How a History Professor Changed Her Mind About the Resurrection | Molly Worthen at Texas A&M

Molly Worthen (UNC) explores what compelled her about the evidence of Jesus' Resurrection. | Texas A&M University, 4/15/2024 | View full forum at • Changing My Mind: A Sk... | Explore more at www.veritas.org.
Want Veritas updates in your inbox? Subscribe to our twice-monthly newsletter here:
www.veritas.org/newsletter-yt
INSTAGRAM: / veritasforum
FACEBOOK: / veritasforum
PODCAST: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
SUBSCRIBE: kzbin.info_...
Over the past two decades, The Veritas Forum has been hosting vibrant discussions on life's hardest questions and engaging the world's leading colleges and universities with Christian perspectives and the relevance of Jesus. Learn more at www.veritas.org, with upcoming events and over 600 pieces of media on topics including science, philosophy, music, business, medicine, and more!

[@DarinL]

Let me summarize this comment section: a bunch of unqualified, non-historians, blinded by their existing bias, laughing at a qualified, professional historian who is explaining how her historical professionalism forced her to challenge her previous bias.

[@houmm08]

Let me summarise your comment. She's got letters after her name, so whatever she says about anything, however preposterous, we plebs need to take it seriously.

[@noelhausler2911]

@@houmm08 Bart Ehrman an equally qualified scholar has argued with the best evangelical scholars on the resurrection and he has become such a pain that they have created a special channell to defend themselves Bart suggests reading the gospels horizontally. If you do that with the resurrection accounts you find contradictions. In Matthew it is an angel sitting on the rock, in Mark it is ONE angel inside the tomb and in Luke it is TWO angels INSIDE the tomb. John's gospel i equally confusing.

[@noelhausler2911]

@@houmm08 In Matthew and Marks gospel accounts the two thieves badger him but come to Luke there is a long comment. How was that remembered. Did someone have pitman's shorthand "I say unto you today thou shalt be with me in paradise" This passage is used in debates among Christians as to whether man has a soul. Did that thief go to heaven? But it seems Jesus had not ascended yet?

[@DarinL]

@@houmm08 No, that is not at all what I’m saying. That would be an appeal to authority. What I’m saying is: when an expert in an area speaks to a matter within their area of expertise, they are not guaranteed to be correct. However, detractors need to explain where, specifically, the alleged expert has gone wrong. Perhaps you could show all of us where - specifically, in your view- this historian has clearly erred?

[@DarinL]

@@noelhausler2911 And Bart Ehrman’s critiques have been answered by NT scholars (as evidenced by numerous books, blogs, websites, and debates.)

[@abejar99]

This hard working, clearly inspired woman sure is getting a lot of hate from people with 0 expertise

[@TiaKruimel]

Exactly how Jesus predicted….🙏Amen!

[@greglogan7706]

Because her pronouncements are seriously problematic - as anyone who is involved in apologetics already is aware. As a Christian theist, I can see through her reasoning with very little effort. Tribalism is not a good look for one who is a follower of Jesus of Nazareth - a man - attested to by God.

[@thetabletopskirmisher]

​@@greglogan7706what are you trying to say? She's speaking from the POV of an actual historian.

[@mbabbitt98011]

Yes, I noticed the mockery and condescension in many comments from the willing-to- avoid truly listening.

[@EndWach-gi1nh]

@@greglogan7706?

[@paulsimmonds2030]

I have followed the scientific investigations of the Shroud of Turin for many years. For only one reason. So that I could believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Then I had two ‘Wow’ moments! The first was the that the disciples heard Jesus’ teachings, but never really listened. When He was crucified, they seemed to lose faith and they went into hiding. It was like, Jesus was not the King they were expecting. Now, Jesus appeared to over 500 people after he was resurrected, but we never really hear about what those 500 did after. However, the disciples suddenly found their faith again and went out spreading the Good News with such vigour and passion. John was eventually imprisoned on the prison island of Patmos and the rest were martyred for their faith. The ‘Wow’ moment was: Why would they do that for a lie? At least one of them would have cracked and the whole house of cards would have come tumbling down! That means only one thing. Jesus appeared to the disciples out of thin air in a locked and shuttered room! There is no other explanation! The second ‘Wow’ was Saul on the road to Damascus. Jesus, now in Heaven, asked Saul “Why do you persecute me.” Saul, became Paul and became a most devout follower of Jesus! Why did Jesus choose Saul? Jesus could have chosen a Christian. But wait. Had He done so, that person would have simply become a footnote in the Scriptures with barely a mention. No, Jesus chose a tax collecting persecutor of Christians whose life did a complete about face on the road to Damascus. Again, why would a fairly wealthy man who hated Christians turn his life the way he did, suffering imprisonment and eventual beheading, for a lie! He wouldn’t! Both of my ‘Wow’ moments demonstrate to me that Jesus was crucified, resurrected and then ascended to Heaven. The Shroud of Turin is now just an interesting artefact. Something said to me “Read the Scriptures again!” When I did, it was like ‘WOW’

[@user-bl7oe2md4p]

What you have said totally resonated with my own coming to faith process as I was studying the historical evidence that supports the trustworthy accuracy of the biblical narratives. One of the big WOW moments for me was that NO ONE who was an eyewitness denied that Jesus had the power to work miracles, not even his enemies but what they did instead was attribute the supernatural power at work to the devil. It was not only Christians who testify to these facts, even in the Jewish Talmud there are some coded references to Jesus of Nazareth who is mentioned to be a Sabbath breaker, blasphemer, and Sorcerer who was accursed of God by his hanging upon a tree in crucifixion. Another WOW moment for me was the recognition that the newly hewn tomb out of the rock had only one entrance or exit and the body was entombed there the tomb sealed up by rolling a massive stone disc to cover the opening. Jesus's enemies put a Roman guard to ensure that the disciples could not steal the body and then claim that he had been resurrected, because they themselves had heard him prophesy that he would be. This means that all the Jewish or Roman authorities had to do to totally discredit and debunk the claims of the apostles to Jesus's resurrection was to present his dead body. They had the tomb completely under their control and possession and yet there was no body in the open tomb. The only adequate explanation for this along with the mighty power of God at work through the apostles who proclaimed publicly at great personal risk to themselves, that Jesus has been resurrected, was that they were telling the absolute truth! The so called Passover Plot conspiracy theory was used as propaganda against the followers and disciples of Jesus and was a falsehood from the start and falls to pieces when examined closely, in fact ALL the attempts at finding a non supernatural explanation for the events recorded in the gospels are complete failures, even retreating into doubt and uncertainty about how credible the sources of information we have does not work as we have multiple independent corroborating sources, even if each of the sources have slight variations and imperfections in their recollections.

[@paulsimmonds2030]

@@user-bl7oe2md4p I can only describe a ‘Wow’ moment as like a baseball bat strike to my head. (Without the pain, just the reverberation) Some of the meaning within Scripture can be hidden in plain sight. Many times, you can read and re-read something and still not get it. Then the Holy Spirit, out of the blue, flicks a switch and BOOM! You read the passage again and think “How did I miss that!” I do admit, I am a sinner and fall far short of the glory of God. Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would be sent as a helper to all those that believe in Him. I know that I am being helped and guided, but also know that I am still a work in progress. (But not my works, the Holy Spirit) God Bless you brother. 🙏

[@goldenalt3166]

​@@user-bl7oe2md4pThe non- supernatural explanation is that the gospels are stories created without any significant evidence just like everything you and the originial poster just said about them. Early christians were no better than modern christians.

