Herod vs. John: Historical Accuracy of Gospels

Both the Jewish historian Josephus and the Gospels recount the story of Herod Antipas, his affair with his brother Philip’s wife, and how it led to the execution of John the Baptist. This alignment and historical background highlights the Gospel writers' accuracy and familiarity with the events of the time, underscoring the Gospels' reliability as historical records.
Are you a Christian struggling with doubts? Get 1-on-1 counseling at talkaboutdoubts.com
Help support me: / isjesusalive or paypal.me/isjesusalive for a one-time gift
Amazon wish list: www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @testifyapologetics
Visit my blog: isjesusalive.com
Recommended books on defending the Gospels: isjesusalive.com/recommended-...

[@TestifyApologetics]

Josephus quotes: “Now, when [many] others came in crowds about him, for they were greatly moved [or pleased] by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion (for they seemed ready to do anything he should advise), thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it should be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod’s suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death.” (Antiquities 18.5.2) “About this time Aretas (the king of Arabia Petrea) and Herod had a quarrel, on the account following: Herod the tetrarch had married the daughter of Aretas, and had lived with her a great while; but when he was once at Rome, he lodged with Herod, who was his brother indeed, but not by the same mother; for this Herod was the son of the high priest Simon’s daughter. However, he fell in love with Herodias, this last Herod’s wife, who was the daughter of Aristobulus their brother, and the sister of Agrippa the Great. This man ventured to talk to her about a marriage between them; which address when she admitted, an agreement was made for her to change her habitation, and come to him as soon as he should return from Rome; one article of this marriage also was this, that he should divorce Aretas’s daughter. So Antipas, when he had made this agreement, sailed to Rome; but when he had done there the business he went about, and was returned again, his wife having discovered the agreement he had made with Herodias, and having learned it before he had notice of her knowledge of the whole design, she desired him to send her to Macherus, which is a place on the borders of the dominions of Aretas and Herod, without informing him of any of her intentions. Accordingly Herod sent her thither, as thinking his wife had not perceived anything; now she had sent a good while before to Macherus, which was subject to her father, and so all things necessary for her journey were made ready for her by the general of Aretas’s army and by that means she soon came into Arabia, under the conduct of the several generals, who carried her from one to another successively; and she soon came to her father, and told him of Herod’s intentions. So Aretas made this the first occasion of his enmity between him and Herod, who had also some quarrel with him about their limits at the country of Gamalitis. So they raised armies on both sides, and prepared for war, and sent their generals to fight instead of themselves; and, when they had joined battle, all Herod’s army was destroyed by the treachery of some fugitives, who, though they were of the tetrarchy of Philip, joined with Aretas’s army. So Herod wrote about these affairs to Tiberius; who, being very angry at the attempt made by Aretas, wrote to Vitellius, to make war upon him, and either to take him alive, and bring him to him in bonds, or to kill him, and send him his head. This was the charge that Tiberius gave to the president of Syria.” (Antiquities 18.108-115) “Now, some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist; for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness… Now the Jews had an opinion that the destruction of this army was sent as a punishment upon Herod, and a mark of God’s displeasure against him.” (Antiquities 18.116-117) Marcherus is "on the borders of the dominions of Aretas and Herod.” (Antiquities 18.111).

[@RustyWalker]

Note the absence of John being killed as a birthday present. Josephus tells us John was killed because Herod was afraid he would foment a rebellion. This is very much a Trojan source if you're trying to prove the Bible as true.

[@Boundless_Border]

Now. On the Josephus quotes there is the issue that not only is this likely interpolated. But the author is acknowledging that they are getting this information from Jews. As indicated here. "Now some Jews thought... and was there put to death." It is important to take note that your opening quote is actually at the end of the second one (with the final sentence being the exception of being after the end of what I quoted). A bit convoluted and looking at it yourself may clear that up. I don't think you did this to be misleading but I do think that it contextualizes it differently. Whether or not Josephus wrote it is secondary to the author acknowledging that it is a record of Jews and their thoughts. This largely reframes some of what you're saying. Whether or not Herod killed John is then not affirmed by Tacitus. At least not in his own words. And similarly the reason of Herod would have a record of being at least unclear to the Jews during this time (or maybe Tacitus omitted the second reason from his records of the thoughts the Jews had). Still some interesting historical nuggets. But the initial framing you started off with is shaky. With the more solid details being that it Herod were to send someone to kill another it would be a high ranking soldier, and soldiers were on duty at this time.

