspired by or influenced by Jesus. There is no other person in history that has so affected the course of that history like Jesus. None. He is the reason that until recently history was divided as BC (Before Christ) and AD (In the year of our Lord)! Sure, there are pretenders but only Jesus conquered death!!! Again, if He hadn’t we wouldn’t be having this conversation. We wouldn’t even know He existed!

[@monkkeygawd]

“Religions are divisive and quarrelsome. They are a form of one-upmanship because they depend upon separating the “saved” from the “damned,” the true believers from the heretics, the in-group from the out-group… All belief is fervent hope, and thus a cover-up for doubt and uncertainty.” ~ Alan Watts

[@robertgroen2197]

The irony of such a statement is it’s doing the same thing it criticizes: It’s showing one-upmanship against all religions , and he obviously believes it without fervently. So my question is, is he using it to coverup his own doubts and uncertainties about his own worldview?

[@robertgroen2197]

*believes it believes it fervently

[@monkkeygawd]

@@robertgroen2197 no. He's saying EVERYTHING is OK, no worries, no one is saved or damned... things just are. Enjoy the ride. It's eternal.

[@monkkeygawd]

@@robertgroen2197 Watts wasn't offering any specific "religion" to replace any, just a way of understanding that we can't understand. But... via self inquiry, we can find peace.

[@jeremiahmeade710]

@@monkkeygawd Here's the deal: We live in a universe where things grow, but, also, where growing isn't always certain, i.e. growing has to be done in a particular way in order for it to be growing in the first place. The difference between "the true believers" and "the heretics" is that the prior is more grown-up than the latter, at least from the prior's perspective. The fact remains, though, that if one had a beginning, then one was, at one point, less than one was at a later point, for to begin is to become more than nothing. Due to the nature of growing, which, if removed from the universe, would stop the universe altogether, it is clear that something which had power to begin with, without ever needing to grow, nor ever growing, preexisted the universe, for one cannot grow at all without there first being something to grow into. Thus, the distinction between "the true believers" and "the heretics" is sourced in the very foundation of life and the universe, which foundation is God who is worshipped by acting like God, which actions can only be accomplished, by something which had a beginning, after growing, so that all true growing is inseparable from proof of the inherent necessity of religion in order for things which need to grow, to grow at all. As for the assumption that “EVERYTHING is OK”: God, being the foundation of life, is good, so that all that contradicts God is evil. It is not “OK” to be evil because God made a universe where things grow. If God thought evil was “OK”, then growing would be pointless, as God would not want to create, as there would be no difference between life and death, and God would have no advantage over the absence of something.

[@aleflucas7169]

Jesus lives!

[@tonymaionchi168]

@PLAIN AS PLANE he does indeed!

[@atheistangel007]

"Jesus lives!" ...only in the minds of those that believe it.

[@m.a.sperry3424]

"Jesus saves. Moses invests".

[@alishalileh]

Amen

[@eduard7624]

Praise the Lord!😍

[@busterbiloxi3833]

Praise Zeus!

[@Navii-05]

@@busterbiloxi3833 Praise a false god if you really want to

[@Navii-05]

@Dd S Praise a false god if you really want to

[@Navii-05]

@Dd S Not according to evidence!

[@Navii-05]

@Dd S War god?You May have mixed something up...But ok...Do you know that infinite regression is scientifically impossible?

[@thebeast656]

Thank you Dr. Craig. This is incredible the way you present the problems and the solutions to each. Wow I'm amazed by this.

[@maninalift]

He does a very good job. He presents his arguments very clearly and gives clear reasons to rebut the counter arguments which he gives. Unfortunately the more familiarity you gain with the counter arguments, the more you will see that Dr Craig avoids the difficult problems, misrepresents the counter arguments and misrepresents the evidence. It would be worthwhile for you to familiarise yourself with the arguments actually made by counter-apologists to see where the gap is. I would be very happy to provide links for recommended places to start. Most likely he does all of this sincerely and prayerfully. However, he is well paid for his appearances, it would be naive to discount the possibility that he is simply dishonest. The most damming evidence for this is not the selection of "facts" he presents which could be just a manifestation of confirmation bias, but the way he appears to carefully word statements in a way that seems to be designed to mislead while not being factually false. This is harder to do by accident.

[@atheistangel007]

Aren't apologetics _wonderful?_

[@markrichter2053]

I love the way he itemises his points as “Fact Number 1, Fact Number 2,…3, etc,” when they are arguments, or suggestions in support of a theory, and not fact in any sort of objective way. This shows that he’s creating an argument that is designed to please and comfort those who have already decided or don’t want to think for themselves. Of course preaching to the converted like this is a lucrative proposition. And it’s easy. You don’t need any real intellectual rigour or academic depth. This audience are not asking tough questions. They want easy answers and they’re getting them.

[@freegraceau]

He’s infinitely smarter and more honest than you are.

[@acp865]

I’m a 57-year-old Texas man, was a Christian for most of my life, but my beliefs have changed these last few years. I want to have something to believe in, but not just for the sake of believing. I have a question that’s been asked several times in KZbin, inquiring why God doesn’t appear to us. But the person being addressed will either rephrase the question, or simply dance around it. I get it, no one can legitimately answer that particular question. I don’t know that I am truly an atheist, agnostic, etc - I just don’t know what to believe. I’ve asked these questions several times, and one of the harshest answers I’ve gotten is “if you’re not a believer, then you’ll burn in hell for eternity“. So I have a scenario: Jack and Joe are equally good people. Both of them are selfless, are constantly giving of themselves to help those who are clearly suffering. Even if it’s just a kind word, a hug, words of encouragement and sympathy, they are both quick to do it, without a thought or a request of getting anything in return. Neither of them strike or raise a hand to anyone, nor do they have hurtful words for anyone. Jack is a Christian, while Joe is not. Joe knows there is something powerful and all-knowing out there, but feels strongly that it’s not a god. I’m told that the Christian belief is that Jack will go to his just reward, but what of Joe? I have a very dear friend who is a Christian, and she says Joe will also go to his reward, but she was unable to tell me more than that. I want to genuinely believe something, it’s just that being told to “have faith“ or to “love yourself“ doesn’t quite do it for me. Any thoughts?

[@orbitamusic316]

Sometimes we don't even have the right to say anyone is a good person. You can do good but maybe you aren't good. Joe is making a choice just as Jack. Jack chose to recognize his creator and worship him whilst continuing his selfless activities. And in recognition of his creator, Jack tends to listen to his creator and act according to what his creator demands and limit himself unto things he ought to. But Joe on the other hand doesn't recognize his creator. He has the impression that 'well there is a creator but I don't know him'. So Joe goes about his normal works and doesn't know what is good in the eyes of the creator or what is bad. He acts just like he wants. Who will get a reward if put in your judgment scale?

[@acp865]

@@orbitamusic316 If you’re mincing what I meant between good and bad, then you totally missed my point.

[@orbitamusic316]

@@acp865 totally unrelated to my comments please. I have no intentions whatsoever to portray morality here. I just answered your scenario

[@contractpro]

@@orbitamusic316 No you just totally missed his point and didn't answer his question

[@bobbyfischersays1262]

Both Jack and Joe are sinners. No man is good. They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Psalm 14:3 Their good deeds won't do them any good. But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. Isaiah 64:6 If you go to court here on earth, your good deeds won't save you. You get punished for your crimes. Same thing in God's court. You need a Saviour - Jesus. God offers salvation from death, redemption from sin and eternal life as a FREE GIFT. You can't earn it with good works. Any attempt to do so would be insulting. Imagine you gave your son a new car and he gave you ten bucks and said "we're even". The one who believes in Jesus, calls on His name and has a relationship with Him is going to heaven. The other one is going to hell.

[@randypacchioli2933]

Dr. Craig is one of the best apologists for the Christian faith !!!

[@atheistangel007]

Which isn't saying much.

[@randypacchioli2933]

We have a God that is Wonderful. 👍

[@atheistangel007]

@@randypacchioli2933 Then your standards must be extremely low and you are clearly morally and intellectually bankrupt.

[@hitman5782]

I would agree, i would also argue that he never presented anything valid at all. Put i mean what will you expect when you debate the existence of something that doesn´t exist. No matter how smart you are, you will never be able to talk fairytales into existence.

[@Peter-wl3tm]

@Hit Man “ i would also argue that he never presented anything valid at all.” To argue is to give evidence, so what evidence do you have to show that his points are invalid?

[@dennisfakoory5627]

When Bill said being there made me miss my mom and dad he said it with so much sincerity that he made me miss my dad. Thankfully, as Christians we KNOW WE WILL SEE THEM AGAIN!!!

[@m.a.sperry3424]

DO WE?

[@midimusicforever]

Jesus is risen!

[@HarryFaber-z7l]

He is risen indeed! Hallelujah!

[@Jeliar]

🙏🙏🙏AMEN.

[@timsteinkamp2245]

Not a mention of the true gift from Jesus resurrection. The giving of the Holy Spirit on that first Pentecost so we can talk to the living Jesus. Maybe that is where Christians get their faith, in prayer to Jesus and asking him to transform our ways. Asking for wisdom, understanding and compassion man is blessed. Using the Holy Spirit we can fight the good fight.