[@downenout8705]

Wow, you read the gospels with a presupposition that they were true. So not much of a Wow that you found them to be Wow.

[@vhawk1951kl]

How can he Shroud of Turin be relevant to whether or not the impossible is impossible? Of what syllogism could anything-at-all about he Shroud of Turin be a premise? Depending on your breeding wits and learning you may or may not have the information that a particular bit of evidence or information is " relevant" if it can form one or another of the premises of a syllogism

[@JD-HatCreekCattleCo]

What is said regarding the conflicting facts in the accounts of the Gospels and how this is true with history in general, is spot on. I spent 35 years in law enforcement and 30 as a criminal investigator. The most unreliable evidence is eye witness testimony. Because every witness brings something different to the table, bias, points of view and impressions. We do this generally with religion, and those who have influenced religion. I have come to believe that it is all true… all of it…just not necessarily how we might think that it is true.

[@noelhausler2911]

In Matthew two Marys arrive witness the stone being rolled away and encounter an angel sitting on the rock. In Mark two Marys and Salome arrive see the tomb is already open and encounter one angel. In Luke three + women arrive see the tomb open and walk in and encounter two angels. In John Mary arrives sees the tomb open and gets peter and john who come and check the tomb and leave (wonder where the angels went?) They leave. Mary later sitting outside the tomb looks from outside and sees two angels. Peter and John just missed them? Who would have provided the writers with the information of what happened? Points of view can be wrong. I have moments when I get further information see where I was wrong.

[@JD-HatCreekCattleCo]

@@noelhausler2911 I have seen witnesses in criminal cases see very different things and that then creates a problem for the prosecution.

[@noelhausler2911]

@@JD-HatCreekCattleCo You mean the two Marys would tell each gospel writer a different story? I wonder what Bart Ehrman would make of your theory . I must ask him.

[@michaelhenry1763]

She is an American history professor who also teaches about Christianity in American history. History is the investigation through literary multiple sources to construct a story or events of the past. However, if there are conflicts or contradictions, you would not include that story or explain that the truth cannot be known but share the different variants.

[@noelhausler2911]

@@michaelhenry1763 So two Mary's tell the writer of Matthew's gospel the angel was sitting on the rock while the two Mary's and Salomi in Mark say nothing about seeing the rock being rolled away. an invitation "Come and see where he lay" Matt28:6 Mark 16:5 And they entered the tomb and saw a young man (no invitation) Luke they enter notices no body and two men suddenly appear. Bart Ehrman who also teaches the Bible in a University disagrees and has debated with a number of evangelicals. Also was there was person knowing pitman's shorthand standing under the cross. ?

[@navchaps3449]

An expert in her field arrives at her conclusion after decades of study, careful thought and personal struggle. Her critics respond with name-calling. Nice.

[@kevinrombouts3027]

Fascinating. She is so expressive.

[@vhawk1951kl]

You are merely saying she lies well.

[@constantgardener19]

@@vhawk1951kl No, that's what you are saying.

[@williamjohns9322]

@vhawk1951kl just because she is saying something you don’t agree with doesn’t mean she is lying. Go on, attack her ideas but don’t lower yourself to ad homonym.

[@justincapable]

The NT contains the only account for the resurrection of Jesus. Although anonymous, the church has attributed the Gospels to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The Gospels were written in the third person. While these points are not a deal breaker, the Gospels do not contain any first hand eyewitness accounts for the resurrection. A historian should not accept such weak evidence unless they have the epistemic standard of Low Bar Bill.

[@TheSulross]

Well, the writings of Paul are first hand accounts and he met directly with Peter, a direct disciple of Jesus, and is thoroughly mentioned in those NT gospel accounts and Acts, and with James the brother of Jesus. James the brother of Jesus gets cited by Josephus and there are a number of other accounts external to the NT writings that mention James the brother of Jesus. These are all very impressive aspects of historicity to history academics in respect to the ancient world time period. And so Paul cites not only his personal experience of encountering Jesus, but he recounts others that he knew of directly that saw Jesus as alive in the aftermath of his having been put to death by crucifixion (in one case he mentions there was a group of 500 that together saw the risen Jesus - Paul traveled twice to meet with James and Peter in Jerusalem and spent a few weeks to compare notes, so to speak, so he definitely had the opportunity to hear lots of such accounts from these original Christians). Were Peter and James the brother of Jesus real people? Paul says in his first person writings that they are, and so does the author of Luke and Acts, etc., etc. And of course the author of Acts accords that Paul was an actual person. Lots of multi-attestation all way round. And of course there is still the Shroud of Turin that forensically accords with the NT account of what was done to Jesus.

[@damianedwards8827]

Incorrect. There are various documented accounts of Jesus and his activities, influence and divinity But we must Always remember… With atheism, comes a passion to hate Jesus. In the faith people Follow that God is Love. So if an atheist claims Love is insignificant, the issue isn’t about documentation on Jesus. This atheist ego adds into people’s deflection from Caring about these experiences with Jesus .

[@Jimmy-iy9pl]

Well, I'm not sure what an "account" of the Resurrection would even look like outside of a Christian context. If I had to guess - it seems obvious to me, our presenter probably thinks the Gospels are historically reliable. Considering she cited the work of Richard Bauckham, she would probably deny that the Gospels do not contain any eyewitness testimony.

[@austintriggs995]

Read the Gospel of John. And try Price’s intro to his translations.

[@fbcpraise]

Thank you for this. Subscribed.

[@user-lr2sq5qx2r]

I also like to add that evidence for the Civil War is much better than that for the resurrection.

[@georgewagner7787]

Of course. We had cameras. And also irrelevant.

[@user-lr2sq5qx2r]

@@georgewagner7787 How so? It means we have morer streams of evidence for the civil war than for thee resurrection

[@THESMARTERMAN555]

Something that happened 1800 years later. Where we had pictures, a printing press. Do you even understand how hard it is for something to survive 2000 years, 3500 years for the old testament. The Holy Land area has been under so many different hands in 2000 years, so many things get destroyed. We found the Gospel of Thomas in 1945, we knew one existed but never had the text, then the dead sea scrolls found randomly in the desert that have perfect Greek gospels the earliest ever found that match the gospels we have today. Read Luke, archeologist use Luke to find important sites close or in the holy land, super detailed writing. He is clearly a different author than the other 3 gospels.

[@vhawk1951kl]

The difference between the Civil War and the so-called resurrection, is the the civil war was not a physical impossibility.There is no esential difference between jesus rising from the dead and jesus eating his own head sandwiched between two unicorns. There simply*cannot* be any evidence of either.

[@williamjohns9322]

One thing that I thought more people, more Christians, would latch on to was her final statement about how many ideas she had to admit she had as a secular person to make a leap of faith on.

[@jahnvantuttlesma8215]

I didn't realize that Molly had become a Christian. Pretty cool.

[@MrTconnell1]

She’s so right about marks gospel. I heard Alec McCowan recite it from memory many years ago and I felt it was almost reportage and very immediate in places.

[@michaelhenry1763]

It was written 40 years after Jesus’ death. The author of Mark was not a very good writer. This is why we see Matthew and Luke expand, change, and correct Mark.

