Is the Story of Jesus Stolen From the Old Testament?

Many skeptics assert what the Gospels record is not history, but mythic retellings of stories from the Old Testament. The life of Jesus must have been fabricated because we can find parallels in the Old Testament. However, this claim does not stand up to scrutiny. Also, I would like to thank Darrell Bock and Mike Licona for reviewing this video and helping to bring it to life.
Don't forget to help us create more videos! We need your support:
/ inspiringphilosophy
/ @inspiringphilosophy
Sources:
The Historical Jesus: Five Views - James Beilby
Cognitive Processes - Bourne, L.E., Dominowski, R.L. and Loftus, E.F.
Memory, Tradition, and Text: Uses of the Past in Early Christianity - Alan K. Kirk, Tom Thatcher
Roman Myth and Mythology - Jan Bremmer, Nicholas Horsfall
Writing Biography in Greece and Rome - Koen De Temmerman
Tacitus - Rhiannon Ash
Reading and Teaching Ancient Fiction - Sara R. Johnson, ‎Rubén R. Dupertuis, ‎Christine Shea
Life of Sertorius - Plutarch
Christobiography - Craig Keener
The Relationships Among the Gospels: An Interdisciplinary Dialogue - William O. Walker
Social-science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels - Bruce J. Malina, Richard L. Rohrbaugh
The New Testament and the People of God - N. T. Wright
Acts and the History of Earliest Christianity - Martin Hengel
Mussolini’s Rome - Painter, B.
Ancient Rome: From the Early Republic to the Assassination of Julius Caesar - Garland, L., Dillon, M.
Thomas: The Fifth Gospel? - Nicholas Perrin
#Myth #Christianity #HebrewBible

[@OlviMasta77]

"michael jones is a myth crafted by multiple historical accounts"

[@anunknownentity1637]

I actually think Richard Carrier never existed. Think about it, there are very few scholars who reject the historicity of Jesus in the 21st century, so the chances he existed is already very low. On top of that look at his name. Richard Carrier. Who is the most famous atheist of the 21st century? Richard Dawkins. This is, no doubt, where the name Richard was developed as those who created the story of Richard Carrier wanted to give him a name that would be well respected among atheists. The last name Carrier is meant to represent his symbolic carrying of the Jesus mythicist movement of the 21st century. I think we have ample reason to conclude Richard Carrier never existed.

[@Gamerboy365ify]

@@anunknownentity1637 The logic you used is more sound than what Mythicists use.

[@andyfield7397]

great answer 😂😂😂

[@thiccmcchicken550]

@@anunknownentity1637 Why do I find this weirdly convincing

[@Warcloud1980]

Who is Michael jones ? Bob Jones university is a real school in the us google it I went there

[@danielward2328]

Old Testament: Prophesied the coming of Messiah New Testament: Fulfilling the coming of Messiah

[@jamesserbos6697]

Old testament: Prophesied the coming of Messiah New testament: C'mon guys let's create the Messiah old testament prophesied

[@26RealKutVoodooThoatZoe26]

False…

[@superdog797]

Except according to all the Jews who know the Old Testament the best and in the original language

[@frankiemoore9127]

@@jamesserbos6697 Impossible, how can you create something that really happened. Read Isaiah 53. The prophecy being written a about Jesus being tortured and crucified. Thousands of years later this happened. Jesus crucifixion is the most recorded part of history

[@jamesserbos6697]

@@frankiemoore9127 Wake up and start educating yourself

[@michaelx5070]

I used to be a Jesus mythicist - it was information like this that changed my mind.

[@paradisecityX0]

And Tim O'Neill's site history for Atheists dot com which thoroughly dismantles mythicism.

[@michaelx5070]

Not for me though. I didn’t hear about O’Neill until afterwards and I’m hesitant to condone him. I like what the McGrews do, alongside Craig Keener and Colin Hemer. Tim McGrew specifically was very influential in bringing me to Christianity. I’ve actually had a conversation with him, he’s a really cool guy.