[@paulwood6636]

Dr Craig mentioned right up front that the internal witness is a fine reason for believing in Jesus. Here he is making an evidential argument rather than an experiential argument.

[@bobg.7976]

At 6:36, he says if an event is attested to by multiple sources that are independent of each other it is much more probable the event is historical rather than made up. -- The accounts of the resurrection are all by the earliest members of the Christian sect. If a man is horribly murdered and maimed and a few days later 500+ see him alive again and unharmed surely it was the sensational event of the epoch for all Israel. It's odd that Josephus other pagan historians who reference Jesus don't mention it.

[@freegraceau]

And if someone reported that 500 people saw the risen Jesus then it would be ridiculously easy to refute and stop Christianity in its tracks.

[@AtamMardes]

"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool." *Voltaire*

[@jeremiahmeade710]

Do you mean to tell me that the universe came out of nothing?

[@AtamMardes]

@@jeremiahmeade710 Did your God make the universe from nothing or from something?? And how do you know that?

[@AtamMardes]

@@jeremiahmeade710 Don't get confused please. It's religion, not science, that says the universe came from nothing. The big bang is the expansion of existing condensed matter. Nobody knows if the changing matter is eternal or was created from nothing. And when you don't know something you should be honest & admit it instead of concluding that a conscious invisible creator did it just bc you desperately need a conclusion to end your discomfort with your uncertainty. Capisci?

[@jeremiahmeade710]

@@AtamMardes You have begun with a false premise. It is neither religion nor science that claims that the universe came from nothing: religion and science are *not* mutually exclusive. Science is the study of the universe, while religion, when done properly, is submission to the source of the universe that science studies. Indeed, we would have no science at all except that we were driven by our desire for glory which, in order to satiate, we need to obey the commands for us from the God who created the universe, and science is one way of gaining the power to obey those commands, thereby winning glory. The universe, insomuch as it is alive, is an expression of God: he speaks through its living parts. Thus, God did not create the universe out of nothing, but, adding himself to the void, gave to it life, so that the universe, insomuch as it has order, is God. God is what the universe is made out of, and matter is an expression of God, so that matter is made out of God insomuch as it has order. God, however, is not confined to the universe, just as a speaker is not confined to a single word and trees are not confined to the use of building log cabins. Thus, God’s invisible qualities have been clearly seeable since the dawn of time. As it is also written: 'For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead…' (Romans 1:20 NKJV). One only claims that the universe came from nothing if one has claimed, contrary to science, that something, which had a beginning, was *not* begun by something greater than what it was before it began. Thus, the claim that the universe came from nothing can only be made by one who hates God, and all who hate God make it.

[@AtamMardes]

@@jeremiahmeade710 Only a fool believes & reveres the supernatural fairy tales, fictions & myths just because a book claims itself to be the holy truth.

[@theslifestyle2030]

I feel sorry for the people that spend all their lives trying to dis prove Jesus because when they pass and meet him in Judgement...They will hear the words..: You Never Knew ME....Depart From Me :"

[@ramigilneas9274]

Almost all Christians will hear the same words. Most of the people who are convinced that they are saved are heretics who will burn.🔥🔥🔥

[@savedbymylovegodthelordjes8394]

praise the Lord and God bless you

[@walkergarya]

Utter nonsense and fairy tales.

[@savedbymylovegodthelordjes8394]

@@walkergarya but when Richard. Dawkins said, aliens, made the first self _replicating molecule that is acceptable that is not fairy tales God bless you. And he may open your eyes for his own glory in Jesus mighty name

[@walkergarya]

@@savedbymylovegodthelordjes8394 No he did not. He accepts it as a very remote possibility, not a fact. Do not lie to me. "Jesus mighty name"?!? Nope. I am not interested in your fairy tales.

[@savedbymylovegodthelordjes8394]

@@walkergarya ok God bless you

[@walkergarya]

@@savedbymylovegodthelordjes8394 I have no interest in any blessings from your fairy tale friend.

[@waynethomas1900]

Another overlooked proof is that the reality of the Pentecostal infilling and gift of the Holy Spirit in salvation, could not have happened until after Christ's resurrection {Acts CHS.1&2}. Christ's resurrection was necessary to inaugurate the birth of the new covenant church. Are you Born Again of Water and of the Holy Spirit {John 3vs3,5}?

[@dr.williamlanecraig8273]

Vc tem que falar com quem sabe

[@satmat6566]

Praise the lord !!! Amazing and outstanding explanation using the scriptures as a historical tool and foundation to demonstrate the evidences and undeniable proofs of the resurrection of Jesus. Although a few external witnesses have been mentioned , the way this analysis has been carried out is pretty authoritative in itself !! The skeptical scholars are bound to be consistent, fair and reasonable their approach with any other ancient documents or manuscripts.

[@satmat6566]

@The Truth Your ignorance is flagrant ! The prophecies in the Old Testament about Jesus have been fulfilled to the letter. The new testament manuscripts are way superior to any other ancient writings in number as well as in accuracy. Dr William Craig lane is not the only person who knows the scriptures and the history of the church. There are countless number of Christians who not scholars though but are well documented about Christianity.

[@satmat6566]

@The Truth Do you have any substantial proof or evidence supporting your opinions since you do not have any argument but bla bla bla.. Sorry man you are only a babe !!!

[@m.a.sperry3424]

@@satmat6566 Your gullibility is fragrant.

[@satmat6566]

@@m.a.sperry3424 No sir , it is fragrance !!

[@m.a.sperry3424]

@@satmat6566 As in "smelly"?

[@mytwocents7481]

25:08 "Jewish beliefs about the afterlife precluded anyone's rising from the dead to glory and immortality before the general resurrection at the end of the world." WLC sounds very confident about that, but the gospels tell a different story. In several places, it is clear that belief in resurrection was pretty common at the time. King Herod, a practicing Jew, thought that Jesus was John the Baptist risen from the dead. (Mark 14:1-2) When Jesus asked his disciples what the people thought about him, his disciples reported that they likewise thought he was the resurrected John the Baptist or one of the prophets, possibly Elijah. (Mark 8:27-28) Finally, according to Mark, Jesus predicted his own death and resurrection 3 different times. (Mark 8:31-33 Mark 9:30-32 Mark 10:32-34) Similar passages appear in Luke and Matthew. Now Craig is certainly familiar with all these passages, so why is he making pronouncements that fly in the face of them?

[@lepidoptera9337]

Because it's all good as long as he gets paid.

[@vincentcampanaro9012]

A few seconds later Craig stated the general resurrection at the end of the world . That view would be correct for the Pharisee. They believed a resurrection.

[@freegraceau]

He clearly stated that the Jews believe there would be a general resurrection not one individuals resurrection.

[@WesleyClark-j4f]

God bless dr. Craig god bless jesus

[@aidank2108]

Based on this evidence, the conclusion is undeniable; Jesus rose from the dead.

[@exilfromsanity]

What evidence??? There is nothing presented here but bare assertions from the bible.

[@aidank2108]

@@exilfromsanity People like you are so stupid. he barely even talked about the bible. tell me a better explanation for his empty tomb, then I will listen

[@exilfromsanity]

@@aidank2108 He bases all of his claims of "facts" on the bible. First you have to prove there was a Jesus, and that he was crucified, and that he was buried, then you can try to prove the tomb was empty. None of this crap is supported by extra biblical accounts, the bible is all there is. If you believe the bible none of these arguments are necessary, if you don't believe in fairy tales none of this crap is convincing.

[@aidank2108]

@@exilfromsanity You should study some history because it is a well established fact that jesus lived and was crucified. any historian would not deny that. so it is not based on the bible, but on historians accounts. you shouldn't add comments if you dont even know basic facts like that.

[@exilfromsanity]

@@aidank2108; A well established "fact"?? Really? Cite you sources for that "fact".

[@paulustarsus]

A Flawless and Spectacular Lecture. 👏👏👏👏✝️🇮🇪

[@atheistangel007]

"Flawless" only to the clueless.

[@paulustarsus]

@@atheistangel007 Oh! Not another member of the Negativity Brigade. 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@atheistangel007]

@@paulustarsus Like I said...

[@paulustarsus]

@@atheistangel007 Judging by your other comments on this thread, you're still searching, but don't worry Bro', you'll get there. ✌️🔥✝️

[@atheistangel007]

@@paulustarsus 1st off, I thought Xtians weren't supposed to "judge". 2nd, it is clear that your judgement is as flawed as Craig's argument. 3rd, what is it you have concluded I am supposedly "searching" for? 4th, you suggest that I'll "get there", seeing as how there are over 40,000 denominations of Christianity alone, which of them in your _judgmental_ opinion is the one that "got there"? 5th, what makes you assume I'm your "Bro"? 6, why so many emoticons, are you 12?

[@pyramidworship]

This is dope yeet yolo sauce

[@MLeoM]

Lol, what's that? 😆 I'm afraid, that object or thing, might not exist lol 😆😆 Peace bradah!

[@mariorizkallah5383]

آمين😘

[@davekanak]

❤No, we are not Saved by His resurrection. We are Saved by Obeying and Doing the WILL of GOD the Father and BELIEVING in the SON OF GOD, JESUS CHRIST. The SHROUD OF JESUS CHRIST PROVES IT!