[@noelhausler2911]

@@michaelhenry1763 They could do that? What was the synoptic problem again?

[@michaelhenry1763]

@@noelhausler2911 yes, they could do that. The synoptic problem is the attempt to untangle the literary relationship between Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Mark was written first. Matthew was written second incorporating 90% of Mark into its gospel. Matthew copied some passages verbatim, others he expanded and changed, and Matthew added his own material. Luke, like Matthew, used Mark as a source. 62% of Mark is found in Luke. Luke and Matthew also share material in common that is not found in Mark. Most ( roughly 60%) of scholars think Matthew and Luke referenced a common sayings source called “Q”. The other roughly 40% of scholars think Luke used Matthew as a source. Luke also includes unique material. The gospel writers did not form their gospels independently of each other. They are similar because they copied from the same sources.

[@jamesnewton3709]

Thanky you, Molly. Very thorough and enlightening!

[@scottguitar8168]

It is understandable how people seeing the same event could perceive it differently to some degree but that is not what we have in the New Testament, these are researched accounts, not eyewitness accounts. We can see that Matthew and Luke borrow from Mark's gospel and we can see them also take liberties in altering the story and adding to the story that Mark presents. We can tell that Mark must have been a Gentile because of the mistakes he makes that no Jew of that time would make. I don't doubt anyone can change their minds, where a historian is a bit like a detective in collecting the clues and attempting a best guess as to what the clues add up to. The question from this video should be how good of a detective is this particular historian and how does her case stack up to others in the field? I would at least agree that Christianity is a bit of a mystery and depending on how you look at it, could be convinced into or out of Christianity and sometimes both.

[@MessianicJewJitsu]

Protect this woman

[@theunknownatheist3815]

Why? Is she being threatened? 🙄

[@MessianicJewJitsu]

@@theunknownatheist3815 it's a saying I like from a Tom MacDonald shirt. You say it when you like someone. It may come from rap culture or memes maybe.

[@chipkyle5428]

don't you love her gestures? I would like to talk with her in person. I bet she is a good professor.

[@robertmccormack191]

Professor Worthen combines ethos, pathos and logos to present her case. Kudos to her; this is brilliant. Subscribed.

[@TiaKruimel]

This channel is so cool!!! No ads!! 😂

[@greglogan7706]

@Robert - It was actually very disappointed.

[@Arbognire]

@@greglogan7706…because it was lacking in reason or something❔

[@vhawk1951kl]

She is *Lying*-fine if you like liars and parties to con tricks.

[@donnaasignacion-pv3rg]

She still expressed that it is still a leap of faith. It is interesting when she said that she an all or nothing type of person where she needs to decide after going through her own investigation. I wonder what motivates her to decide firmly even she have not experienced the mystical experience.

[@user-lr2sq5qx2r]

Exactly It's still a leap to believe in the supernatural

[@user-bl7oe2md4p]

Finally an honest intellectual who was willing to really examine all the evidence that cumulatively makes for a very compelling case supportive of the first century apostolic testimony as being factually and historically grounded. However it is often necessary for modern people to recognize that their own presumptions and implicit or explicit biases about the nature of reality can get in the way of being able to understand the history regarding Jesus Christ and the biblical record and it's frame of reference and interpretive construction which is given by those writers of those historical events.

[@terrybedtelyon8225]

What evidense, its all hearsay. Written 40 years after the fact.

[@greglogan7706]

Oh geez...your comment simply reflects an ego-centric tribalism.

[@phillipsugwas]

Examining the evidence does not amount to "ethno centric tribalism."..- ( tautologist ?) I venture neither does it resort well to American snobbery?

[@noelhausler2911]

@@greglogan7706 Did the reports of what was happening on the cross between the two thieves and Jesus require someone down below who knew pitman's shorthand? "I say unto you today thou shalt be with me in paradise " Is there a comma needed somewhere which would cast doubt on the existence of the soul. A number of evangelicals at Fuller Seminary and elsewhere don't accept that man has a soul. See Nancy Murphy ed Whatever Happened to the Soul? Does a comma come after "you" or "today"?

[@greglogan7706]

@@phillipsugwas Sorry my friend - this is as weak a "critical" examination as possible - shocking she is employed. Ehrman has gone over the failure in these kinds of approaches countless times - She is NOT respecting the basic historical approach - but evidently desperately wants something to be true Either God has manifested to her - or not - for our faith is NOT based in the wisdom of men's words (the "evidences" she claims) - but in the POWER OF GOD!

[@paulyd786]

Wow. Thank you. That was brilliant.

[@5StarsLuis]

Refreshing point of view, uncommon testimony and real personal inner struggle balanced with a search/need for truth that I just haven't heard elsewhere. Lord Jesus let this be the beginning of many like her that turn and follow you.

[@johnkrichardson]

Okay, now I really want to get that book by NT Wright and “slog” through it with the one by Tim Keller by my side - as an aperitif maybe?

[@danieldoherty5034]

N.T. Wright, "The Resurrection of the Son of God" (Fortress Press 2003). I read it about 10 years ago, but good to be reminded how good it is.

[@user-sq9td8nu9i]

@@danieldoherty5034 there's a lot of theological problems with Wright, he backed a book/wrote a forward to a book by Steve Chalke - ''the lost words of Jesus'' - which declared God is a 'cosmic child abuser' ....and Christ not being the once for all substitute on the cross for mans sin

[@tgrogan6049]

Recommended reading. "The text by Bailey and Vander Broek, Literary Forms in the New Testament: A Handbook (1992) provides definitions of over thirty literary forms, including examples of their use in the New Testament and comments regarding the value of genre recognition for interpretation. Various descriptions and labels include historical literature, historical biography, popular biography, Graeco-Roman biography, a folk book, tradition in a Middle Eastern peasant culture, cultic legend, document of faith, drama or mythography, letter writing (e.g., Paul’s epistles), memoirs, Midrashic, narrative literature, novels, theological literature, and unique genre. In order to answer what genre these texts were written, it is necessary to determine the purpose of their respective authors. At the same time, it is the position of this text that the Gospels are not a biography, and they are not written to record history in a modern sense. " Alter, Michael J.. The Resurrection: a Critical Inquiry (pp. 59-60). Xlibris US. Kindle Edition.

[@scottwatson8659]

Of course, they were meant, as they state, to deepen the faith of the communities they address. But the reductionist claim that therefore there is no real history in the Gospels, is untenable. This is what Prof Worthen is addressing, IMO. All history, even so-called objectivist modern history, is perspectival and told with intention, to help us to understand our place in the present, in some way.

[@tgrogan6049]

@@scottwatson8659 Nobody said there is “ no history “ in the gospels.

[@user-lr2sq5qx2r]

I also like how she said it's still a leap of faith to believe in the resurrectiion. So dispite her intectual arguments for believing in the resurrection it is still a leap of faith. How does she rule out other religions as not being true? Has she investigated Islam for example?

[@andywong9847]

You can start by telling us the life of Mohammad as a starting point. Even I don’t know you at all, I probably respect you more than the Mohammad of the Quran. On your mark, get set, go…. Tell us about Mohammad .

[@fabiopaolobarbieri2286]

The people who reject this, one, know nothing whatever about history, and, two, are determined to sneer and refuse anyway.

[@user-ku6ju1gy5u]

Encouraging, although the professor seems a little driven to intellectualize her way to spiritual illumination.