[@jonathanoseitwum2029]

I'm glad you made a thoughtful decision to change your mind

[@chrisalfano589]

What changed your mind?

[@Cori761]

@@michaelx5070 that's so awesome! I actually had a similar experience and it was McGrew that convinced me, or should I say, he presented the evidence that convinced me.

[@jamesberbert2547]

It's not mythology. It's typology. It's almost like people go out of their way to misunderstand.

[@jonathansoko1085]

We live in a world filled with individuals that reduced most of their information that they get into 15 second video clips. Those same people will say Christianity is false because of a 3 minute video they watched. I am certain you see why we as a people are in trouble.

[@superdog797]

​@@jonathansoko1085 Once you believe someone magically flew through the sky or turned water into wine based on *literally nothing* except the testimony of a 2000 year-old book, a book that asserts (not reports, asserts) hundreds of other equally unbelievable claims, with obvious competitive theological agenda, from a cultural context that was inundated with profound ignorance, illiteracy, and mythology, then you no longer have any historico-epistemic leg to stand on. If you're willing to just sit back and say "Yea, I'm gonna believe all this based only on that", then there is no _argumentation_ that will be relevant to a discussion with you anymore because you've already overturned any standard level of reasonable skepticism for sound historical analysis. You can sit back and say you will believe it on *faith* but the idea of trying to have a _historical discussion_ on the "truth or falsehood" of the matter with someone who already jettisoned skepticism - the bedrock of all factual methodological investigation - is ludicrous.

[@jonathansoko1085]

@@superdog797 Once you do what you do, you're beyond lost and will never come to reality.

[@superdog797]

@@jonathansoko1085 Bro, don't condescend to me like I'm some moron. Be more Christ-like. I'm an atheist and I have a great deal of respect for many of the moral teachings of Christian tradition. You are not my enemy. What I said, nevertheless, is true - these attempts at historical rationalization of Christian teachings simply do not and _cannot_ hold water, simply as a matter of the necessity of methodological naturalism in historical exploration. As a methodological investigator you cannot use the canons of Christian tradition to come to objective conclusions, because you are theologically bound from the outset to _assume_ the truthfulness of them. All I did was point out that that is problematic for historians who want to support Christian theological claims with historical facts. Christianity is a faith-based worldview, not one that is the sober conclusion by the community of objective academics of history, sociology, and philosophy. I did not insult you and do not say Christian theology when taken literally is an absolute impossibility, but teaching people that there is some tremendous historical basis for the Christian theological claims is just fanatical.

[@noelperez6523]

@@superdog797 I have studied multiple religions and Christianity stands out far above the rest. It is logical consistent, psychologically consistent, philosophically consistent, spiritually consistent, historically consistent and many more that I have gather outside the Bible. I dont believe in the Bible because of what the Bible says but rather because philosophy, psychology, anthropology, scientifically, and even other religions based on their spiritual landscape they are all testimony to the judeo-chrstian God. I was an atheist but became a believer after examine outside sources and examine the fabric of reality itself to come to the conclusion of the validity of the Christian God

[@ayandamafuyeka1952]

The old testament is a literal foreshadowing of Jesus. From Abraham, to Moses, to David, their character are all a foreshadowing of Jesus.

[@alenizi07]

It doesn’t foreshadow Jesus at all.

[@Warcloud1980]

@@alenizi07 yes it does

[@alenizi07]

@@Warcloud1980 nope 👎 Ik missionaries will often quote Isaiah 53, 7:14, 9:6 as usual 😂 or Daniel 7&9, Zechariah, etc.

[@canonjean-mignon4985]

If it’s a foreshadowing, the Quran is more accurate than the New Testament, since that one is more about Christ than about Jesus.