[@flamingswordapologetics]

Good work! Keep em coming.

[@notme5205]

@@Boundless_BorderAnyway to cope huh.

[@Boundless_Border]

@notme5205 I wouldn't be so harsh to Testify. I can understand that he may make such a mistake.

[@thebatman2405]

Jesus is King

[@JesusWillRaptureUs]

Amennn❤❤

[@Nguyenzander]

Bro stay on topic this comment does nothing

[@thebatman2405]

@@Nguyenzander its about the same topic of christianity

[@itaxevasixn8808]

@@Nguyenzander jesus christ is lord and god.

[@r4_in_space]

Batman is originally very archetipally like Christ, in which he transforms his suffering into redemption to others.

[@TheStarshipGarage]

Herod could literally have his own reality show with how much drama he went through and caused lol.

[@graysonhoward1562]

I’ll still take him over Herod elder

[@MeanBeanComedy]

The more you read the Bible, the more you realise half the characters would fit in perfectly with reality TV and daytime soaps. People never change!

[@johnrockwell5834]

Politics is a bloody soap opera many times.

[@kaylahensley1581]

Now I’m picturing Herodias as Kris Jenner and Salome as one of the Kardashian girls.

[@kimOMG3516]

When a certain Hollywood producer sees this... "Brace yourselves, a new controversial movie trailer is coming on 202X!"

[@mgvilaca]

Time for skeptics to move the goalposts again

[@Boundless_Border]

May I ask what goalposts are being moved or addressed? This video at its core is something that most atheists would agree with. Namely that the Gospels do contain historical nuggets.

[@mgvilaca]

@@Boundless_Border they never waste a chance to do so

[@Boundless_Border]

@@mgvilaca That doesn't really answer my question(s).

[@mgvilaca]

@@Boundless_Border I didn't say any goalposts were moved, read it again. But I wouldn't be surprised, since they go as far as dating the synoptic Gospels to 85 AD because Jesus couldn't have predicted the destruction of Jerusalem when even a mere farmer Jesus Ben Ananias predicted it

[@Boundless_Border]

@@mgvilaca I read it. But you did say that it was time for them to move the goalposts, implying that some goalpost of evidence has been met and so the atheist would have to shift goalposts. I have trouble believing that any representative amount of atheists would argue that there aren't nuggets of historical details in the Gospels. In fact the often mocked Spiderman fallacy implicitly agrees with that. So, I'm curious exactly what goal has been met in this video that the atheists would have to shift goalposts for? As for the dating... I'll just leave that alone for the moment as it is largely irrelevant to my question.

[@karol9205]

Thank you for your work. You helped in my conversion to Jesus, and now I'm sure Bible is real word of God.

[@TestifyApologetics]

Thanks for sharing this. Glory to God.

[@ogloc6308]

Praise God

[@eugenetswong]

Congratulations, Karol and Testify.

[@sholland42]

I just read again The Gospel according to John yesterday. Jesus loves him, and so do I. Keep spreading the good news!

[@protochris]

In Mark 10:19 when the a young man asks Jesus what he must do to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus responds "You know the commandments", and the first he mentions is "Do not commit adultery". Jesus had a strong message to the people in that area about divorce and adultery.

[@hermanessences]

Really interesting stuff ^^ Also an interesting fact: today, we have surviving coins with the face and name of Salome (the princess who danced at the party where they decided to kill John)

[@eugenetswong]

"Also an interesting fact: today, we have surviving coins with the face and name of Salome (the princess who danced at the party where they decided to kill John)" Thank you for this info!

[@skyr4tMusic]

Seeing how history lines up with the gospels is always a jaw dropping experience

[@defectoamarsins3539]

Not only that but the gospel itself is history

[@NoghaStar]

This whole family loves the name “HEROD”

[@rickoshay5525]

Just like how France had 18 Kings named Louise.