[@TiaKruimel]

That’s on account of all the schoolin’……she’ll have her moment 🙌🙏

[@wtillett243]

Educated people tend to do that.

[@user-lr2sq5qx2r]

She also said about putting ones supernatural biases aside well again what does she think about the supernatural miracles of say Islamor Mormonism? If she dismisses these on what grounds does she do so?

[@mbb--]

That old canard that "if you believe that miracle, then you must believe all alleged miracles" is absurd. People repeat it without thinking about the shoddy reasoning behind it

[@theunknownatheist3815]

@@mbb--it is NOT absurd. Why is Mohammed ascending to heaven any different than Jesus resurrection? They are both extremely unlikely, to the point of impossibility. You just have a bias toward YOUR particular miracle. Of course you just happened to be born into the “one true faith”, right? 🙄

[@user-sq9td8nu9i]

@@theunknownatheist3815 The body of Christ had/has no earthly grave, no rotting body - the tomb was empty.... while Mohammed was buried, did have a grave, a decomposing mortal body ; nor was he was seen as, or declared himself God

[@theunlearnedastronomer3205]

The preponderance of nonsense has led them to that delusion

[@Cantstanya]

@@mbb--my superstition is better than yours 🙄

[@zach2980]

As we are in reality aliens ourselves, aliens from another planet is more likely than positing something supernatural. As we’ve no evidence for aliens visiting us, the better answer is, I don’t know.

[@davidkillingsworth1643]

Excellent.

[@dennisdeng3045]

11:08 I concur. At the end of the day, it's one's philosophical beliefs (about how to make sense of anything) that drive the view on history (and everything else). I once watched a debate between Bart Ehrman and Michael Licona on the subject of resurrection. Right at the beginning, Bart said, "Miracles are outside the purview of history (or historical studies)." (I don't remember the exact wording, but it's something along that line.) Now that I think of it, it was rather problematic that Bart made that big of a philosophical claim right there. I also watched an interview where Michael Licona was talking about his debate with Bart Erhman (about the same subject, but probably not the same debate). From what I remember, Michael said during the interview, "God exists, so of course resurrection is possible." (Again, I don't remember the exact wording, but it's something along that line.) I also found it problematic that Michael made that big of a philosophical claim right there. Now, I don't doubt that both have thought long and hard about their philosophical positions. I just don't like how they stated their philosophical positions, which are utterly important, as passing references, in their respective occasions. 12:29 That is philosophy, right there, talking about definition, cause and effect. Ps: Some people say that such a definition of historical method presumes uniformity of human experience.

[@epsyuma]

I enjoyed all of her explanations, but not all of the exaggerated hand movements.

[@markstang23]

This is your contribution?

[@juneschlebusch6679]

It is a bit much. Far to expressive

[@PC-vg8vn]

He is risen!

[@Padronfan]

Molly is just great!

[@danlopez.3592]

Yes if a supernatural event was written to take place during the civil war then no, we don’t have good evidence to believe that either

[@alandiehl3619]

Interesting. Reading the gospels wasn’t enough for her. She needed N.T. Wright to convince her. Lol

[@draytonblackgrove]

Wow!

[@elliechewny6924]

Her voice reminds me of Sandra Bullock in Miss Congeniality. Great clip!

[@user-lr2sq5qx2r]

@jake5811 So what is your historical significant evidence that make you think that Jesus resurrection most likely happened? And have you looked into the details of Romuluses resurrection? Because are almost identical?

[@georgewagner7787]

Belief in Romulus never changed anyone's life.

[@constantgardener19]

@@georgewagner7787 That's not the point.

[@Dr.Reason]

As a believer for many years I find this uncommon narrative very intriguing.

[@TbLj____]

Check out NT Wright’s “Simply Jesus” if you want more about this historical perspective. It’s a much shorter read than his tome “The Resurrection of the Son of God” (mentioned in the video).

[@theunknownatheist3815]

Name does NOT check out. 🙄

[@Freethinker_Humanist_Atheist]

I recommend the book “Liberated from Religion”, by Paulo Bittencourt.

[@enochpage1333]

What is the first inspiring book on the resurrection that she mentions at the start?

[@daveg-j1866]

N.T.Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God. As she said, it's very thorough but not always an easy read.

[@kimbirch1202]

It astounds me that many so - called Christians have no idea what Jesus actually teaches. He teaches that bodies do NOT contain life, because God ONLY creates eternal SPIRIT, which has nothing to do with bodies. " It is the Spirit that gives life; the flesh counts for nothing " John 6 : 63. He also taught that there is no place called heaven, full of ageless bodies floating about somewhere in outer space. " The Kingdom of God is WITHIN you " Luke 17 : 21. He never taught that the crucifixion was some kind of magical atonement for some original sin against God , which is impossible as " God judges no one " John 5 : 22. Traditional Christian doctrines have simply been made up over the centuries, and actually oppose the teachings of Christ.

[@vhawk1951kl]

jesus is dead and the dead do not and cannot teach. Do you make up your lies as you go along?

[@kimbirch1202]

@vhawk1951kl You just show your complete ignorance. The body and personality of Jesus is NOT Christ. Christ is eternal spirit and therefore always exists. Only the insane believe they could be bodies.

[@raymondswenson1268]

I would note that a number of Protestant and Catholic critics of Tom Wright's book on the resurrection of Christ, and the promise of resurrection for mankind, characterized his conclusions as being "Mormon" (a nickame for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). Wright does not quote or cite ANY CJCLDS source in his book, or discuss their doctrines at all, or contrast them with other denominations' doctrines. But the CJCLDS does teach that the resurrection will eventually encompass EVERY human who has ever lived, and that resurrection consists of an immortal spirit, which continues to live after death in a realm of spirits, returning to inhabit an immortal, physical body that will never die. That is also the teaching that Wright finds in the New Testament, contrary to the ideas of many modern Christian denominations who don't believe in a physical body continuing in eternity. In First Things journal, in response to the critics who indicted him for endorsing what they thought is an heretical belief about a physical immortal resurrection, Wright said "The Mormons read the Bible more carefully than many other people.". The CJCLDS point out that Christ has a resurrected, immortal physical body, and he is the divine Son of God the Father. They therefore argue that their belief that God the Father also has an immortal, physical body, LIKE THE SON, is also consistent with the Bible. And they teach that all human beings are embodied spirits who are the children of the Father, who are intended to become like Him and his Only Begotten Son, both embodied and immortal for eternity. The LDS explain the reason for the physical resurrection, which other churches cannot.

[@EasyDriver891]

Thank GOD for these 2 intelligent and honest women.

[@vhawk1951kl]

what is "honest" about a fraudulent put-up-job pseudo interview which is a complete fraud- the old I-have-changed-my-mind con?There is and cannot be any evidence of the impossible; there is *absolutely_no*difference between the resurrection lie and the jesus ate his own head lie. If it*cannot* be true -is impossible, it *Is* not true, and what do we call people that say things that are not true? You got it, you sing out loud when you know the answer.

[@andrewdarnley4608]

Another glass of Christian Cool Aid.

[@rc4134]

She is just too animated to watch

[@greglogan7706]

And painful to listen to

[@mchristr]

Perhaps she developed that style in order to keep the attention of contemporary university students.