[@magnificentuniverse3085]

@@alenizi07 I never understood why muslims hate the idea of Jesus being prophesied in the works of previous prophets... could you please explain it to me Im quite curious? If I remember it correctly Jesus is called Masih in the Quran and other muslim sources, and that means the Anointed One... well there are proofs of Messianic expectations even before Christ, even most rigid scholars see pictures of that ideal Jewish king, descendant of David who will bring justice and Messianic age in the Tanakh, and even more in Jewish second temple literature... like Messiah is all over the place there and most of those writings are written before Jesus was born, so there were some prophecies that made them expect Messiah for sure, either written in the books of Tanakh or in their culture. Does islam teach whats the meaning of Jesus being the Masih? Are there any hadiths which explain it? Thank you in advance and God bless us all with humility and truth before him who knows everything!

[@TylerSmith1986]

Always been interested in the parallels between old testament and the new. "What was, is, and is to come" is always a phrase in my mind when I ponder that topic.

[@imperatorlightoneous1382]

The old testament constantly sets up the coming of Jesus and the new testament is the revealing of our salvation and the kingdom of God that awaits all who repent and accept Jesus the lamb of God and our only way to the father

[@MountainFisher]

Keep in mind the many "comings" of God in judgement when the Lord used the Assyrians to conquer the kingdom of Israel and later the Babylonians destroying Judea and Jerusalem. The Lord used the Armies of Rome to wipeout the last Temple that He prophesied in His Olivet discourse.

[@MountainFisher]

@@missouritravelers 483 years from the order to rebuild Jerusalem until the Messiah comes. It was predicted in Daniel chapter 9. Depending on which date you use Jesus first claimed to be the Messiah in 28 or 30 AD. That certainly was not written after the fact considering that there are copies of Daniel that date to 200 BC. It also says the Messiah would be cut off.

[@MountainFisher]

@@missouritravelers You're a troll and if you think you are dragging me down your rabbit hole I'm not falling for it. Jesus on many occasions accepted worship and was crucified for saying yes to the Sanhedrin's questions by telling them that they will see Him as the Son of Man (an Old Testament name for Christ) sitting at the right hand of the mighty God.

[@MountainFisher]

@@missouritravelers You didn't read what I said. Jesus did claim to be the Messiah and was crucified for it.

[@pdxnikki1]

As a Jewish believer I appreciate your work here- and always! God bless you Michael Jones!

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

Thank you

[@kc8582]

You jews are waiting for the antichrist who will deceive you after you rejected Jesus Christ a messenger of God almighty blessed

[@donthefreeman]

@@kc8582 Nikki isn’t waiting for that. Try to discern what scripture says about the “spirit of antichrist”. The “Antichrist” isn’t a person and doubtfully ever will be. Read Revelation again, I recommend reading 1 of the 4 testimonies(Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John) again - perhaps Acts and a few of the letters to the churches so you have a little more context. There is a sect of Jewish faith that is still waiting for their messiah but you really shouldn’t attack them, nor other Jews especially those that don’t support that doctrine. That kind of generalizing might be causing your sense of “I Don’t Know”.

[@kc8582]

@@donthefreeman jews rejected Jesus Christ blessed and christians worship Christ and muslims believe and respect Jesus Christ a messenger of God almighty blessed so choose which is the correct faith

[@ultracrepiderian]

@@kc8582 not all Jews,I think uve forgotten who the first Christians were, and all the other Jews who were neither hostile nor supportive And furthermore, Muslims don't believe in Jesus, they believe in isa Who is almost an entirely different person

[@andyfield7397]

yes, it is called prophecy 😩

[@ramigilneas9274]

It’s called Mimesis.😉

[@andyfield7397]

@@ramigilneas9274 Psalm 22 for starters

[@ramigilneas9274]

@@andyfield7397 Exactly, the author of the gospel of Mark mirrored Psalm 22 by letting his version of Jesus say "God, why have you forsaken me?“

[@andyfield7397]

@@ramigilneas9274 It is all of that Psalm - goes into great detail of the events of the crucifixion, as well as many other OT references in Isaiah, Lamentations, Zechariah, Jeremiah, etc... "The New is in the Old concealed, the Old is in the New revealed"

[@kellanstec]

@@andyfield7397 ever hear of fanfiction? In order for the OT to be considered prophecy of the NT, we'd need some corroboration that the NT events actually occurred--and you can't use OT prophecy to do it.