[@ajhitchner]

Without His resurrection doing what He commands would have no significance. But you are right in that the evidence of our believing is in doing His will, his directives.

[@davekanak]

@@ajhitchner sure

[@freegraceau]

You just mixed grace with works and therefore have no grace. We are saved by believing in Jesus for eternal life as the gospel of John makes abundantly clear.

[@davekanak]

@@freegraceau Religious Boob! I never used the words Works or Grace, and don't believe in them, so tell me how I mixed them. Also when did my Savior Jesus ever use the word Grace? Salvation 101-To Believe God Sacrificed His Son to Die for your Sins! We are SAVED by GOD, by Doing His Will, and BELIEVING In HIM, His SON Jesus Christ. Matthew 7:21 Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven, But the one who Does the WILL Of My FATHER, who is in heaven John 6:40 MY FATHER’S WILL is that everyone who looks to the Son and BELIEVES in HIM shall have eternal life John 3:16 For GOD so Loved the World that HE Gave (Sacrificed to Die) HIS only SON so that Whoever BELIEVES in HIM, shall not perish, but have ever lasting Life. Jesus, Your SAVIOR Told you in John 3:16 to BELIEVE in HIM, the SON of GOD and Be SAVED!

[@andiswandumiso7187]

Thank you sir

[@blakeclarkson9954]

All Glory Be To God!

[@atheistangel007]

Bah, Zeus is modest...doesn't need the praise, and why would he need it? He's GOD.

[@margahe9157]

22:08 Interesting, wouldn't the position of the Pope of the Catholic Church better be founded on James, instead of Peter?

[@stuartofblyth]

I made that very point at last week's housegroup, based on Acts 15 vv 13-21. In the debate about how to treat the Gentiles, James says the apostles should write a letter explaining what the Gentiles should do, everyone agreed, and that's what they did. The ISV translates James' words in v 19 as "I have decided". He decided what should be done and the early church did it. He exercised the authority of the pre-eminent position he occupied. If you're looking for a first pope, James is he.

[@GazGuitarz]

@@stuartofblyth Agreed, although some scholars think that the Jerusalem congregation was possibly co-lead by James and Peter. Whatever the case, there is no evidence that either James or Peter ever visited Rome. The first account of Peter being in Rome is a letter from a Christian deacon named Gaius. Writing probably toward the end of the second century C.E around 170 or 180 C.E.

[@hitman5782]

There is a difference between stories and demonstrable evidence for a claim. Try again, that was nothing.

[@Becca_Lynn]

Are you going to stop believing all ancient history that does not have modern aspects?

[@hitman5782]

@@Becca_Lynn If it includes braindead nonsense like worldwide floods, talking animals, zombies, and people that live in fish, yeah sure.

[@indigofenrir7236]

You have no demonstrable evidence for having a 🧠.

[@hitman5782]

@@indigofenrir7236 I have not claimed to have one. The producer of this video made nothing but claims he can´t back up. I don´t find that impressive, do you?

[@indigofenrir7236]

@@hitman5782 This is a KZbin video. You are operating under the mistaken beliefs that (1) what he says in the video, he has to personally prove to each individual viewer the existence of God when God can do that Himself; and (2)what he says in the video are his own fabricated claims instead of observations you haven't noticed due to your selective blindness. You cannot prove anything in the past happened; you can only deduce they happened due to the specific circumstances that occur only if they had happened; for example, your existence proves your parents slept together despite you not having evidence of them doing so.

[@markrichter2053]

That’s a gorgeous tie 🦋😊

[@tonyrareman8088]

Excellent !

[@johnr4670]

Yes. Thank you Dr. Craig for spreading truth! ❤️🙌🏼

[@atheistangel007]

Bah! Who cares if it isn't right?

[@ronaldlindeman6136]

The problem with Christianity is not about cohesion in the story. The problem with Christianity, as with all story Religions, is that it is not verifiable. Humans have created stories from their minds and imaginations thru out history. We humans are bad at figuring out what is true or not true from stories. What then is verifiable? Stories from humans in the ancient world are not. How about knowledge? Claiming to be a God of the Universe would mean that person or being has a great deal of knowledge. But we can't just ask for knowledge, because knowledge can be made up human knowledge from other stories that humans created. People make up stories about great knowledge. Such as prophecy, just because someone writes a story about someone fulfilling prophecy, doesn't mean it actually happened that way. If there is a story about someone being born in Bethlehem and then the story creator writes stories about the hero being born in Bethlehem, the story creator created with the book open. They knew what things to write to fulfill the prophecy. Very human. The knowledge that is verifiable is knowledge of the natural world. A God of the Universe would know about: Sanitation, cleanliness, sterilization, inoculation and medications to prevent disease. Miracles that cure disease are easy to make. Actual medical knowledge is difficult. Why is there no references to Jesus of Christianity in a book on the history of medicine? Didn't Jesus of Christianity, God of the Universe, not know anything about medical knowledge? Inventions, technologies and Sciences that might be valuable to humans. Didn't Jesus know about the value of printing presses to make books, magazines and newspapers to spread information and knowledge around the world? Didn't Jesus of Christianity know about the value of investigating nature to develop Physics, Chemistry and Biology? What about a lecture from Jesus of Christianity on the value of economics and business and how it will transform the world for humans? Is selling all that you have and give to the poor better advice that what humans have learned to do in colleges and schools? Do we think that Star Trek is true? There are stories about Warp Drive in Star Ships, Photon Torpedoes and Transfer people from Star Ship to anywhere (except when the Ships Shields are up) with Transporters. Just because the stories are written, does not make it true. The verifiable thing is knowledge. If the writers of the Star Trek stories also had fully working Star Ships with working Warp Drive, that would give the stories some credibility. Consider as well, the atrocities of the stories. How is it that Jesus of Christianity knew, just knew, that when he was born on Earth, 33 years later the Roman Empire military would have Judea under military occupation? What if the Roman Empire military decided to leave, it just wasn't worth the occupation? What if the Eastern Roman Empire collapsed 400 years before it did? But Jesus of Christianity knew that the Roman Empire would still be there to preform the torture and killing of himself. Along with the torturing, killing and murder of the people of Judea. Don't talk to me about a God that walks on water, turns water into wine and tells people to be good to each other. Jesus of Christianity was in collusion with the Roman Empire military to have the people of Judea tortured, killed and murdered.

[@ElCucuy1904]

Ronald Lindeman you need to get on with your ignorance and go troll somewhere else. Why is it you feel you have to click on a video and talk that bullshit when you don’t even believe in God? Seems like you like to talk shit and need your ass handed to you. Leave these God fearing people alone and go troll some where else. You’ll meet Jesus one day though that’s for sure

[@ronaldlindeman6136]

There are people who comment on videos like this because they have been in the Religious Fictional world that this person describes and got out of it. Consider that Thomas Jefferson who wrote the Declaration of Indepedence, did not think that Christianity was true. He wrote that Governments should be of "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." Which leaves out "Laws of Story God." Which leaves out "Laws of Super Natural God." Story God or Super Natural God. Feeds 5000 with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish. Laws of Nature and Nature's God. Would start an agricultural school and bring intelligent people together and use observation and experiment to understand how crops grow and ways to make them grow better. The Prosperity we have had in the last 400 years is not because of better study and application of Story God ideas and Super Natural ideas, but because we understand the Natural world better.

[@RL-es6gg]

Humans inspired by divine power accomplish more than ones who are not. Our increasingly modernist, secular, relativist, scientism-driven Western society is becoming more and more isolated, confused and miserable. Families breaking up, people confused about gender identity, less of a feeling of community (which religion provides), drug addiction increasing, architecture art and music going downhill, women reporting they're more unhappy than ever, despite feminism, people worshipping athletes and celebrities instead of God, and so on. Also, whether or not you agree that the resurrection happened, or whether or not you agree that the supernatural exists, the teachings of the New Testament and the Catholic Church on how one should live are sound, even to this day. Science is only valuable when it's used to attain a higher state of being and get closer to God. Otherwise, it's neutral or negative if used for nefarious purposes. Science is just a tool, not an end. The end is God. If science is not grounded in sound philosophy and theology, in the pursuit of the divine, then it can easily lead to the creation of more chaos than it destroys. We made some good scientific advances BECAUSE we were unified as a society under God. That was what gave our societies stability and HOPE. Do you really think people would have gotten through the horrors of the past WITHOUT God? Highly unlikely!

[@ronaldlindeman6136]

@@RL-es6gg Go to Google, Images and look up Bible Belt. Then look up states by percentage of smoking cigarettes. Kentucky. The states with the least smoking of cigarettes is Utah. Then look up the states by lung cancer rates. Kentucky has the highest lung cancer rate. Utah the lowest. Then look up life expectancy by state. California, New York, Minnesota and Connecticut, people live the longest. Over 81 years. Kentucky, West Virginia, Mississippi and Alabama the shortest. Around 75 years. Look up other social things that can be measured. Crime is generally higher in Bible Belt states. Educations in lower in Bible Belt states. The United States has a country with most Christians, but it also has higher crime rates than countries with less Christianity in it. Japan has 70 people in prison per 100,000 per population. Much of Europe has 120 to 180 people in prison per 100,000 population. Russia has 300 people per 100,000. The United States has 700 per 100,000. Bible Belt states leads the United States in Prison population. Louisiana has 1400 people in prison per 100,000 population. Other Bible Belt states over 700. California and New York, in the 200's.