[@johnnymomascaro]

You must hate italian restaurants too

[@juneschlebusch6679]

I also find her to overwhelming., even though she is interesting but to much. Over welming

[@greglogan7706]

@@juneschlebusch6679 I do!

[@nickfragedakis5511]

I would love to see both of you on Joe Rogan's Podcast. Thank you! That was awesome!

[@williamjohns9322]

I think her statement about how radical the notion of the Messiah, who was thought to be a political leader, akin to the Dali Lama, was then killed. It took a while for the people there to „make sense of it.“. We forget, or never knew, how problematic it was for those who were there.

[@alberg6290]

frustrating that can't understand the name of the book she references at the beginning ------any help?

[@mbb--]

It's N.T Wright's Resurrection of the Son of God

[@alberg6290]

@@mbb-- thanks, really appreciate it

[@aremuola9464]

What I think both speakers have been able to achieve from all they have said is that the narratives in the gospels do not qualify to be of divine origin but rather narratives of some people who claimed to have had a special experience. Experience they narrated from different lenses.

[@robertd9965]

What's the name of the author of that book she mentioned at the beginning? (The one she called "a slog") I'd didn't quite understand it

[@terrytigner9600]

N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God. Widely respected. This is part of an in depth, scholarly series on Christian origins.

[@robertd9965]

@@terrytigner9600 Thank you so much! I work at a theological library and just saw that they've got it, so I'll check it out :)

[@tgrogan6049]

Well there is a bit of a difference between accounts of wars that we know have happened vs miraculous events that need one heck of a lot more evidence.

[@user-lr2sq5qx2r]

Exactly, There are no supernatural miracle claims regarding the civil war

[@Enzo012]

There were quite a lot of resurrections mentioned in the Bible? There are even a couple in thew Old Testament.

[@jake5811]

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is quite different. For one thing, throughout his ministry He predicted his ultimate demise and subsequent resurrection. And His resurrection was an affirmation from God the Father that Jesus was precisely who He claimed to be. And, there were hundreds of eye witnesses to the post mortem appearances of Jesus.

[@Enzo012]

@@jake5811 How did they manage to lose hundreds of eyewitness accounts? Those would have been fairly sought after and they had a few decades to collect and preserve them in writing the time. It's a bit like how no-one really knows where the tomb of Jesus's burial and his resurrection is located. It should really have been a major Christian holy site from day one, how did that slip people's minds who were alive at the time?

[@jake5811]

@@Enzo012------What you are inferring is that the authors of the Gospels and the letters and epistles of Paul, James, Peter, etc. in the New Testament were composed to deceive, mislead, and fool. That is what you are presupposing. And I find this viewpoint cynical, absurd, illogical, and irrational. You have not done your homework on this topic.

[@neilf6740]

@@Enzo012 finding Jesus’ tomb was never important because he rose from the dead. And recording 100s of witnesses wouldn’t make a difference to one who doesn’t believe. As Jesus said to Simon, Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven

[@Enzo012]

@@jake5811 The New Testament wasn't written by eyewitnesses that's generally well accepted, but I would be genuinely interested to know to all the eyewitness material they must have had at the time all went and why wasn't the tomb of Jesus seen to be a location of any special interest? You'd think that would be the most significant place of pilgrimage for Christians around the world from the 1st century onwards. Personally I don't think it was deliberately concocted as a lie. It'll be something that developed over time from a blending of Jewish and Roman pagan spiritual beliefs, but that's a long story.

[@georgewagner7787]

Read Who moved the stone? By Morrison

[@douglasschafer6372]

Which book, exactly, is she referring to?

[@TiaKruimel]

The Gospels

[@douglasschafer6372]

@@TiaKruimel Thank you

[@TiaKruimel]

@@douglasschafer6372 Anytime 😊

[@rupertknapman9639]

The Resurrection of the Son of God by N T Wright. I think that was the book she mentioned at the beginning.

[@phillipsugwas]

Try Jesus and the Eyewitness Accounts by Richard Bauckham...

[@user-tb1gf6kn4w]

There is no substitute for finding Jesus' resurrection in the Shroud of Turin. Seeing is believing.

[@TiaKruimel]

Why does he look old in the shroud? Can you recommend an article or video? Thanks 🙏

[@user-tb1gf6kn4w]

Put into Google: "Bruce Gerig Shroud of Turin" for a good introduction. The Shroud was likely created by a burst of intense radiation from God in the tomb, so that may have aged Jesus' hair.

[@michaelfourie345]

@@user-tb1gf6kn4w That is one of the most amusing comments I have ever read. "Intense radiation from God" - "aged Jesus' hair" !!! LOL 🤣

[@user-tb1gf6kn4w]

John Jackson, a physicist who examined the Shroud in 1978, suspects it was created by an intense radiation burst, so call him a comedian, genius.

[@michaelfourie345]

@@user-tb1gf6kn4w As he was commissioned to work for the "Holy shroud guild" - I would just politely call that a conflict of interests...but I am not polite. The man was talking BS, if he ever attributed anything to do with that shroud as "from God". There are no gods, angels, demons, devils.

[@ecisme10]

Sounds like they're just trying to rationalize what they want to believe.

[@georgewagner7787]

No that's exactly what she said didn't happen between 1 and 2 minutes.

[@ecisme10]

@@georgewagner7787 and yet that's what she was doing.

[@user-eg2iy6hp9x]

If you think you don't rationalize what you want to believe, then you lack self awareness

[@gsytrey]

In what world do you decide to separate an endeavor in rationality and what you choose to believe as true and false. You would propose discarding rationality in pursuit of beliefs?

[@ecisme10]

@@gsytrey you can rationalize your beilfs with facts and critical thinking instead of myths.

[@suelingsusu1339]

Her exact irrationality can be applied to Aladdin and the rest of the fairy tales man has ever devised as artifices.

[@hugofernandes8545]

Irrationality?? She is an historian and she is not a christian. She is just look at the Gospels through an historical view. Your analogy is fallacious. Aladdin was not a historical person, there is no historical ir acheological record of his life. You are just saying nonsense. Being irrational is believing that the entire Universe came magically from nothing and by blind and that all things ordered themselves into a such vast, orderly, beautiful, complex, marvelous, tangible, mathematical structured, fine tunned Cosmos with natural laws and mechanisms and with bilions of galaxies, planets, stars, solar systems, supernovas, black wholes, atoms, sub-atomic particles, chemistry, biology, genetics, life, evolution itself, biodiversity, information, counscious, rational, moral and loving beings. That's a logical nonsense.

[@suelingsusu1339]

@@hugofernandes8545 .... hahahaha....🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣

[@stevenwiederholt7000]

2:40 never had that either.

[@rayjr96]

It’s a belief based on biases not facts. There was no resurrection, if there were we wouldn’t need a new religion. It’s all mythology

[@James-wv3hx]

When I was 4 years old and heard about a talking snake I knew it was a scam. And rest is subterfuge.

[@TulleyAndMe]

The Bible doesn’t say it was a snake.

[@James-wv3hx]

Ok. A talking donkey 🐴 ​@@TulleyAndMe

[@Greyz174]

NT Wright's book is not a slog he is such a good writer and has a clear argument that is developed through the chapters why wpuld she say that

[@freshjellomusic5097]

I think by slog she means long. It isn’t a short book and takes some effort to finish.