[@randelshurker8133]

I'm pretty sure that we're still trying to draw parallels to past events for things to this day, whether trying to figure out what's gonna happen in the future, make political statements, or other things of note to us. It's just a common human behavior we do, intentionally or not.

[@manub.3847]

It happens even with personal experiences, someone tells what happened to him or a friend and the next person in the group thinks of an earlier experience that was very similar.

[@donthefreeman]

@@manub.3847 Great observation, do you think its in our nature or do you think we’ve all watched too many movies?

[@manub.3847]

@@donthefreeman It's more of a natural social interaction. For example, I remember a colleague saying that she met a customer at her hotel while on vacation. Another colleague said that he also met a customer once on vacation. Two different places and yet a similar situation which both colleagues were kind of embarrassed. (Otherwise only meet customers in suits / costumes and suddenly "half-naked" in swimming trunks / bathing suits, if you otherwise don't even meet these customers in the local swimming pool.)

[@ronrontall6370]

Just found on the internet: Napoleon was born in 1760 Hitler was born in 1889 (a difference of 129 years) Napoleon came to power in 1804 Hitler came to power in 1933 (a difference of 129 years) Napoleon came to Vienna in 1812 Hitler came to Vienna in 1941 (a difference of 129 years) Napoleon lost the war in 1816 Hitler lost the war in 1945 (a difference of 129 years) Both came to power, when they were 44. Both attacked Russia, when they were 52. Both lost the war, when they were 56 years old.

[@rocketman2628]

Napoleon lost in 1815.

[@gamer7916]

Napoleon’s name is 8 letters 8 is 2^3 Hitler’s name is 6 letters 6 is 2*3 A triangle has 3 sides 2^3 has a 3 in it 2*3 has a 3 in it ILLUMINATI CONFIRMED *X File theme*

[@5BBassist4Christ]

If the Gospels were a mythical retelling of the OT, then where is the passage where Jesus split sea waters, slew a giant in a valley, or called down fire from heaven? These are some of the biggest moments in the OT, surely they would have been echoed. I have learned there is nothing genuine or honest about Jesus Mythicists' claims.

[@jeffchapman9382]

It's in the Bible. Christ was also a prophet. Muhammad knew this and he high jacked it and formed the Islamic religion. Many Arabs are followers of Muhammad and not Jesus. They claim Muhammad was the purest and the most undefiled flesh that ever walked the earth. But the Bible says Jesus never committed a sin. That's why you want to be a follower of Christ. Now saying Christ is a prophet doesn't mean I deny his deity. He is a part of the Trinity. Elisha fed one hundred. Jesus fed five thousand. The prophets of the old testament had followers too. John the Baptist had followers. Jesus was born into and came out of Israel for crying out loud. But he will rain down fire out of heaven. That is yet to come. And he'll also destroy the Antichrist. It's pretty amazing actually that he would call sinners like me to take up the cross and follow him.

[@jeffchapman9382]

@Jafs Jafs you orthodox?

[@jeffchapman9382]

@Jafs Jafs you're possessed

[@aidan-ator7844]

Congrats on 200k. I love your videos. Btw, do you have a final opinion on quantum mechanics and what that could mean?

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

It means a lot of things, not sure what you are trying to ask.

[@aidan-ator7844]

@@InspiringPhilosophy do you think it counts as proof for God's existence?

[@Noticer-in-chief]

@@aidan-ator7844 Don't worry about proving God's existence. Have faith, love your neighbour, love your enemy and above all, love God as he loves you.