[@ajhitchner]

The stories are historic . Perhaps you missed that part. That's what historicity means.

[@marsman1211]

Wonderful

[@PhillipLWilcher]

To begin, my life has been one of creativity. It is that through creating I came to know of Love and through Love did I come to create. The dynamic at work in it all for me has been my imagination, and that my work as a composer serves as testament to my Faith in God, given that I consider God to be my imagination. Some thoughts worth considering if I may, in light of the above, and the creative spirit that has gifted this world so many things at which we marvel, and that more often than not serve to sustain us as a species: Consider if you will, a mind whose imagination knew no bounds in tailoring such spectacles as 'The Taming of the Shrew'; who penned tales of truth and treachery, benevolence and betrayal, love and death, and death as sacrifice in honour of love; dualities within a state to tax even the greatest of truths, the likes of which the world will never bear witness to again. A man whose mind sustained him; in whom the rhythm and texture of words found no other counterpart within the genre of his expression, neither before or after the advent of his being; not in any penned history, tragedy or comedy, neither poem nor varied part that saw his art adapted by way of experimental variance to the contemporary so as to appeal more simply to the herds that otherwise might not have heard his "teachings" for what they were. Where it could well be argued that the canon of works comprising thirty-seven plays, two narrative poems and a collection of sonnets Shakespeare presented to the world "says it all", did not Jesus say it all too, but more precisely, and with no less poetry at play by way of The Sermon on the Mount, and has not The Sermon on the Mount stood the greater test of time? Not that it can be held true, nor even refuted, for we will never surely know, but how much of Shakespeare's work, if we consider it in just proportion to the highest of ideals, could be aligned to the allure of such a sermon that might have served as serum for the sorrows of his own personal life, the death of his son in 1596, his father in 1601 and his mother seven years later in 1608, not to mention the approach of his own passing in 1616, the cause of which is not known ... What frailties of the human experience does Shakespeare touch upon that Jesus did not to divine the way? Against the arras that was to become the backdrop for all subsequent literary endeavours by poets and playwrights alike, being of expression the most ideal, let us now consider The Holy Scriptures, penned as they were so many centuries before, believed by the devout to be a matter of fact, and the "in doubt" a moment of mere fiction; how in light of love their provenance matters little but for the friction that is of this: * For any mind to imagine the coming of a Messiah; the presence of a divinity in human form, that such a form as was Jesus became The Christ who made the blind to see and the lame to walk; who removed illness and raised the dead but to be sacrificed for the sins of the world as was he so humbled before the face of humankind at its most cruel, and then to be resurrected, suggests that within the scribes who had not the inherent styling of speech as did Shakespeare, but whose servitude was such in purity to possibly surpass him - each purity of thought being a pause for thought - was the presence of The Divine, a consummate spirit that was itself both the creator and the creation of His Story: History. How could they have been "imagined" otherwise? How can you first imagine God without God first being present within you? How does any artist imagine their ideal without that ideal first being present in his or her being, or is that where our humility draws the line, at any hint we should so honour the power that first bestowed upon us that by which we ourselves are honoured? To that must then be considered this: how can you first imagine evil without evil first being present within you? How could even Shakespeare first imagine treachery without treachery first being present in him? But then, things can be consciously willed and that they be so willed does not imply one necessarily has the want to occasion them. Conversely, you do not have to be present in God for God to be present within you, and is that not the divine mercy of God, that his love is so to remain present and regardless? It is that whatever tale you tell should adhere to the highest tenet of truth any legalism or casuistry can ever admit, the truth that saw jealousy kill Jesus. And what about the music of Bach, a voice "not quite God" but near enough to at least make you want to believe in the Almighty, and at most exclaims : "I do!" And for that matter, what of the matter that is of you? If The Bible is the sum total of its contradictions, is that not Life? Is that not Love? Is not the greater question one of acceptance? Are we not all, as is Life and Love, the sum total of our contradictions? Therefore, is not The Bible a testament of Life and the treasury of Love one's faith requires of it to be - whatever your belief - if in what you believe there is the presence/prayer-sense of Love? Why bother to debunk or even approve of it, after all, are we not ourselves the greatest piece of fiction before the reality that will be our fate! Is that anything to shake a spear at?

[@mhayes33120]

" That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the { Spirit } is spirit. " Genuinely saved persons have been, Born of the Spirit. Born again. Born from above. " Do not be deceived my beloved brethren. Every good and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning. " " Whenever you meet a genuinely saved Christian, you are meeting someone in whom Christ lives. " Whenever you meet an unregenerate person, you are meeting someone in whom He ----- does not. I'm sure that no one's personal opinion can ever change this fact, try as they might. Unregenerate Heathen folk have been trying as they might for some 2,024 years now to no avail.

[@jeremiahmeade710]

some 2,024 years now? If you had said "about 2,000 years now", I would not have the problem I am articulating, but Christ's resurrection is said to be the precursor for the "Spirit" being given to those who follow Christ, which is reported to have happened around 30 AD.

[@clarencecausey7473]

An idea that might help others here, regardless of what side you're on, as it relates to the question "did Jesus exist"? Establish a set of criteria, a test of sorts, say archaeological evidence, eyewitness testimony, written accounts, etc., and then apply that standard to any number of figures from antiquity and look at the results. You could start with Hannibal, Plato, Alexander the Great, and others....

[@oreo507]

People don't realize how much bias there is against Christianity

[@clarencecausey7473]

@ So on what grounds, historically or scientifically, do you base your claim "Jesus didn't exist"? Also, what "tons of evidence" exist for the three people you mentioned? Finally, I think you're a little confused over Jesus as an historical personage vs. whether or not he was "supernatural"; are you aware of that distinction?

[@clarencecausey7473]

@ Interesting; that's the best you can do?

[@clarencecausey7473]

@ The only "pure bullshit", is you and what you are saying; if you don't think Jesus existed, that places you in the category of a "crank". Even better, I'd say that your training/background in history amounts to a KZbin account. How close is that? You are obviously an idiot, not capable of an honest, informed, intelligent debate; so run along back to fantasy world...:). But again, apply a standard of evidence to each of the figures you mentioned, as a test, and see what you get. What "archaeological evidence is there for Hannibal, by the way?

[@clarencecausey7473]

@ "...Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed historically..."- Wikipedia. Now, moron, ask yourself a simply question; what is it that modern scholars know that a low IQ youtuber like you doesn't? Correct. They are educated, and you're not. Do yourself a favor, go to college and get educated...

[@albertpurification985]

I love it

[@skeensmachine597]

There's thousands of books on this topic with thousands of different conclusions. I hope you aren't going to dismiss this topic based off of one video

[@tomnorton4277]

I like this guy. I find Gary Habermas to be a bit more enjoyable to listen to but William Lane Craig is clearly just as educated. I also like that at 20:18, he said "As far as I know", expressing a willingness to be corrected if anybody had evidence that he wasn't aware of. It's little details like that which can tell you if a person is arrogant or humble.

[@luisbarrios4610]

😮no one cant denied that argument

[@jerrellhelms8378]

Perhaps, since Pilate found no fault in Jesus; because he was not fomenting rebellion against the Romans, was simply, as it seems was the case, indifferent to Jesus' crucifixion and allowed the burial. Rome didn't fear Jesus, Jerusalem did. The Sanhedrin did not have possession of the body, the Roman's did. I am far from an expert in the matter, but neither do I presume to know what was in Pilate's mind. Just a possibility.

[@GV_777YT]

Reasonable enough, though i doubt his mom and closest ones would be crying infront a man being tortured and killed that they doubted at any level and moment, was their beloved Jesus.

[@allanmorris8405]

The fact is Jesus' body was gone. If by Romans or Sanhedrin they would have produced it when Faith began to spread. Historical evidence exists that The Faith spread during the lifetime of eyewitnesses & opposition. Not plausible to suddenly appear after death of Apostles.

[@fotoman777]

I don't think we can assume Pilate found no fault in Jesus -- certainly the gospel writers wanted everyone to believe that in order to get the Romans off their backs. Jesus was crucified for leading a rebellion against Rome, claiming to be king of the Jews. Odds are that is exactly what he did.

[@Wolf-wn6nk]

Not a shred of convincing evidence was shared 🤦‍♂️

[@rep3e4]

Turn the volume up

[@kevinroum9343]

100% agree, and even if I did accept what Craig said, I still see why I would become a Christian.

[@alexcameron2880]

Still waiting on your evidence that we came from nothing.

[@richardvastine7486]

Craig. A legend in his own mind.

[@bluedot6933]

Jesus was executed as a young guy, only 30. Then he came back to life. But there is no record of him anywhere? Wouldn't someone say they saw him or heard him speak other then those that believed in him.

[@spacenie]

James, Jesus' own brother did not believe in Him, neither did Saul/Paul.

[@AlanHitchner]

There is a large number of independent documented historical conformation from the same period in roman government sources among others.

[@josephantony2834]

When I see such videos,the more I am convinced that I did the right thing excommunicating myself from Christianity...