[@NoghaStar]

@@rickoshay5525 they should’ve “The Second” or “The Third” that would be more convenient 😂

[@WarriorcatGerda]

You get the name Herod you get the name Herod everybody gets the name Herod

[@teamrocketjoe1621]

I hope you keep posting videos like this. We need Christians who are great teachers as well as memers. You'd be surprised how influential memes can be in proving a point.

[@paulus809]

yes, the memes are great!

[@DoIoannToKnow]

memetics is literally just modern iconography. memeing to teach and evangelize is modern martyrdom

[@paulnash6944]

I honestly can’t understand how Christianity critics can use the gospels not falling exactly in line with the historical narrative as a reason for it being fiction. If anything, I would expect the Bible to sensationalize the historical events.

[@Boundless_Border]

To simplify it. If you're exaggerating then strictly in terms of accuracy you would be wrong. Of course critics think that their is likely going to be sensationalized information and so forth. That is why they don't think it is inerrant. But many Christians do think it is inerrant. There is where the issue lies. Do you think you can understand the critic a little more now? I will say that simply calling it fiction can be misleading. Similarly I don't think we should simply call the Illiad fiction. But I'm sure you can agree that whether or not something is called fiction it can get details wrong.

[@gozerofgozmis4181]

The Magik parts

[@paulnash6944]

@@gozerofgozmis4181 Yep, that’s always the argument these unbelievers devolve to. When the Bible is proven to be accurate, it’s always conveniently only the magic parts that were forged.

[@gozerofgozmis4181]

@@paulnash6944 ....yeah maybe beacouse human made reference to real historical city and put the Magik to push theyre propaganda? Have younnotice that only actual city and Kings are proven by bible Is like Olympus and existing montain for Zeus , this by your own Logic make you an unbeliver of Zeus

[@EveryTongue]

Jesus, yesterday, today and tomorrow.

[@colemcgill3845]

Thank God for this channel.

[@freddurstedgebono6029]

Loving this series!

[@TinyFord1]

Hey man. Is this just your blessed insight or do you also rely on commentaries? Because if you do I would very much like to also get these commentaries because I love how the puzzle pieces come together. Would you please tell me which ones if you do use them, if not then please write your own.

[@TestifyApologetics]

This one comes from A View of the Evidences for Christianity by William Paley

[@TinyFord1]

@@TestifyApologeticsthanks so much for taking the time to reply I really appreciate it.

[@FishermensCorner]

Rocking and rolling, day in and day out. Excellent work as usual.

[@Frodojack]

I love how you put the puzzle pieces together. I wish I could say that this is one of your best videos, but how can I do that when they're all winners?

[@carson.conant]

love these videos!!! have watched all of them in one night!!!

[@BobBob-yj6pg]

Every time thankful for your work

[@coltclouse7561]

This video was amazing. I'm blown away with how great your information is and how well you deliver it

[@yourneighbour3309]

love the editing lol, great video!

[@user-io4oo2dh6y]

Live by Scripture Pray all day every day

[@lmdo678i]

Love these small conformations

[@LartinBeats-rg6pf]

Muy bueno!

[@ryanrockstarsessom768]

Thank you

[@2uyz]

Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and forever, until the ages of ages, amen.

[@bryce8594]

thanks so much!

[@lumix2477]

For my judgment, this I plea, nothing but the blood of Jesus! Not by works that I have done, nothing but the blood of Jesus! 👍🔥

[@Gib24]

These videos are awesome! Love the visuals 😂

[@Gutslinger]

1:32 - So not only would it be unlawful for him to marry his brother's wife, but wouldn't it also be unlawful for him to marry his niece? I read Leviticus somewhat recently, but I forget the exact details. Seems like I remember verses that forbid things like seeing the nakedness of your aunt, so I would think that would also apply to a niece and uncle?

[@LucasTF]

Hey, Testify. Your videos are very interesting. May I ask, apparently it is agreed upon Luke and Matt copied a lot of their Gospels from Mark. Do you agree with that?

[@TestifyApologetics]

There is literary dependence between the Synoptics yes. And I think Markan priority makes the most sense but I am open handed about it. That said I think they are partially dependent and independent, see my series on undesigned coincidences (it's a playlist...just skip the videos on Acts since they're not related to your question)

[@austin33785]

Hahaha i love that Herod is depicted as a coomer.