[@jamersbazuka8055]

Napoleon went to war with Russia and lost because of the winter. Hitler went to war with Russia and lost because of the winter. Hmmm, Hitler's probably just a mythical retelling of Napoleon.

[@DanielApologetics]

Great work, Mike! And congratulations with 200,000 subscribers! Lord bless you, yours and the ministry

[@sking7003]

Hey 👋

[@willtheperson7224]

There's a saying called: "History repeats itself."

[@עמיחיאלימלך-כ8ל]

History...or storie?legend?

[@theapexfighter8741]

@@עמיחיאלימלך-כ8ל history. Period.

[@DDeFederico]

Sometimes when you hear these theories you wonder how someone came up with it. The regular understanding (the gospels are generally true and accurate accounts of what Jesus did) is much more believable than some kind of highly complex hypothesis.

[@worldviewdetective9456]

I disagree. A Mormon could just as easily argue that the Mormon understanding (that the Book of Mormon is a generally true and accurate account of prophets living in pre-Colombian America) is much more believable that an uneducated farmboy like Joseph Smith could write the Book of Mormon, a complex literary masterpiece comparable to the works of JRR Tolkien. It's far more likely that the Gospels are mostly fictional stories than that a man rose bodily from the dead.

[@DDeFederico]

@@worldviewdetective9456 I'm not understanding your comment. Did you mean to type "than" instead of "that"? Anyway, notice I didn't say the regular understanding was more believable than simply saying it's false; I pointed out that the regular view is more likely compared to a complex view, in this case, that the gospel is a mythological retelling of the Old Testament. When it comes to whether it is generally true or false, I would argue it is more likely to be true due to the historical context, prophecy, and philosophical arguments.

[@worldviewdetective9456]

@Darrien DeFederico Sorry, I must have made I typo. I meant to say "Mormon could just as easily argue that the Mormon understanding (that the Book of Mormon is a generally true and accurate account of prophets living in pre-Colombian America) is much more believable THAN an uneducated farmboy like Joseph Smith writing the Book of Mormon, a complex literary masterpiece comparable to the works of JRR Tolkien." I disagree that a resurrection is more likely than a mythological retelling of the Old Testament since we have tons of well documented examples of people reusing details from old stories to tell new stories (for example Midrash), but no well documented examples of resurrection. Historical context isn't a good argument for the Gospels being mostly true, since we have relatively little written about Jesus outside the New Testament and many historians (Bart Ehrman, Dennis MacDonald, etc) accept that Jesus was a historical person and that there is a historical core behind the Gospels, but still believe the Gospels are mostly fiction. Regarding prophecy, what’s more likely: that the Old Testament actually predicted details about Jesus’s life before they happened or that the Gospel writers made up details about Jesus’s life to make it seem like he fulfilled messianic prophecies when in reality he didn’t. Plus, many “messianic prophecies” that Christians cite are super vague or weren’t even messianic prophecies to begin with. Philosophical arguments for God’s existence don’t make a resurrection significantly more likely since even if a God exists, he doesn’t raise people from the dead very often. Most people on earth believe in a God, but don’t believe Jesus rose from the dead. A God could exist and every religion on planet Earth still be false.

[@michaelturnage3395]

They perform outlandish mental acrobatics then accuse IP of doing it. Projecting themselves onto others. They really are grasping at straws, it's obvious.

[@michaelturnage3395]

@Κωνσταντίνος ΉπΜκ The real tradition comes from the Jewish background and context-not some pagan Vatican court in Rome. You know they basically make a vote as to whether or not something is an “authentic” doctrine or tradition. Unfortunately majority appeal doesn't make it correct. They have zero divine inspiration whatsoever. God is the interpretor, not man. That goes for both protestantism and Catholicm. They both have it wrong. If God doesn't open your understanding then you will always err in the scriptures. Every single time.

[@travist7777]

Innovation is the sure way to get published and get famous. Thanks for doing the case-building for us, Michael!