[@Mortalkindofman]

Why

[@Becca_Lynn]

What parts convinced you?

[@bonnie43uk]

5:35 .. i have to stop you there Dr Craig, how can you factually claim that Jesus was buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea. The only references we have to this are in the New Testament, just because something is written in the NT does not make it true. It's a claim, not a fact.

[@bonnie43uk]

@Juicelad There are lots of mentions of Julius Caesar from historians who were around at the time, we know the exact day of his birth and death, we have coins minted with his face on, statues of him, we know exactly what he looked like, we know who he succeeded, we know who succeeded him, there would be an enormous gap in history if you took Julius Caesar out of the picture. And, his supporters didn't make any claims about him doing incredible feats of magic, or flying up into the sky and into the clouds after his death. And he certainly didn't claim to be the son of God.

[@ramigilneas9274]

@J w Nope, this is how myths are written.😂

[@ramigilneas9274]

@J w The case against the existence of the empty tomb: -no mention of the empty tomb outside of the gospels. -no mention of Joseph or Arimathea outside of the gospels. -no mention of the town of Arimathea outside of the gospels and no archaeological evidence that this place ever existed. -the romans crucified hundreds of people each week. Usually they were left to rot on the cross and then ditched in a mass grave, so they would most likely not allow that Jesus was placed in a tomb. That was part of the punishment and there is not a single recorded exception for insurrectionists like Jesus. -Paul, our earliest source doesn’t mention the empty tomb or Joseph or Aramithea. -the story looks like it was invented to fulfill a prophecy "Jesus is buried with the rich“. -the character of Joseph of Arimathea enters the story just to provide an empty tomb, then immediately leaves the story to be never heard of again. Sounds like something written by JJ Abrams.😉 -in the beginning of the life of Jesus there were Joseph and Mary... and in the end of his life there were different people called Joseph and Mary. Sounds like something George Lucas would write... it’s like poetry, it rhymes.😉 -the empty tomb is probably the most important place ever for Christians... but somehow they immediately forgot where it was. And it has never been found.😂

[@nicoletalmadge7276]

Where he would be buried is also prophesied in the old testament.

[@skyt54]

I don't quite understand this guy. He defends the resurrection of Jesus but he says that Jesus understanding of the cosmos while he was on earth was primitive. In the time of Jesus people believed the earth was flat, was fixed, and the sun revolved around the earth. He says that Jesus got it wrong when he referred to Adam and Eve, Noah and the flood, and Jonah. Since Craig believes that Genesis is not history but allegory he says that Jesus because of his primitive knowledge of the origin of creation wrongly believed that Genesis was a real history. So here we have Jesus who was fully God and fully man through whom all creation was spoken into existence did not realize that the events of Genesis were just allegory. I wonder was the God in Genesis a fictional character also. All I can say is people like Craig who are considered great philosophers must lose common sense in the midst of their brain storms of philosophizing. If you find this hard to believe look up creation.com/craig-genesis-account

[@Jim-Mc]

I might be able to partly address one of these objections. Jesus having "primitive" understanding of the cosmos is not a viable objection because 1. that's an anachronistic arbitrary label, and 2. inconsistent with the character put forward in the story. The Jesus of the Gospels may or may not have had special knowledge of the material aspects of reality, but it is certain he did not care. Dr. Craig's assertion is consistent because God incarnate or not, a core aspect of Jesus' character was that he never addressed anything outside the Kingdom of Heaven. It was irrelevant to him. So if he didn't know the earth was round, it was because he didn't care.

[@FLVCTVAT_NEC_MERGITVR]

The scientific fact that the earth is round was derived by Eratosthenes at least 2 centuries before Christ, please do your research before commenting such naivety.

[@tedgrant2]

"the moon shall not give her light and the stars shall fall from Heaven" I wonder what Professor Brian Cox thinks about that prediction. (Matthew 24:29)

[@tedgrant2]

@user-xd9sq4sz3f "Thou shalt buy thy slaves from the heathen around you". I wonder what Barack Obama thinks about that commandment. (Leviticus 25:44))

[@tedgrant2]

@user-xd9sq4sz3f "Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth". I wonder what Daniel Werfel thinks of that advice. (Matthew 6:19)

[@tedgrant2]

@user-xd9sq4sz3f "Sell that thou hast and give to the poor" I wonder what the Pope thinks of that advice. (Matthew 19:21)

[@tedgrant2]

@user-xd9sq4sz3f "Take no thought for the morrow". I wonder what Ken Graham thinks of that advice. (Matthew 6:34)

[@tomasmartinez7298]

I agree with Dr. Craig. From 1:54 to 2:08 this atittude prevailed in Jesus time. When He healed blind man. His parents didn´t decide to accept Jesus because they fear of pharisses and priests. They saw his blind son all life long. But they didn´t want to follow Jesus. In turn they wanted to be comfortable with traditions. This attitude prevalent today with scientists, teachers, politicians ( except President Trump man of God) students and even in familiar circles, where they accept the existence of God but they don´t take a stand with Jesus.

[@tilleulenspiegel2286]

Science is based on evidence, not tradition. President Trump is a man of God? Explain please. Consider is action of immorality and lack of ethics, when you provide your explanation.

[@DarthMakroth]

Amazing, I learnt a lot

[@atheistangel007]

Then burn your brain and start over...you'll thank me later.

[@hippiasminor6264]

This strikes me as an excellent synopsis of the historical arguments for the resurrection. Probably the weakest part of the presentation is in the last six minutes, where Craig states that God raising Jesus from the dead meets all six criteria for the plausibility of a historical explanation. In most cases, I think we would be inclined to say that positing the supernatural is a rather strong strike against the hypothesis in question. So...imagine the following response: "Yeah, something weird happened alright. Maybe it was Jesus' twin brother doing some weird posturing (as Craig describes one of his opponents implausibly suggesting), or some other weird, freaky thing. But freaky things do happen in the course of natural history, and I'd rather go for the freaky *natural* thing over the freaky *supernatural* thing you're describing." I could certainly understand this response. On the other hand...it's worth noting what the response would amount to: the antecedent naturalistic metaphysics would be driving the historical analysis. It seems that someone who was *neutral* on the metaphysic would be tempted by Craig's account.

[@bertoramirez9499]

When you have more than 500 witnesses saying they saw Jesus, is not unreasonable to conclude the supernatural event at hand. The question becomes then about the reliability of 1 Corinthians in which Paul states that claim about 500 witnesses. So you must deal with the credibility of the new testament as a historical account written in Paul's case about 3 decades after the resurrection. If you have an event is not practical to assume the supernatural but if you have multiple witnesses saying it was supernatural you have to consider the possibility of the supernatural

[@RagingBlast2Fan]

So how do you explain it?

[@hippiasminor6264]

@@RagingBlast2Fan Well, assuming that Craig has done his homework correctly (and I rather suspect he has), then the choice is between giving an implausible naturalistic explanation or a supernaturalistic one. For most of us in the 21st century, a supernaturalistic explanation carries the aura of implausibility as well. (Think of our first reaction to weird supernatural-ish stuff that a stranger might say which doesn't conform to our antecedent religious biases.) Of course, there are a lot of different implausible naturalistic hypotheses out there (swoon theory, a body swap, etc.), and so if I were a skeptic on this thing, I wouldn't commit to any of them. I'd commit to some *one* of them being right, and just insist that my position is a big disjunction of all of them. So, let "INE" mean "implausible naturalistic explanation" and let "ISE" mean "implausible supernaturalistic explanation." The choice you're looking at is between the following: Skeptical Claim: (INE1 v INE2 v INE3 v ...) Believer's Claim: ISE Now...which of these is more probable? That's our little quandary. If I were playing the skeptical game, I would harp on the fact that the big disjunction of all the INEs out there would improve the overall probability as more disjuncts are added. Obviously any one INE on its own would look pretty stupid. (Swoon theory? Really?) A big disjunction of all of them is less so. And since the believer's claim (implausibly) invokes the supernatural, the skeptical approach is more plausible overall. If I were playing the believer's game, I would attempt to provide arguments that invoking the supernatural really isn't so implausible after all--which of course takes us into the heart of a metaphysical dispute. Three observations: 1. The skeptical game is old school--it's really just a gloss on David Hume's argument against miracles (although really Hume borrowed that argument from the deists of his day). 2. At some point, the decision about the historicity of the resurrection ceases to be about history and starts being about metaphysics. 3. I think Craig knows all of this, and to his credit (and the credit of others like him), he takes on the Humean approach while venturing into the metaphysical dispute. But RagingBlast2Fan, to answer your question, I prefer to play the believer's game.

[@michaelbrickley2443]

Thank God for a man who has casually defeated all comers in the debating arena. The best anyone can say is Kalams argument makes no sense. Of course it makes no sense when you believe there is no Yahweh and Jesus was just an itinerant Rabbi who was killed for being a rabble rouser. Sad..