[@Greyz174]

@@freshjellomusic5097 she was talking about needing to take Tim Keller breaks to decompress bc of the content, but i mean yeah its a long book and took a long time to read, but its pretty easy to follow, and nt wright's style is about as readable as what anyone could ask for

[@jake5811]

By "slog" she means the extraordinary detail in his work and how those details connect. I tried to read his book, but it got way way way too far into the weeds (aka slog)

[@Greyz174]

@@jake5811 i thought it was pretty straightforward...it took a long time to read because there are a lot of pages but its just like "here is what greeks thought about resurrection" and "here paul's resurrection theology in each of the letters" etc etc etc through other examples, and an overall argument about how Jesus' resurrection and its accounts are unique and how people couldnt have come up with all of that on their own

[@jake5811]

@@Greyz174 ---You are more patient than I am. As an ADHD guy I found it very difficult to remain awake as he went into great detail on the Resurrection narrative.

[@kimbirch1202]

The only thing that Jesus teaches is that we have become so infatuated with mere material appearances, such as bodies and other meaningless objects, that we have forgotten our God- given spiritual nature, which is eternal.

[@bwoutchannel6356]

It's almost like the New Testament is trying to persuade you otherwise of the Divinity of Jesus Christ and you get forced into answering the very question that Jesus himself asks - but who do you say that I am?

[@johnschuh8616]

Of Course. Plus there is this: Modern cosmology is presently handicapped by a pre-occupation with “string theory”. A similar gating happened during the early days of modern physics when Galilleo was persecutes by the Church because they’re clung to “classical” physics. Thus they were loath to examine the much more rigorous science of Newton, One result was a hundred years later Greek philosophy was dismissed by Hume. His now outdated anti- supernaturalism has now become orthodoxy.

[@RussellWestcoast]

@9:00 Somehow she is explaining what DID happen - but she is not realizing/accepting that it did? The followers did run away, or disperse. He died a lonely death, historically speaking. The embrace of Christ she is talking about happened 30-100 years later in the gospels.

[@theunlearnedastronomer3205]

The biggest error most scholars - even the critical ones- make about Jesus and his followers: they grant without question sincerity. Ask yourself, "What do faith healers throughout history and today have in common?" They are running a con. They are a cult of personality and their religion affords them a life they would not otherwise enjoy. If someone is raising the dead today, we all know it's a scam, and the past was no different. Here's another 2 big ones against the resurrection: First, why did Jesus only appear to his followers? Why not also appear to the Sanhedrin? Why not appear in Rome? Or the Temple? Secondly, the world obviously didn't end and the dead rise as Jesus and Paul predicted (I don't think Jesus' and Paul's teachings are the same on this, but nevertheless what they taught didn't occur).

[@housechristoph3633]

Got a list of all the other cons where the conman purposefully angers the authorities to the extent he gets himself tortured and killed? Then all his partners do the same, one after the other?

[@theunlearnedastronomer3205]

Yeah, most cons end not so well. Judas probably had enough of Jesus' bull, and that's what did him in.

[@bennewby9600]

Jesus appeared to his brothers (previously skeptics, didn't believe in Him) and also to Saul (who was actively killing Christians at the time). If Jesus hadn't appeared to skeptics and enemies in addition to His followers I think you would have a valid point. Even then, the followers of Jesus were all absolutely sure they saw Jesus alive in many instances over an extended period of time, ending in Him visibly ascending to heaven.

[@theunlearnedastronomer3205]

First off, you can only say that Paul claims to have had a vision of Jesus, not that “Jesus appeared” to someone. And Paul is not a credible person anyway. Whatever Jesus’ brothers may or may not have seen or what their motivations were we have no firsthand accounts. A couple of the “appearances” in the Bible were actually strangers and it later dawned on the followers that they had “really” met Jesus. So again I state: a real badass move would have been appearing in the Sanhedrin or Temple for ALL to see and not incognito as the gardener or something. Then they could say, hey, that’s the dude we killed 3 days ok!

[@housechristoph3633]

@@theunlearnedastronomer3205 You say Paul isn't credible, but he spent the next 40+ years of his life preaching the gospel and founding churches. He never took a dime, was imprisoned on more than one occasion, and in the end was beheaded for refusing to state it was all a lie. Paul's miracles were personally witnessed and attested to in the Acts of the Apostles by Luke and others.

[@besticudcumupwith202]

...so basically she agreed to suspend disbelief. She took the rational logic based approach and shelved it. She choose to "have faith". She's right about having the open mind approach. That's why I'm here after all. Btw, agnostic is the ONLY rational approach. It's the only one that demands proof.

[@branver1172]

Faith is simply what we believe. She chose to believe what the evidence said.

[@michaelbabbitt3837]

You confuse certainty with coming to a decision based upon the evidence; confidence, not certainty. You could never be a juror in a trial nor could you have any courts with your belief system. Proofs only exist in math.

[@risenchurchbrisbane]

That isn't a far assessment of what happens. She as a historian applied her historian skills to these ancient texts and listened to the arguments and ideas of serious scholars like NT Wright, Baukham and wrestled with them. That doesn't sound like setting aside a rational logic based approach.

[@michaelfourie345]

@@risenchurchbrisbane If I did the same thing with "The Epic of Gilgamesh" (a text that predates the bible by thousands of years) would you consider that, likewise, a rational approach? A lot of very serious historians have studied Gilgamesh - not a SINGLE one has ever maintained that the events therein are fact - you would have to be deluded to think that. This woman is simply deluded. Jesus never existed and dead people do not come back to life.

[@elijahlyons9548]

⁠@@michaelfourie345 A lot of very serious historians have studied the New Testament (many non-Christian) and the consensus is that Jesus existed. The mythological Jesus idea is fringe and ahistorical.

[@hugomartinez8846]

The Bible is claimed to be inspired by the holy ghost, therefore inerrant. In this video, these historians explain that actual historical knowledge is full of flaws, which is perfectly normal. But isn't the Bible supposed to be held to a higher standard since the writers had divine inspiration on their side? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence! In the 4 gospels, there are 4 different, very contradicting accounts of what happened on the day of the resurrection. Not to mention so many other contradictions that plague both the Old and New Testaments. Why is it that an all-powerful God, through his all-powerful spirit, was not able to deliver a narrative free of flaws, therefore proving that the book was divinely inspired?

[@SoB_626]

Amazingly honest and eloquent statement!

[@jacoblee5796]

So what exactly was it that convinced her?

[@danielholder7979]

NT Wrights book on the resurrection of the son of God. At least as far as making the resurrection possible she shares in more detail elsewhere what cumulatively led her to become a Christian.

[@jacoblee5796]

@@danielholder7979 That's the thing, I've read most of his book, it really isn't anything new. Just a bunch of old rehashed BS that any cookie cutter apologists writes and talks about. So again, what was it that convinced her?

[@danielholder7979]

@@jacoblee5796 I’m not saying it has to be convincing to you, I’m saying that’s what convinced her. What part of NT Wrights argument do you find unconvincing though?

[@jacoblee5796]

@@danielholder7979 And I'm just asking what about it exactly convinced her? It doesn't have any new information in it, it's full of the same old apologetic BS. It's as if she's done ZERO research on this and read ONE apologetic book and become convinced? Because that's the way it's coming off. Which i find hard to believe for a professor.

[@jake5811]

@@jacoblee5796 ----You are quite an obnoxious person aren't you pal?