[@ChrisHolman]

That's called forshadowing

[@MeanBeanComedy]

Exactly, man... Helps our case!

[@עמיחיאלימלך-כ8ל]

The Hebrew scriptures are not "forshadow" of nothing.

[@matthayes533]

@@עמיחיאלימלך-כ8ל Actually they promise a Messiah. Read Isaiah 53.

[@brwntwn123]

Or plagiarism / copy and paste

[@kevinlucas9905]

I had no idea this question was even a thing. Skeptics will use anything.

[@rickhanson3293]

I've heard it before on at least a couple of occasions. One example was... David/Saul Yeshua/Paul (who was also named Saul I understand their point of view to the extent that if it involved just one town and 100 people then to have so many parallels would be a bad sign. However, we are not dealing with that. A substantial area, a rich history, diversified religious views with commonality, etc. It would be difficult to accept legitimacy of everything else and exclude the bible with that same argument. It is intellectually dishonest to say the least. I think it is fear of truth and it is seen outside of religion as well. It is deeper than that, of course, but that is one of the first starting points. I think everybody has that and it is situational and understandable. It is when it involves group think evil that it is truly bad and I think that is what a lot of the bible is about for Yeshua acknowledged individual and personal sin, but he distinguished between systemic and individual.

[@dirckthedork-knight1201]

They are getting desperate

[@michaelturnage3395]

Jesus is the greater Adam, the greater Abraham, the greater King David, and the greater high priest Aaron.

[@steveangell1072]

No Jesus is a farce. Not a Jew. Never in the Old Testament. One GOD in the Old Testament who is our Savior and Redeemer.

[@michaelturnage3395]

@@steveangell1072 So you mean to tell me that somehow he bears a Hebrew name which literally means “Yah saves,” is described by various different sources as curly haired, tawny skinned, with a long nose and bushy eyebrows, wears a tallit with tzitziyot (Matt. 23:5, 14:36; Mk. 6:56; Lk. 8:44), recites the Shema (Mk. 12:29) and even making it the first and foremost of his commandments no less, uses contemporary Jewish imagery in his parables, such as Israel being a wine garden (Matt. 21:33-46) told a man he healed not to spread word of what he had done but instead purify himself and offer Temple sacrifices as commanded by Moses (Mk. 1:44; Mtt. 8:4), was very observant when it came to Jewish holidays and feasts. Jesus was circumcised on the eight day as required by the Torah (Luke 2) and celebrated the Feast of Sukkot (John 7), furthermore in Mark 6, it says that when the Shabbat came He went to the synagogue and there He preached to people. Jesus celebrated Passover to the fullest, making sure that all elements of the celebration were fulfilled and sending His disciples ahead of time to make things ready for the Passover meal. But of course, according to you at least, he wasn't Jewish. Which makes zero sense if you think about it. But of course using logic is probably a great sin to you since if you used logic you'd realize how wrong you are. It's impossible for him to not have been Jewish. Literally every reputable scholar and historian on the planet agrees that Jesus lived very passionately devoted to Judaism and was martyred for the sake of a Jewish message. Only a reality denying moron would argue otherwise. WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFEE! STOP BLINDLY BELIEVING IN RABBINIC FABLES AND HEARSAY LACKING EVIDENCE.

[@michaelturnage3395]

@@steveangell1072 BTWY, America isn't the Old Testament Israel fool. America is Babylon, the wicked harlot. HaShem will destroy it.

[@swissapologetics]

You should have turned the argument around: If we can prove that many events in the OT tell us one and the same story again and again, but in different ways and, in a way the writters at that time could not possibly have planned it, then we have the proof of the supernatural autorship of the Bible. When we see Adam is an type/antitype of Christ, the tree of life is a type of Christ, the arch is a type of Christ, the binding of Isaac, the life of Joseph, the passover, Moses prophethood, the tabernacle, the aaronite priesthood, the sacrifical-system, Samson, Elijah, Elisha, David, Salomon... all of their lifes, all these events resemble Jesus life and the events in His life, especially the crucifixion, then there is no way to get around the fact, that there was a big supernaturan plan and planner behind the OT.