[@AffectionateComputerChip-re4iq]

Can you make a video defending the early dating of the book of Daniel?

[@ieattwiceaday4116]

Herod could've avoided all of this simply by watching a kitchen sink installation tutorial by Testify. Shame he didn't.

[@vincenzorutigliano7239]

Epic

[@TheLegendaryMonarch]

This is a genuine question from a believer, but I saw a comment from when you helped debunk satan's guide to the bible saying that Humans basically have neural pathways to affirming divinity, so that all things present in the bible and other religions can be treated as humans making things up in order to feel safe. Was wondering what you thought about that. Personally, I don't believe it, but it is hard to argue against.

[@TestifyApologetics]

Neural pathways all by themselves do not create fake multisensory appearances of the resurrected Jesus

[@TheLegendaryMonarch]

@@TestifyApologetics alright. I find it funny how some of the comments on youtube comments repeat the same things that the video already debunk

[@eugenetswong]

"Humans basically have neural pathways to affirming divinity, so that all things present in the bible and other religions can be treated as humans making things up in order to feel safe." I can't comment on the science. It would be silly to rely on such a fact to form an opinion on any religion, because clearly, not all people react like that to religious ideas and text.

[@AffectionateComputerChip-re4iq]

thoughts on Gary's minimal facts for the resurrection?

[@Boundless_Border]

Testify doesn't like the minimal facts case to my knowledge. Hopefully you'll be able to hear it directly from him but in the absence of that I thought to let you know in advance.

[@TestifyApologetics]

I don't think it works. See my older playlist on the resurrection and I talk about why and what should be used instead

[@Lord9Genesis]

But...but.. muh spoiderman! What about that?!

[@user-mp8tk7sf3m]

Learning about mount sinai and sodom and Gomorrah was refreshing

[@joe-cm4lz]

Hey guys, i just read an article on "colonizer Jesus vs Historixal Jesus" and want to know more information if anyone has resources, thanks.

[@jonathanwilliams1065]

Even in peacetime Roman soldiers were stationed all over the empire, and the empire was also almost always at war.

[@eugenetswong]

Yeah, I think that that part of this video was silly and irrelevant. A soldier is a soldier. I understand that they viewed things differently back then, but there will always be soldiers, even if just in training.

[@pomtubes1205]

im not hating, i actually absolutely love these, i REALLY just want to justify why matthew's genealogies deviates from luke and mark, and they're on the first chapters of each gospel

[@TestifyApologetics]

I discuss it in my reply to Holy Kool-Aid

[@eugenetswong]

I don't think that the genealogies were easy to understand for early believers either. I think that I figured it out, though: Joseph was adopted into the lineage recorded by Matthew. Both lineages are through Joseph. 1 was his official legal royal lineage, while the other is his technical birth lineage. If you look at his royal lineage in Matthew, then you'll see that Mary and other women are mentioned, but it is the men that that they are married to who will carry the royalty. The other lineage mentions names that probably are female, but they are so integrated that there aren't any mentions of marriage. The phrases connecting the names should be seen as figurative, and not indicative of whether or not the person is male or female. I think that the message of Luke is that his ancestry is very miraculous and common sense. With a mix of men and women in the genealogy, there is bound to be a connection to David either way you go. It's like 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon. I have a feeling that most KZbinrs won't find this interesting, though. I'm disappionted.

[@johnrockwell5834]

Terrifying that Jesus said nothing more to him after he beheaded John. If Herod isn't willing to listen to John to repent. Then given God's mission on earth to bring men to repentance and Salvation cannot be fulfilled by speaking to Herod who won't listen anyway.

[@glugglugglug.7963]

I do not understand why the truth Christ spoke about divorce differs from that of the old testament. I understand that rules change with the circumstance they are built for so that crimes were more harshly treated in ancient times out of necessity for the survival of a community. It could be that the difference between male and female virginity (given that only women can become pregnant) is being reflected. I would be grateful for a response to give clarity to my incomplete speculations.