[@fromthehorsesmouth3790]

I'm assuming she means The resurrection of the Son of God, from N.T wrights series Christian origins and the question of God. I've read it, and will need to reread it. Boy is it a challenge to get through. The book is broken into three main parts, the larger graeco-Roman world, inspired by the works of Homer, Plato, pythagorus etc. Then the second part the views of Judaism in the second temple period, including apocryphal works. Then the writings of Paul is a section on it owns, followed by the other authors of the New Testament.

[@fatalberti]

she following the golden threat. if one is honest and curious the evidence is fantastic and irresistable

[@greglogan7706]

@fatalberti I am a Christian theist and I don't buy the standard evangelical evidence that some think are so sufficient. This women is simply ignorant of the issues with these matters. I would question what kind of historian she really is.

[@vhawk1951kl]

TAhere neither is - nor could possibly be " evidence" of the impossible. Hearsay is not repeat *Not* evidence Why?- Because evidence that cannot be tested *cannot* be evidence because evidence that cannot be tested in cross-examination or otherwise is so utterly worthless that it is not evidence, and that is why there is no.....evidence.... whatsover, that jesus rose from the dead. There *could_not* be any such evidence because it is *as* impossible as jesus ate his own head sandwiched between two unicorns-they are*equally_impossible* The so-called resurrection is *utterly **_irrelevant_*_ to christianity as is the god fantasy*Neither has*anything_ whatsoever* to do with the teaching-there is simply *no_ need* for absurd and fantastic lies like the resurrection lie which is *irrelevant* to the impossible namely being a christian which - incidentally , is why *there_are_no*christians just as there are no standing-on-their-own-heads_ians. Christianity has.....nothing..... to..... do..... with *belief* and anyone that suggests otherwise understands_nothing* of Christianity which is now extinct.

[@theunknownatheist3815]

I have an axiom- for every “expert”, there is an equal & opposite “expert”. So, I’ll see whoever this chick is, and raise you a Bart Ehrman. But of course, you’ll have an issue with that. 🙄

[@Wertbag99]

It does seem to be fundamentalist teachings (that the biblical accounts must be literal) and the view of bible inerrancy that really drive a wedge through Christianity. If you are willing to accept that the bible has parables, metaphors and moral stories, then you can take the positive messages without having to deny science or outright claim there is a conspiracy against your position.

[@SavedbyGraceAlone1962]

Wow, a non-woke history professor. Imagine that.

[@terrybedtelyon8225]

Woke means awareness, so go back to sleep as the world continues without you.

[@SavedbyGraceAlone1962]

@@terrybedtelyon8225 No, woke has come to mean ignorant of science and facts, in a nutshell, crazy.

[@KingoftheJuice18]

@@SavedbyGraceAlone1962 It's exactly 100% the opposite: "anti-woke" means refusing to pay attention to reality, whether in terms of society's problems, historical truths, or scientific facts. People who go on and on about "wokeness" don't want their 1950s white Christian dream to be disturbed.

[@user-dy3uh]

@@SavedbyGraceAlone1962 Where is that definition? Cause I can point to a court case in Florida otherwise.

[@michaelhenry1763]

Do you like to oppress people? What is wrong with being woke?

[@EllieBanks333]

I heard "so I really wanted to believe....then I read this apologists book...and I convinced myself".

[@georgewagner7787]

No she didn't want to believe. I assure you she's now shunned by her peers.

[@EllieBanks333]

@@georgewagner7787 I assure you that if she was not predisposed to belief, no academic study of the issue would make her a believer. Apologetics are shockingly bad.

[@shimtest]

great video. she has explored the intellectual side, she should chase the experiential side of Christianity and she will get it

[@richardevans9701]

Fortunately, the number of people holding on to these fairy tales is steadily declining with time.

[@Edwin-pw7cu]

💯

[@suelingsusu1339]

Hahahahaha.... hahahahaha.... 🤦‍♀🤦‍♀🤦‍♀🤦‍♀🤦‍♀🤣🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂

[@25svbn]

She should be teaching in university. Not the characters that are in our schools today. God bless her. ❤😂🇨🇦

[@drzaius844]

You mean preaching in schools? That sounds gross and unconstitutional.

[@theunknownatheist3815]

While I agree that wokeness is garbage- this is almost as bad. The woke and the religious teach things as true only because they were told it was true. Both have no correspondence to reality.

[@anastasiahopkinson5676]

The speaker is impressed by authors but mumbles their names and neglects to post them in the Description.

[@michaeltimpanaro5622]

Why did authors of the gospels write them in the first place?

[@marksnow7569]

Mark is probably a genuine attempt to record the story of Jesus' mission, before all eyewitnesses had died; Matthew is more propagandist, placing heavy emphasis on connections to Jewish scripture to encourage conversion; Luke's main work is Acts, but while researching that continuing history he seems to have found information which disagreed with Matthew, so wrote his own gospel; John, decades later, is massively propagandist, inventing "authentic details" to make the story more vivid.

[@jake5811]

@@marksnow7569 ---seems like you are "inventing authentic details" at this very moment.

[@marksnow7569]

@@jake5811 By "authentic details" I meant things like the whip and the spilling of changers' money added to the Cleansing of the Temple story (which John placed early in the career of Jesus, rather than mere days before the end). Try imagining the money-changers as real people ...

[@jake5811]

@@marksnow7569 ---Your comment reveals that you either did not LISTEN to this exchange between the two historians, or you did not understand. No wonder you embrace atheism. You are not a student of the game.

[@marksnow7569]

@@jake581112:26 _"If we define the Historical Method as drawing- our ability to draw analogies between our own experience of cause and effect in our own life and the way cause and effect works in the past"_ ... use that version of the Historical Method for yourself, and try imagining the money-changers as real people. The cause is a man with an improvised whip tipping your business capital (remember this is just before Passover, one of the busiest times of the year) on the floor. What are his chances of ever setting foot in the Temple again?

[@tedgrant2]

Perhaps she rubbed it a bit faster.

[@budekins542]

The only way to prove the truth of the gospel of John is to go back 2000 years in a time machine. .having said that it has been stated that people who speak the truth can quote conversations they heard. .John 21:23 certainly sounds like someone is quoting an actual conversation(!)

[@alancayton5103]

What if Christ is still being seen by people who are blessed with eyes to see.

[@jacqueslucas8616]

4 minutes in and nothing solide yet….

[@kimbirch1202]

The Resurrection of Jesus was of his MIND , not his body, which he said " counts for nothing ". He taught his disciples that we are Spirit, created in the likeness of God, and therefore there is no death. The only way to prove this was by temporarily manifesting his old body, which then disappeared forever. When Jesus , as the resurrected Christ Mind, said " I and my Father are one " He obviously had no identification with a body, as God has no body.

[@ernestmonroe9796]

A good general makes sure that all of his troops going into battle gets a proper briefing to make sure that they are on the same page. Did Jesus do that. He didn’t even write anything down. Did he not know that the memory of uneducated man is not dependable. Furthermore, a three year ministry is woefully inadequate to do anything substantial. Another thing, we are told that, after he arose, Jesus came through a wall to get to the disciples who were a hidden huddled mass of mess terrified of Rome, frightened of the Jews and apprehensive and guilt ridden about having lied to and then deserted Jesus. Yet, when Jesus came in, not one disciple attempted to run, apologize, repented or asked Jesus what happened to him. Not one. Psychology played no part in the stories in the gospels. Every soul was on robotic mode. I suppose.