[@ivivince625]

Or isn’t it more likely that the scarcity of books and people who can read in those days made people write similarly?

[@swissapologetics]

@@ivivince625 How could this explain that there always the same message told in many different ways in so many events in the OT?

[@ivivince625]

@@swissapologetics because people wrote a story a long time ago and people re wrote it over and over to fit there needs?

[@swissapologetics]

@@ivivince625 Let me give you some examples. Then you may see, why your explanation doesnt work: *Example one: The binding of Isaac:* God ordered Abraham to offer his son Isaac as a sacrifice and He calls Isaac the "only Son" (Gen 22,2) despite the fact that Abraham had another Son, Ishmael. God also has many sons, for example the angels, but He has an "only Son", Jesus, which is the Son of God in a unique way (John 3,16). Abraham took his son Isaac and laid the wood upon him, and Isaac carried the wood on the mount in the land of Moriah (Gen 22,6), and then Isaac was laid upon the wood to get sacrificed (Gen 22,9). The romans laid the wooden cross upon Jesus and He had to carry it as He walked upon the mount in the land of Moriah (Lk 23,26), and they laid Him on the cross and crucified Him. The land of Moriah was later called Jerusalem, and Moriah became the temple mountain (2. Chr. 3,1). But the binding of Isaac was not on the mount Moriah itself, but on a mount in the land of Moriah (Gen 22,2), maybe Golgatha, where Jesus was crucified over 2000 years later. Isaac asked his father: "where is the lamb for a burnt offering?" And Abraham said: "My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering." (Gen 22,7-8) Then after God stopped Abraham before he sacrificed his son, God gave a ram and they sacrificed the ram instead of Isaac (Gen 22,13). Jesus is the lamb of God (John 1,29), that was given by God as a sacrifice. Jesus laid down His life and took the punishment we deserve, in our place. He died instead of us, so that we can have the eternal life (John 3,16). The ram was caught in a thicket by his horns (Gen 22,13). They platted a crown of thorns and put it upon the head of Jesus (Mt 27,29)

[@swissapologetics]

@@ivivince625 *Example two: The brazen Serpent* *Numbers 21,6-9* 6 And the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died. 7 Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, for we have spoken against the Lord, and against thee; pray unto the Lord, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people. 8 And the Lord said unto Moses, *Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.* The serpents are symbolic for sins (Gen 3). Our sins will kill us. We need the Messiah, who took our sins upon Himself on the cross, to get eternal life

[@asHeWalkedcom]

Do you film your own b-roll or get it from somewhere? All your videos are so well done!

[@TheCAMandMAC]

Probably comes from a site like Storyblocks

[@sjappiyah4071]

The 32 dislikes are from those who watched “ Ceaser’s Messiah “ and took it as an absolute fact loool Great work IP

[@steveangell1072]

The thousand likes are from those who never watched "Ceaser's Messiah" and certainly did not compare the New Testament with the Jewish Wars book Josephus wrote. He did not just make this up out of thin air. The books have numerous valid comparisons. Far more valid than the comparisons here between the Old and New Testament.

[@whatsinaname691]

@@steveangell1072 Damn bro. People writing in the same time period have more similar styles than people who wrote hundreds of years prior. Damn.

[@sjappiyah4071]

@@steveangell1072 I watched the full thing and laughed hysterically at it. Not only were many of the comparisons false or insignificant at best, the documentary still failed to understand the principle that IP pointed out. Similarity DOES NOT equivocate to derivation

[@steveangell1072]

@@sjappiyah4071 Yes at first I laughed. This can not be so. Then I started comparing it to the actual book and I had to reverse course. There were many significant similarities and some very very hard to explain. A few that were not so great. The difference was I took my Jesus Glasses off and when you do you see the New Testament as written. Not as rewritten by the not at all holy but very much the Spirit of the dead. I think you were bamboozled by the Holy Spirit.