[@Dr.vonKrankenhausen]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 who did he ever defeat🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@Dr.vonKrankenhausen]

@J w 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 if god were real he would have already killed your for embarrassing him 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@Dr.vonKrankenhausen]

@J w my day has already come. You made it by being the clown you are! Thanks for that man. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@Dr.vonKrankenhausen]

@J w Are you gay? Jesus was gay! I have evidence for that

[@Dr.vonKrankenhausen]

@J w I went to the jesus university just like your prophet WLG

[@stefanprohl2548]

"Ich bin die Auferstehung und das Leben. Wer an mich glaubt, der wird leben, auch wenn er stirbt." [Jesus Christus. Johannes 11]

[@markrichter2053]

In Acts the Jewish leaders reportedly say, “The disciples came and stole away the body”, by way of explaining away the empty tomb. This is the argument that I find the most convincing for the empty tomb. The main weakness with this argument is that we are still required to take Luke’s word for it. It’s not proof in any legal or scientific way. It’s not evidence of anything other than what a man wrote on a piece of papyrus. A man who invented a spurious genealogy and fanciful birth account at the beginning of his gospel, is certainly capable of inventing logical reasons to support the empty tomb.

[@junkerjorg6310]

You're just asserting possibilities. Not really historically satisfying.

[@dallasburns7806]

It is “evidence” like this that caused me to leave Christianity after 30 years of belief.

[@GreekOrthodox7]

Stop exaggerating and pretending like you were a true Christian. You never had a real relationship with Jesus Christ, you never really knew Him, and you never knew His Word. 1 John 2:19-21 “These people left the faith, but they never really belonged with us; otherwise they would have stayed with us. When they left, it proved that they did not belong with us. But you who believe are not like that, for the Holy One has given you His Spirit, and all of you know the truth. So I am writing to you not because you don’t know the truth but because you know the difference between truth and lies.”

[@austinlincoln3414]

Nice try kid you just pulled the true scottsman fallacy. In other words, I have reasonable grounds to say you’re wrong. Get rekt

[@rep3e4]

Well you are free to do what you want, that is true love (no force)

[@robertlight5227]

Lots of rationalization, no evidence.

[@mccaboy]

Because u don't understand history n how historians deal with ancient narrative

[@robertlight5227]

@@mccaboy I teach history.

[@mccaboy]

@@robertlight5227 then u have to explain yrself

[@robertlight5227]

@@mccaboy Sure. Do the carbon dating again. If it again comes back circa 1350 ad will u admit the Shroud is a 'work of art' as it was called when the local Bishop accepted it? Also, provide the 1300 years of provenance to prove it is circa 35 ad.

[@robertlight5227]

Do you teach history in university?

[@ichtudurwehblah]

He sounds like Bill Maher

[@debunkingthefundamentalist]

WLC--the founder of the logical fallacy. I tell this to my own subs in videos regarding apologists including Craig, Strobel and the rest. Here is the problem with the witnessed resurrection and empty tomb and the apologist. First and Christ in a go cart they need to stop with this constant "witnessed" resurrection. We have no texts prior to Mark which was at best 30 years after Yeshua died. We have no idea who wrote all the gospels. And they also keep pointing to the Holy Sepulchre as "the tomb of Christ"-----we don't know that, have any evidence of that--at all. It's a theory of an empty tomb established by Eusebius and the bishop of jerusalem with Constantine's mother who declared this the tomb of Christ. It is not archeological fact. What these apologists do is take something and try to twist and mold it as evidence when it is not. Cheers, DCF

[@josephbrandtner7713]

There is only one day that fits the crucifixion narrative. We must consider that there was more than one sabbath that week, the yearly Passover on Wednesday, 25 April 31 A. D. and the weekly sabbath on the 7th day of that week. Jews counted the days from sunset to sunset. This is the olny way you can have 3 days and 3 noghts from death to resurection. The resurection ocurred after sundown on Saturday night, the third day which began at sunset.

[@jackalsgate1146]

Once again: no facts, merely, unfounded opinions.

[@Ckrost]

Don’t click don’t comment, keep it to yourself.

[@jackalsgate1146]

@@Ckrost Typical Christian who wants to exercise their right to free speech, and yet, deny the right of others to exercise theirs. You are the epitome of arrogance. You people mind everyone else's business: invade other countries with your religion, call other religions evil, call the God's of other nations demons, and insult them every chance you get. This is a public form and you people leave your comments all over secular channels. If you want people not to comment; then, don't put content on a public forum.

[@rep3e4]

That sounds a lot like how people try to claim we all came from nothing for no reason ….. (atheism)

[@jackalsgate1146]

@@rep3e4 I don't think atheists ever said we came from nothing. I do believe their argument is that they don't know, and because they don't know, they're not going to assume anything. Which I think is a wise stance to take. I would rather have a conversation with someone who thinks they know nothing {but is brilliant}; then, someone who thinks they know everything {but knows nothing at all}.

[@pseudophp]

@@jackalsgate1146 Hahah, you gullible humans. Shrouding your arrogance in the form of skepticism. That's cute. Too bad you can't wrap your head around religion, it's actually more complicated since the Universe is designed, not just randomly self-made. The variables.. particles.. life itself.. you have no idea. You say you know nothing, yet pretend to know so much more. The sheer hypocrisy and frankly logical infancy is astounding.

[@ericbell940]

He covers everything but proof.

[@22julip]

What kind of proof are you looking for ? Is he supposed to come to earth with each new generation of people . And say here I am now you can believe in me .the word has been given it is faith in him that has to come from you . That makes it all the more special and righteous. He doesn’t do parlor tricks , stick his face in the clouds to make it easy for you . He is there you just have to open your eyes and heart and accept him . God bless ✝️

[@ericbell940]

@@22julip Yes, why cant he? You notice he never appears when in a modern age were we can observe him? Faith, because there is no proof. He doesn’t do any tricks.

[@22julip]

@@ericbell940 I have the proof here 4 reasons Jesus burial the discovery of his empty tomb. His post Mortem appearances and the origin of the disciples belief in his resurrection, plus one more that sealed the deal for me , the people who died rather than renounce their belief in him . No one dies for a lie . Put that in your pipe and smoke it ! As Bill Buckley once told Peter Atkins who tried to challenge Bill Craig , to give reasons for belief in Jesus Resurrection . Peace my friend and God bless

[@ericbell940]

@@22julip 1. So a empty tomb is proof? 2. Belief is not proof. 3. What about moslems who die for there faith? 4. Boy you certainly put me in my place with the pipe comment, I have am question about prayer if you are interested.

[@22julip]

@@ericbell940 I didn’t expect you to have an open mind and understand how those things I listed were facts historical facts . You don’t have to take my word but they are facts . Also you said many people died for their faith , that’s true but It’s a totally different thing to be killed for a false belief, lastly the church the Catholic Church has been around for over 2.000 years that’s a long time to worship a made up God . Hopefully someday you’ll open your eyes and heart and understand the truth. Be well !

[@MarmaladeSally]

Utter delusional nonsense.

[@ricardomayandia5181]

One strong thought is that the disciple said G'd reised Jesus from the dead. In this way they accept that normal people do not raised from the dead by itself. Something they thought was the situation, but what they exprience was that; this must be G'd.

[@GoogleIsNotYourFriend]

I do not understand how people can find this convincing in the modern world...

[@torontocitizen6802]

There is no convincing evidence of any miracles, including the resurrection.

[@addmeuperfil]

You can’t convince someone. You can only show them what they already “know”. I hope you get to know Him one day. May the Holy Spirit testify of His resurrection in your heart, not just your mind.

[@torontocitizen6802]

@@addmeuperfil Believing in a god with no more evidence than there is for Santa Clause is irrational.

[@hitman5782]

@@addmeuperfil Oh you could convince atheists fairly simple, all you would need is any convincing evidence or proof, but given that you Christians can´t even present a single rational argument, yeah, no way to convince any rational person.

[@bonnie43uk]

One of my favorite questions. "God, how come every time you want to tell humanity a message, you do it through one person, in private, when you could easily use your super-powers and communicate it to the whole world?"

[@davec919]

Have you ever read Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy? Atheist Douglas Adams actually parodied this sentiment in that book. Whether or not he did it intentionally, I don't know. However, I think you may enjoy the comparison. As the two heroes, Arthur Dent and Ford Prefect rummaged through the hold of a Vogun spaceship just moments after the Earth was destroyed to make way for a hyperspace bypass in search of useful items. Ford, who was visiting the Earth as an editor for the Hitchhiker's Guide (an alien from a planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse) attempted to explain the circumstances of his arrival. 'Unfortunately I got stuck on the Earth for rather longer than I intended', said Ford. 'I came for a week and got stuck for fifteen years.' 'But how did you get there in the first place then?' 'Easy, I got a lift with a teaser.' 'A teaser?' 'Yeah.' 'Er, what is...' 'A teaser? Teasers are usually rich kids with nothing to do. They cruise around looking for planets which haven't made interstellar contact yet and buzz them.' 'Buzz them?' Arthur began to feel that Ford was enjoying making life difficult for him. 'Yeah,' said Ford, 'they buzz them. They find some isolated spot with very few people around, then land right by some poor unsuspecting soul whom no one's ever going to believe and them strut up and down in front of him wearing silly antennae on their head and making beep beep noises. Rather childish really."