[@sootherswontknow]

Think about the conflicting indivdiuals who tried their best to discount Christ...Nicodemus came by night so the Sanhedrin wouldn't see him and after speaking with Christ he ending up applying ointment on the body of Christ after crucifixion. WHY would anyone risk their reputation (which ultmiated ruined his) and their lives to continue a lie and to carry on as a Christian specifically during that period of time when devout Jews and their entire families could be cast out for their unbelief? We look at the Bible with modern eyes. When you consider the cost in that culture for what Christ did, it truly in only possible if you are God. Christ is King!

[@patrickwoods2213]

There is no evidence that a Nicodemus even existed - he is after all only mentioned in one account, and his character cannot be traced to any reliable source. Furthermore, your argument is the one that I hear all the time - "why would they risk their lives for a lie?" It's very simple. Who says that it had to be a lie? Many people in history have believed in certain ideas with all their heart, but it turned out to be false. Doesn't mean they were lying, it just means that people base their whole lives on false beliefs.

[@traceysheneman8652]

The account of Jesus' riding on a colt into Jerusalem (the so-called 'triumphal entry'), recorded in every gospel, with crowds of children and adults celebrating the beginning of the Feast of Unleavened Bread/Passover with loud exclamations of praise is embarrassing, trite, and undermines any claim to kingly authority that Jesus enthusiasts of his era ascribed to him. It happened exactly as Jesus had planned, to fulfill both Jewish scripture and his role as the Servant of The Lord. Jesus never does what I expect him to do.

[@nmbr1son64]

Jesus Christ wasn't a self-proclaimed Messiah. He was prophesied according to the Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks, but also was authenticated by John the Baptist (who was last of the Old Testament prophets).

[@random-ks8et]

In ancient Jewish society, women were traditionally responsible for anointing a body after death. Consequently, it would have been women who were most likely to discover an empty tomb. Therefore, citing the fact that women discovered the empty tomb as a criterion of embarrassment seems misguided, as it aligns with the cultural norms and practices of the time. If the goal is to convince someone that a story is true, it should adhere as closely as possible to the realities of the historical and cultural context in which it is set.

[@juliahendrix9468]

Actually, what she said, and most theologians agree, is that the women's testimony that he had risen from the dead was the first testimony. In ancient Jewish society women's TESTIMONY was not credible. So why were the women used as the example in the gospels?? If they wanted to be CREDIBLE, they could have glossed over the fact that the women were the first to discover Jesus as resurrected. But the authors chose not to do that -- that seems illogical for the times. Thus, it adds to the credibility of the story of the resurrection.

[@random-ks8et]

​@@juliahendrix9468 If women were likely to discover the empty tomb first, their role serves the narrative regardless of credibility. The story relies on the disciples' verification, not the women's testimony.

[@nonprogrediestregredi1711]

​@juliahendrix9468 The woman discovering the tomb, as the story goes, does not add credibility. I'm so tired of people arguing for that. The first anonymous author that puts them there is the one we commonly refer to as "Mark". That is the first gospel that we are aware of. "Mark" employs several literary devices such as irony, foreshadowing and inclusio. It has memetic connections to other texts of the Hellenistic world in the second temple period. That is to be expected from what we know about how composition was taught in antiquity. With that said, "Mark" originally ended, per the best evidence, as a type of cliffhanger, so to speak. "Mark" has the women run away frightened and tell no one. There would have no testimony from women to consider with the original gospel of "Mark". The various endings to "Mark" were added later. When the anonymous author we refer to as "Matthew" wrote that gospel, he did it as a rewrite of "Mark". "Matthew" used 90% of "Mark" and changed things, either eliminating or embellishing, as he saw fit. The women were already in the main storyline, as the precedent from probably around a decade earlier, so he changed the details to fit his narrative. The "women at the tomb" precedent was even more substantiated after "Matthew". When "Luke" and "John" were written even later, it's very likely that most Christian communities had already established this narrative.

[@Jimmy-iy9pl]

So, regardless of if what you're saying about women anointing corpses is true or not, the women still didn't need to be the initial witnesses of the empty tomb and angelic guards. If the Gospel authors were in the habit of making stuff up, all they had to do was skip over the anointing and have one or more of Jesus' male followers find the tomb. It's not like the story needed the women in it at all, if it was fictional. So the objection doesn't work. You can't say the Gospels were creative story tellers while trying to argue they HAD to do this or that in their narratives.

[@Jimmy-iy9pl]

​@@nonprogrediestregredi1711 Since this comment is just a regurgitation of standard higher critical bunk, there's not a lot I'll say, but I'll just say that for anyone who hasn't had their brains rotted by the bad epistemic standards of biblical criticism, they should check out the work of Peter J. Williams, Richard Bauckham and Lydia McGrew on the reliability of the Gospels. Biblical studies is where the mind goes to die, more often than not. And I hope more people come to realize this too.

[@aku7598]

It's just a threat to unbelievers of many threats. Believe in Jesus. If not, he'll come back and deal with you. The real world doesn't work that way. Only in fiction. Many feel threatened as many threatened that ghosts will harm them.

[@michaeltimpanaro5622]

???

[@jackgriffin117]

Great discussion.

[@Cantstanya]

“They were not fools who would believe in a lot of crazy things”. Really? It was an age of rampant superstition! Nothing has changed…

[@joejoe-lb6bw]

So, do we know who wrote the gospels? Nope. Case closed.

[@nickmatthews604]

Joejoe? We do know who wrote them.... the entire Bible is amazing and wonderful... the back story, the non-biblical historicity and so on and so forth emphatically confirms its authority. Please get stuck into it, enjoy the journey and may God bless you. Amen Amen. 🙏

[@Tony-fq3pp]

So not through evidence then!! 🤦‍♂️

[@michaelfourie345]

It should tell you all you need to know when she refers to the bible as a "primary source". I think she actually believes the bible IS evidence🙄

[@vhawk1951kl]

Hearsay is *Not* evidence

[@whatwecalllife7034]

It always makes me laugh when people put so much emphasis on their own religion, or the religion they have been surrounded by most of their lives, while simultaneously forgetting/ignoring that various cultures existed, flourished, and had a variety of superstitious stories, beliefs, and claims. Why is it that they never consider the superstitious and magical claims of other religions or cultures as seriously as their own? Why do they not believe in oracles and djinn, or the "supernatural" claims and gods of other pantheons who were genuinely believed to have effects on the real world? Why are these discredited as if people didn't base their lives around their apparent truthfulness? Why should anyone take the fabled resurrection of Jesus seriously, but not take the stories of the Iliad, Heracles, the Assyrians, the Chinese, or the Vedas seriously? Would she change her mind about the Norse stories such as how Thor killed all the frost giants? Was the Earth made from the body and blood of Ymir? Let it also be known that being a historian does not exclude you from superstitious thinking. For example, in at least one of his letters, the historian Pliny the Elder, wrote about how he believed in ghosts because he HEARD A STORY from someone. That's it. Not because he had evidence, but because he heard a story. That's something to keep in mind when it comes to the gospels, Christianity, and religion in general. I don't discredit her work as a historian of religion and it's history in North America, however i do find it interesting that she's not saying this as an Ancient Near East scholar, but as a North American scholar.