[@joshpetit8298]

Hey, that's a great question. Jesus actually expounds on why there is a difference. Matthew 19:8 says "Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so" Here we see the concept that God's original intention was no divorce (the one fleshing in Genesis 2:24, Matthew 19:5, and other places). Now, sin happened and because of the state of Israel to a certain extent some things were allowed, but what Christ is doing (and has always aimed to do) was to bring us back to the Eden ideal. We see that in how before it said do not kill, but Christ said don't even hate. Before it said don't commit adultery, Christ says don't even look at a woman with lust that's not your wife. Christ is showing us the heart of the law which is a much weightier matter (Matthew 23:23, Matthew 15:8). That is my understanding, I hope it can shed some light and I'm open to any more questions.

[@eugenetswong]

@@joshpetit8298 I affirm your understanding.

[@imimpo9316]

Jesus is King! Christ is Risen, brothers and sisters!❤☦️

[@Boundless_Border]

Hello. Glad I'm caught up again. I'm honestly pretty satisfied with the extent of which you utilize the presented evidence towards your case. You don't mention tying the narrative back to witnesses. The largest issues I have with the presentation emerge at two places. The beginning preface with your stipulation of consistency without indicating that there can similarly be areas of inconsistency. This treatment of the document as a monolith is problematic. Then later around 4:40 when you bring up how some aspects seem to line up while simultaneously talking about some that do not and using the extremely loose phrase that there is some real history in the Gospels. Sure I'll agree that you mention likely real history in that section but you similarly inserted more likely as inaccurate history at the same time. Now we can quibble but if you put an 80% likely history next to a 70% likely history as if they are the same then I hope it can understand why someone can say this is problematic. But that is pretty much it. Just minor quibbles that I think can lead to misunderstandings. P.S. There is a bit of an issue with the Josephus passage you quote but I decided to leave it alone in this response since that is what I typically do and you have a pinned comment quoting it. I actually really like how measued this one is in comparison. Nice job. I'll agree that there is real history contained within the Gospels. Edit: I even gave an upvote to show my appreciation towards your more measured claims.

[@inukithesavage828]

This wpuld be all that context the spooderman fallacy ignores that Spiderman Comics would get WRONG.

[@Gutslinger]

It's been a while since I read this portion of the Gospels, but did Herod really want to kill him?. I thought I vaguely remember something about Herod not really wanting him to be executed, but honored the girl's request. But I can't remember if I got that from people or scripture. Surely Herod executing John like that would make people perceive him as a martyr, and cause even more resentment towards Herod, considering that John had influence with the people.

[@alfonsuskristo1624]

Unrelated but have y'all ever heard of "He's/She's a Christian of course he/she would write an account that supports Christianity" argument? I think that's stupid because when Christianity is proven true and you're a witness, it's weird for you not to be a Christian afterwards. Have a good day.

[@paulallenscards]

Mark’s gospel sends Jesus out into the wilderness with a sense of urgency, and by the time he returns John has been imprisoned without explanation. His arrest is communicated in passing, as though it is implicit for his audience. Stranger still is his absence for the next five chapters, until ch. 6 where Mark shares about John’s death before even expounding upon the circumstances that led to it. I think these narrative choices are some of the strongest evidence for John’s historical legitimacy, and yet, Mark appears to be downplaying John’s significance in order to shift credit for his movement over to Jesus. Or, perhaps Mark feels too distant from these early events to give a detailed testimony, and so he only shares that which he’s been made privvy? Curious to hear what others think.

[@christiancrusader9374]

That makes sense. Some of the apostles were John's desciples first, so they would know more about what happened.

[@eugenetswong]

Paul, I think that you nailed it right on the head. Elaborating would have been weird, because it was commonly knowledge at the time. It is important to underscore that the 1st 5 books of the New Testament were written by grassroots people using what was avalable to do what is right. That is how God used them. It is also important to underscore that the 1st 5 books of the Old Testament were written by God dictating on a mountain, and then a mere mortal bringing it down to the people. Chuck Missler said that God probably dictated by spelling out every word, since this would be the way that Moses would have recorded puns, which are seen in the Bible. Don't quote me, though. My point is that everything in this video and in your comment confirm that the gospels and Acts were organic and correct.