[@PaDutchRunner]

bonnie43uk I used to struggle with this, but then I realized something. God certainly loves us -- beyond our ability to comprehend; however, He also understands our sin problem far better than we do. God has a definite personality and style (one thing that influenced everything He does is the fact that He is holy -- which we have great trouble understanding in our sinful condition), and He will never condescend to our corrupt demands that He prove Himself in a way that would satisfy our sinful imaginations. And if He were to do this, it wouldn't help us anyway -- we still would refuse to repent absent the power of His Holy Spirit. Try to see this from God's perspective. From his viewpoint, we are surrounded by evidence. Our mere existence is irrefutable proof that He made us. Our denial of His existence is an insane manifestation of our corruption. To him, having to "prove" His existence is nothing but a submission to our sinful demands in a way that would not help us anyway. Instead, what He has some for us is something far greater -- He has manipulated all of human history, and took on an additional human nature, and suffered death for us -- to make possible an amazing redemption and to restore a RELATIONSHIP with us. He wants something far more profound than to just "prove" Himself -- He wants a relationship.

[@bonnie43uk]

@Stephen Otto, Hi Stephen, thanks for that reply. I think our mindsets are totally different on this question of God. I was raised up as a Christian and throughout most of my life I was full of questions regarding who I was and what was my purpose, what is the meaning of life etc, .. it was only when I was able to take a step back and question God's existence that was when things began to make much more sense. You say our 'mere existence is irrefutable proof that He made us', well, I certainly don't see that. At what point in our long evolutionary history did God imbue us with his morality? You mentioned 'sin' a few times, who gets to say what sin is?, something I find perfectly acceptable and natural, you may view as sin. There may well be things in life you do which I find immoral. Even if we take an extreme example of killing another human being, you may see that as wrong, but I may view it as an act of mercy and perfectly acceptable. Life isn't as clear and as black and white as some people make it. As a species we humans are incredibly different and diverse.

[@PaDutchRunner]

bonnie43uk When I refer to sin, I am referring more to an attitude, a state of mind and an inclination of the heart than I am to individual, discreet acts. It is an attitude of independence and rebellion toward God. It is the attitude which takes selfish pride in human endeavor, and fails to give proper credit and glory to God -- as I said, the denial of God's existence is a manifestation of this rebellion.

[@bonnie43uk]

So you are saying my denial of Gods existence is due, in part to my willingness to rebel against God due to my selfish pride. I would absolutely refute that Stephen, you don't know me as a person, I certainly don't deny Gods existence out of some selfish pride. What may be obvious to you ( gods existence), is certainly not obvious to me, hence my lack of belief. Should I find credible evidence, I will adjust my view accordingly, I have an open mind, I don't totally rule out Gods existence. I have a keen interest in things like miracle claims and supernatural occurrences, I've yet to hear of anything which has made me change my view, when you delve a little deeper into miracle claims, they always tend to have a much more natural or plausible explanation.

[@timdowling6950]

Well, I certainly believe the resurrection of Gandalf is irrefutable. I mean, Gimli saw it, Legolas saw it and according to the sources, Aragorn also spoke to the once-dead Gandalf. Moreover, elves and dwarves were known to be natural antagonists, so it seems highly unlikely that they would connive at making up some cock-and-bull resurrection story about a dead wizard. Also, the account very clearly quotes the wizard's own words relating his experience of death and resurrection: quotation marks are even used in the text. Furthermore, before revealing himself to this motley company who were so unlikely to lie on the subject in question, it turns out that Gandalf had ALREADY spoken to Merry and Pippin, a couple of simple hobbits who wouldn't even have had the capacity to imagine a resurrection. Following this, Gandalf went on to appear to numerous participants in the War of the Ring, events which are also summarized at the end of the Silmarillion (where Gandalf is referred to as Mithrandir - a name also clearly employed in LOTR by some of those present when Gandalf revealed himself following his resurrection). If you entertain the idea that Gandalf's resurrection was just a fictional device invented by J.R.R. Tolkien in the course of a text that passes itself off as history, then ask Theoden - he was saved from Saruman's treacherous power by a risen Gandalf. Besides, even Gandalf's enemies, such as Denethor, admitted he was in fact alive. Indeed, even Sauron admits it specifically through his messengers at the gates of Mordor. The explanation that Gandalf rose from the dead, incredible though the idea of someone rising from the dead may seem to skeptics, has far more explanatory force than any other. Also, independent verification is hardly needed when one considers that a risen Gandalf best explains the victorious outcome in the War of the Ring: if you don't believe that Gandalf rose, then where is Sauron today? I take it for granted that you have never been harassed by ringwraiths. How can you explain this if Gandalf never rose? The critic there is placed in a very tricky situation: he has to hunt in the back burner to find alternative explanations for something self-evidently true that may easily be accounted for by the precise theory he rejects. Additionally, the account given of Gandalf's resurrection in LOTR is simple and direct compared with the much more embellished presentation in the movie, which was made years after Tolkien had already died. This relative simplicity establishes convincingly that the earlier account was historic.

[@anthonyzuffrea176]

The problem with your comparison is that Jesus was a real person and Gandalf is obviously a fictional character. Jesus's existence is attested by many secular and Jewish sources such as the Babylonian Talmud and the Anti Christian Roman Historian Tacitus. Even the most secular scholars like Bart Erhman say Jesus was very much a real historical figure. So you're comparing apples and oranges here. The difference is Jesus was a real person and so were the first Christians, Gandalf was not. Also his death by Pontius Pilate and the explosion of Christianity after his death are also attested to by non Christian sources.

[@Abc-cp6cb]

We have evidence the lord of the rings isn't history but was a fictional story created by tolkien. We have evidence there is no theoden, Gandalf, Aragorn, Gimli, etc. as they were all invented by tolkien. We have evidence against their existence. Do you have evidence that Jesus is a fictional character? Were Jesus's apostles fictional characters? Do you have evidence that Jesus's resurrection was merely a fictional story created for some other purpose? who wrote the story and what was their motive?

[@timdowling6950]

@@Abc-cp6cb well, as I said to the last person who replied, my interest here is not the point at issue. Precisely, the import of my comment was to underline parodically the absence of an intelligent argument for or against the resurrection - at least on this video, which I recommend you to see. As you yourself point out, nothing is gained by merely asserting that the event in question did or didn't happen and then presenting a justification for that assertion which lacks justificatory substance, but is instead wrapped up a show of conceited self-assurance and bombast. Doubtless the believer has become so accustomed to assuming that Jesus rose from the dead that an argument against that postulate would strike her as counterintuitive and even absurd, whereas the skeptic has a similar reaction to the assertion that a dead man literally walked. That is precisely why an argument to the point should have structure and substance, instead of just merely quoting what a text says about itself. Whether that text is the New Testament, the LOTR or the Beano makes no difference AT ALL to THE STRUCTURE of such an argument. Anyone who can't see that is a bit deficient in pattern-seeing. My objective was the structure of the argument, not the point under discussion. As for your questions, answer them yourself. I certainly have no interest in them: after all, in no way, shape or form do they - however indirectly - address what I initially wrote, or any subsequent remark I have made.

[@tns8022]

@@timdowling6950 It is easier for men to die for a belief or faith . Assuming that I am a disciple of Jesus, I lived with Jesus for three years ate with him , slept along, joked with him , saw his sweat , saw him in flesh. Now if I am not sure about his resurrection or his claim to deity, why would I go and die in a faraway land claiming that Jesus is God if I know first-hand he wasn't? It doesn't make any sense. Infact history attests to the fact that 10 of his disciples gave up their life for the claim that Jesus was resurrected and He is the Messiah. Men would die for what they believe to be true. None would die for something they knew as a lie first-hand. The life and martyrdom of the Jesus disciples is the greatest logical proof of resurrection!!

[@timdowling6950]

@@tns8022 your reply has no relevance to my comment, but I would point out that your argument here is threadbare. It is threadbare for two reasons: the way it begs the question and the deplorable level of psychology it contains. First of all: if the existence of the church (i.e. the apostles' mission and the fact of martyrs) proves the resurrection of Jesus, then clearly, there is nothing to argue about, since there is no way in heck that I can deny the existence of the Christian Church. Neither can anyone else. So where is the falsifiability there? In that case, a man who stands up to act as a Christian apologist is a clown and a self-confessed liar. I haven't alleged that, by the way. But you just have. Secondly, you could spare others (and yourself) a course in fourth-rate knee-jerk cliche psychology that is so bad it is not even wrong. People wouldn't die for something they knew was a fiction? Like Hell they would. You could not be more dead wrong there. Joseph Smith died for ideas that he knew he had made up from scratch himself and so did Hitler. I assume you're not arguing that the fact that Hitler took his own life in the Führerbunker lends any credence to Mein Kampf. If you're not, so much for your argument.

[@USA2023..]

Great content. PRESENTATION would be so much better if he didn't have to keep reading it from notes. Definitely would have been sincere.

[@Raiden-the-Goat32]

Or the jew's saying the apostles stoled the body could be looked at 3 ways. 1 the jew's did do it and was called out so they tried to put the blame on the apostles. 2 the apostles did steal the body and was trying to blame the jew's. 3 neither the jew's nor apostles stole the body and someone else did.

[@emkfenboi]

Speculations & assumptions.

[@thunderpooch]

Oh, ok, no proof. Thanks

[@ajhitchner]

Watch it again

[@ed1726]

5:38 Fact number one proves nothing as to whether Jesus was resurrected. Do any of the other facts?