[@paulallenscards]

@@eugenetswong common knowledge to some indeed, but who specifically? This is the question I have a great difficulty answering, especially if we are to understand the author as the interpreter of Peter during his stead in Rome. Why would a Roman audience be at all familiar with the life of an Ebionite Jew from a previous generation? I suppose one answer could be that this is what Peter preached, but if so then why not preface it as such? And even more vexing is the reality that Peter is no witness to John’s life either, so the primary source for John’s life-whatever it is-must come from elsewhere.

[@eugenetswong]

@@paulallenscards I'm not too sure that you understand what i meant. i was referring to the political antics. They would have known that elite were not getting along, and decided to leave out certain info in the written narratives.

[@TheNightWatcher1385]

Genuine question: Why did Jesus claim John the Baptist was the second coming of Elijah when John himself denied this? Does this not mean that Jesus failed the prophecy in Malachi that Elijah must bodily return before the messiah will appear?

[@TestifyApologetics]

Probably because John himself was being humble and he just may not have known.

[@TheNightWatcher1385]

@@TestifyApologetics Seems like a stretch, frankly. Not to mention Elijah supposedly appeared during the transfiguration. This would mean that either Jesus got the identity of Elijah wrong, or Elijah appeared twice in the same region at the same time and as two different people. That doesn’t make much sense since Elijah bodily entered heaven. He’d only have one form to return with. It also doesn’t make sense that Jesus would say that there were individuals listening to his sermons who would not die before he returned. This claim makes his divinity seem less and less likely with each passing year he does not return. Unless we are to believe that there’s a group of immortal Israelites wandering the earth as we speak, until he comes back. I want to believe Jesus is the Son. But these glaring issues trouble me.

[@adenjones1802]

@@TheNightWatcher1385 Elijah appearing on the mountain would not fulfil the prophecy and was not meant to. Moses was there and there is no prophecy about his return. Also the return of Elija was specifically about Elijah getting kids to respect their parents for example. Meaning public preaching. Something that the Elijah on the mountain was not doing. Also, where does it say that they would not die before his return? Does it say that or does it say until they see him coming in his kingdom. Those are two different things.

[@MeanBeanComedy]

Testify cranking out solid Christian content? Business as usual. Testify becoming a meme god? Surprising! 😳🤔

[@greghannibal]

I almost thought this was about Elijah

[@Snpiedog]

How so?

[@greghannibal]

@@Snpiedog Bad king and his worse wife vs dirty prophet

[@trillionaire8886]

Locust are an unclean unkosher animal right? Why did John eat them?

[@adenjones1802]

Nah Locusts are cosher

[@nothingnothing7958]

Why was it unlawful for him to be married to her?

[@TestifyApologetics]

She was his brother's wife

[@nothingnothing7958]

@@TestifyApologetics was his brother dead?

[@IslandUsurper]

@@nothingnothing7958 nnnnope! Go back in the video where he talks about Herod’s war with Aretas, and losing badly. Part of the reason is Herod Philip (the brother) added his army to Aretas’s (his wife’s father).

[@burnstick1380]

0:27 maybe I'm just nitpicking but I'm a bit bothered that the puzzle with Josephus has a flat side on it (aka it's on the border) and looks like (!) it will connect with the gospel puzzle but this one doesn't have a flat side but otherwise great video.^^

[@inthenameoftheson]

Why can’t it be both? Because that’s HERESY

[@TestifyApologetics]

Huh?

[@lsixty30]

You Pentecostal savage , you ! xD

[@lsixty30]

Great videos, I often take notes.

[@dandeliontea7]

"But wait, there's more!" Remember Jesus's words in Luke 14 about a king sitting down to count the cost before he goes to war? Yeah, that's talking about Herod going to war against his FIL as well.

[@geraldjohnson8871]

Unbelievers do Not Even consider History or they would Not be Unbelievers. For a true believer the Word Of GOD is enough proof that Jesus is the Saviour of The World. AMEN. Great video that people should watch to learn about the History of Jesus. Amen.

[@Boundless_Border]

People who don't believe in your god can similarly appreciate history. But I think it is particularly problematic to say the "word of God" (the Bible) is enough. And it shuts out any discussion for investigating whether or not it is true.