[@clarencecausey7473]

Ed: do you understand what a "cumulative argument" is? If you do, then Dr. Craig's argument is easy to understand. In most instances, say in a murder trial, a single piece of factual evidence (Joe was at the crime scene) would hardly convince anyone that Joe was the murderer; but combined with other known facts (Joe's fingerprints are on the murder weapon) might lead to the logical, cumulative conclusion the Joe was the murderer...

[@ed1726]

@@clarencecausey7473 No I've never heard of the term 'cumulative argument' before. A quick google returns only religious based exampled of its use, I can find no reference to it within law circles, or any other field such as logic. Besides you have ignored my point and not answered my question. The first fact says nothing (please note the word nothing) about whether Jesus was resurrected. Dying is not proof of resurrection. You may as well say the first fact is Jesus wore a coat. What is the significance? This is not analogous to finger prints on a murder weapon (which is evidence). So again, do any of the other facts have anything to do with proving a resurrection? Like anything at all?

[@clarencecausey7473]

@@ed1726 ..a cumulative argument is used by lawyers in a court of law; as in the example I used, of using multiple facts that separately might not convince anyone, but cumulatively (meaning together), might. Merely placing Joe at the crime scene wouldn't convince anyone of anything, but Joe's fingerprints on the weapon, the fact that Joe had a motive, that his blood was at the scene, would make a case for his guilt. I agree "the first fact", by itself, means nothing; but Craig isn't arguing that it does. He's arguing that combined with other lines of evidence, makes a compelling case. No one. or almost no one, ever argues from a single line of evidence. Do you actually believe that the Big Bang is supported by a single "fact", or is it from multiple facts? Obviously it's the latter...

[@clarencecausey7473]

@@ed1726 So how would you refute Dr. Craig's "Resurrection Argument", especially if you were talking to a Christian?

[@ed1726]

@@clarencecausey7473 As I said I can find no reference to the words 'cumulative argument' outside of religious sites. If you can find me references in scientific journals (or court cases) concerning cosmology then I will happily take on board this new fact. Just to be clear (although it really shouldn't be necessary) I am not saying that trials never have more than one piece of evidence or that scientific theories don't either. I am just saying I have never heard of the exact term 'cumulative argument' outside of religion. Courts (and scientific bodies) have standards on what they will and won't accept as evidence. They also weight the evidence based off of mathematical probability and standards of proof. As I understand it this is what you mean by 'cumulative argument'? So let me try to be clear. Evidence needs standards, it doesn't matter how much evidence you have if all the evidence has no connection to the inference you are trying to make. So, once again, do any of the other facts have anything to do with a resurrection?

[@renemartin5729]

According to legend, Jesus got so blasted that he woke up 3 days later in a cave not remembering how he got there.

[@irontaylor9992]

Question 1. who were the 500 paul was talking about 2. question who were the 12 because if it means the aostles wasnt peter a apostle so was james Question 3 where dose it say jesus apeared to paul cause in acts chappter 9 Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples. He went to the high priest 2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, so that if he found any there who belonged to the Way, whether men or women, he might take them as prisoners to Jerusalem. 3 As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” no where dose that say jesus apeared to paul it says he saw a light and heard a voice

[@electronworld4996]

What an idiotic defense lol

[@psuedonym8344]

Sorry my fellow Christians but Craig iz wrong "for these and other reasons" on the Resurrection. Lets set the story aside; where iz the historicity of damaging earthquakes, an eclipse that went for hours, and lets not forget, graves opening diseased saints? None made the record. Craig:"These are legend" Anyone: isnt that what the bible says? Even more so; James was a jew and told paul not to preach the gosspil against torah(Jerusalem)& and was killed. Lies hurt mr. craig.

[@jpaul1599]

Sijifredo Sarabia - if truth does not convince you, please be content in your ignorance and go on in life.

[@psuedonym8344]

@@jpaul1599 'Good Sir,' i gave you truth without being belittling & insult in form of question. You had no answer. Whos more ignorant? Thank you for applying what youve learned in Jesus' name.

[@jpaul1599]

@@psuedonym8344 - Craig has absolutely confirmed the authenticity of Christ's burial and resurrection - you however seem to be questioning it ? Or are you a believer in Christ's burial and resurrection ?? It's not clear from your comments.

[@psuedonym8344]

@@jpaul1599 Im not questioning Christs resurrection. Im asking to put it aside and credit other evidence like earthquakes, eclipses, graves turning over as told in New Testament as an outside source to lean this 'possibility.' Just adjacent as noahs ark; and there being a global flood as some use archeology and geography.

[@jpaul1599]

@@psuedonym8344 - then I am sorry for misunderstanding your remarks . Apologies from me. Shalom.

[@GeoCoppens]

Such nonsense!

[@biblicalfacts3409]

wjy is ist nonesense?

[@GeoCoppens]

@@biblicalfacts3409 There never happened a resurrection; it's not a fact! Biblical nonsense!

[@GreekOrthodox7]

@@GeoCoppens Well if you have never deeply studied the life of Jesus and the history of His resurrection for yourself, you need to see what the people in this field have to say. I will quote the top historians in the world who have studied the life of Jesus. They have studied it and are able to comment on the subject, not random people online who have studied nothing. Every historian, whether atheist, agnostic, Christian, Jewish, etc. who has studied this field acknowledges that Jesus was a real figure and they agree with much of what the New Testament claims happened to Him. For example, with regards to the crucifixion, we can demonstrate the crucifixion of Jesus on numerous biblically-independent ancient sources. One of our best secular sources comes from the reliable Roman historian and senator Tacticus, where he writes: “Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called "Christians" by the populace. Christus (or Christ), from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.” - Tacticus, Annals, Book XV Now let’s see what top historians have to say. Bart Ehrman, regarded as the top atheist historian on the topic of the life of Jesus, said: “There is no scholar in any college or university in the Western world who teaches classics, ancient history, New Testament, early Christianity, or any related field, who doubts that Jesus existed.” He even says it is an utter embarrassment for atheists to claim there is no proof of Jesus and that He never existed. He says it is embarrassing and makes atheists look uneducated, since there is overwhelming proof that Jesus was a real historical figure who was indeed crucified. Another historian who has deeply studied this field, Graeme Clarke, said: “Frankly, I know of no ancient historian or biblical historian who would have a twinge of doubt about the existence of a Jesus Christ.” I will now include more quotes from top historians involved in this subject: “One of the MOST CERTAIN FACTS OF HISTORY is that Jesus was crucified on orders of the Roman prefect of Judea, Pontius Pilate.” - Bart Ehrman “Jesus’ death as a consequence of crucifixion is indisputable.” - Gerd Lüdemann “There is not the slightest doubt about the fact of Jesus’ crucifixion under Pontius Pilate.” - John Dominic Crossan “Jesus’ execution is the most certain fact about the historical Jesus.” - Marcus Borg “Jesus’ death by crucifixion is historically certain.” - Pinchas Lapide “The single most solid fact about Jesus’ life is his death: he was executed by the Roman prefect Pontius Pilate on or around Passover, in the manner Rome reserved particularly for political insurrectionists, namely, crucifixion.” - Paula Fredriksen As for the resurrection of Jesus, here is again what even atheist historians on the subject say about it: “We can say with complete certainty that some of his (Jesus’) disciples at some later time insisted that he soon appeared to them, convincing them that he had been raised from the dead. . . It is a historical fact that some of Jesus’ followers came to believe that he had been raised from the dead, soon after his execution. ” - Bart Ehrman “It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’ death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ.” - Gerd Lüdemann “I know in their own terms what they saw was the raised Jesus. I’m not saying that they really did see the raised Jesus. I wasn’t there. I don’t know what they saw. But I do know, as a historian, that they must have seen something.” - Paula Fredriksen I won’t even go into the numerous accounts and records we have in history were hundreds and even thousands of Christians were willing to be brutally tortured and killed for not denying their belief in Jesus and the claim that they saw Him clearly after His crucifixion. Why would they lie to get brutally tortured and killed, in the worst ways possible? If it were a few people, you could say they were just crazy or something. But hundreds and even thousands, willing to be tortured up to death? That’s just false thinking.

[@GeoCoppens]

@@GreekOrthodox7 You are a deeply deluded fool!

[@GeoCoppens]

@@GreekOrthodox7 Let's assume that Jesus was human, as it is said. When a human is dead, his nervous system starts to break down after some 8-10 minutes. The decay if his body starts to putrefy almost immediately after death and especially in the hot climate of the Middle East. After three days the process of rotting flesh is far advanced and cannot be reversed. So much for the resurrection of any human including a so named Jesus. See Richard Carrier about the historical Jesus.

[@lancep4164]

Dracula also rose from the dead. I have a book that says so.

[@dajanacoric5495]

How many historians have verified that?

[@lancep4164]

@@dajanacoric5495 Not a one because rising from the dead is only in fiction.

[@kevindame3757]

​@@lancep4164Which actually only strengthens the case for the resurrection mind you, because it is so rare in any non-fictional account.

[@lancep4164]

@@kevindame3757 There are no non fictional accounts.

[@jounisuninen]

@@lancep4164 ... except that Lord Jesus' rising from death is confirmed reality.

[@hankcester]

Shalom