[@geraldjohnson8871]

@Boundless_Border @b_b. b_b real intelligent reply but if people would check historical events they would see that My God is in fact the only God that has mattered in the history of mankind. Search the Scriptures for in them ye think ye have Eternal Life and they are they that testify that Jesus was and is Still alive To Day. Luke 17:20,21. AMEN.

[@Boundless_Border]

@@geraldjohnson8871 Thank you. I hope for a similarly intelligent discussion. Looking through history,your god seems as real and so as important as any other. If I want to be charitable than it could be considered one of the more important ones simply based on the actions people who believed he existed did. But that to me seems less about the god and more about the people. But I can understand and respect an argument made to also attribute the actions of people who believe to the importance of what they believe in. As for searching the scriptures for eternal life. I don't know how you consider that as relevant. I get that it can be a feel good message for you but can you see how maybe that would be unimportant if it isn't verified?

[@geraldjohnson8871]

@Boundless_Border @b_b. I believe what l believe Not because of what l have read in the Bible, But by what l have lived ln my life, agreed that l did Not live other people's lives but they or You have Not lived mine either. Experiences of life is what causes people to believe the Way they Do. That's why the world lives in fantasy or deception. Amen.

[@aka_dust]

OOOOOOOOOH!!

[@makeda6530]

Humans really stay messy smh

[@Makaneek5060]

Pilate thought the Pax Romana was pretty boring, he liked bashing heads.

[@mike62mcmanus]

No wonder Jesus left after he heard about John, it was not his time yet...

[@kevinmessiah872]

history does not confirm the bible !

[@TestifyApologetics]

But it does

[@kevinmessiah872]

@@TestifyApologetics nope .. sorry but histiry cannot prove that there is a god or that ancient jew rose from the dead, never mind the ludicrous stories of tje old testament. Is there any evidence of the exodus .. no of course not. What about a global flood...hmm again, if anything history shows the impossibility of such a thing. The list goes on, but the historical evidence of ancient times, whilst showing that there were ancient times, all points towards a fundamentally natural world, without the existence of a jewish zombie sky daddy with anger issues. Sorry, but history doesnt work that way.

[@Commentary173]

@@kevinmessiah872 If you start using the terminology, "sky daddy" you've already lost the argument. Not everything can be proven with science. Zombie? Last time I checked, zombies were undead. However, He is fully alive. Jewish? While that may be true both ethnically and religiously, He was also the Messiah who is God made man. No evidence of anything? Sodom and Gomorrah, molten sand at the Red Sea which is not possible without a tower of fire, how do you get fish fossils on the Himalayas? Historical evidence of ancient times? Okay so the Saints knew the Early Church Fathers who knew the Apostles who knew Jesus. If you really think it was a hoax, you need to watch the Babylon Bee's video on it. History does not show the impossibility of it because whether or not it was a flood, the entire world would have been covered in water at some point. Chariot wheels in the Red Sea. Fundamentally natural world? You wanna know what happens in fundamentally natural world? People believe that just because something is natural that it is okay or that just because something feels good, that it is good when this is not the case hence why addiction exists and that's a very hedonic way of living. Congratulations, you just admitted your own faulty reasoning about it being a natural world which ultimately means you can't achieve objective morality because you can never get what you ought to do from what is. Not only that but the worst position I heard on morality was that it is decided by what society believes benefits them is good and whatever they think doesn't is bad. However, morality is not based on human well-being. As William Lane Craig said before, "If morality is based upon ultimate human well being, is it possible to achieve ultimate well-being by causing pain and suffering to others?" If society determines an inherently evil behavior is ultimately beneficial to them, are you going to go along with it? If you do that, then you're a shill. If what you believe in changes on society as a whole disagreeing and not because you genuinely disagree, then what you believe in doesn't matter. You talk about history. If you look long enough into history, philosophy, theology, archaeology, and morality will make you a Christian. The first gulp of natural sciences will make you an atheist but at the bottom of the glass, God is waiting for you. - Werner Heisenberg

[@cheesytoenails9744]

@@kevinmessiah872 you misspelled history

[@TonyBMW]

No… no it doesn’t

[@TestifyApologetics]

But it do

[@TonyBMW]

@@TestifyApologetics source: trust me bro

[@TestifyApologetics]

do u got an argument m8?

[@imperialrook5442]

I realized i forgot to subscribe to bro