[@lexwill718]

Council of Nicaea is just 1 council. The sinods or synods are other councils. All working for or with Rome. How many times does God say NO ONE SITS NEXT TO ME? This is pathetic.

[@slimetimetvwithjojo1672]

Glory to the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit. The book is a gift from Jesus to us so that we can have Salvation through his sacrifice. Thank you Father for orchestrating the greatest book ever made to show us your great love for us. Words cant explain your Glory and Power. You are the Truth the way and the Life. Isaiah 53

[@agustinhernanadez562]

@@missouritravelers in according to your atheistic worldview and standards, what makes slavery wrong if there is no such thing as God or objective morality and humanities transcendental values that they are not made in the image of God

[@agustinhernanadez562]

@@missouritravelers why should I care about other people and giving them empathy in an atheistic standards of morality

[@agustinhernanadez562]

@@missouritravelers allowing society to determine morality is pretty dangerous , because who said that our morality is right and not any other cultures morality, and when society establishes their morality, you run to the problem of double standards , and the subjectivity of morality that changes on the whim

[@agustinhernanadez562]

@@missouritravelers slavery still exist in the United States but in a form of punishment of prison sentence written in the constitution, but most religions today including atheistic religions differ in morality, like that of the USSR and nazi Germany and many dictatorial empires of the past which their society established that their morality are the absolutes and must be obeyed ,but my point was that what standards are correct to make a judgement that other cultural moralities are wrong and we are right in our morality in an atheistic worldview where good and evil don’t exist

[@agustinhernanadez562]

@@missouritravelers I meant a different form of slavery, not the one that was fought against in the civil war as described in the 13 amendment but my question is where does good and evil come from and are they transcendent and who gets to decide for others what’s good and evil?

[@J.F.331]

I think you are correct in saying that Jesus at times purposefully did things to draw parallels to the past, especially in the Old Testament. For example, mythic skeptics would point to Mark 4:35-41 and say that Mark is plagiarizing Psalm 107:23-30. When I first discovered this parallel several years ago, my first thought wasn’t that Mark was plagiarizing, but that Jesus exercised His authority over nature in a similar way in order to substantiate His claim of being God. It was Yahweh who calmed the storm in Psalm 107 and it was Jesus who calmed the storm in Mark 4. The people of Jesus’ time especially the disciples would have been familiar with Psalm 104 and would have made the connection of Christ claiming to be Yahweh by exercising the same authority over nature. This wasn’t a familiar act to them in the sense that a prophet would normally exercise such authority which is why they say, “who then is this?” Jesus was claiming more than prophethood, He was claiming deity and performed miracles to prove that claim.

[@kernlove1986]

Those mysticist are just looking for any random way to object. They're just ridiculous.

[@racingace9959]

200k Still rising May the Lord bless you more Michael.

[@zach415]

Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament and its prophecies, basically

[@KTChamberlain]

My grandfather had some striking parallels with King James I/VI of England and Scotland. King James Stuart came from a long line of Catholics until he broke the tradition and became Anglican. My grandfather came from a long line of Mormons that were part of the Mormon Migration until he broke the tradition and became Lutheran. On top of that both never knew their mothers because Mary Stuart was executed when James was a baby and my great-grandmother died of pneumonia when my grandfather was a baby. Furthermore, both share the same birthday: June 19. I didn't know any of these parallels at the time I got my grandfather the King James Version of the Bible on his last birthday.

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

Obviously, your grandfather never existed!

[@KTChamberlain]

@@InspiringPhilosophy Looks like we've found a recurring theme for this video. Joking aside, I really like your content, especially the one you did on the topic of Hell because it made me realize that the Pixar film Inside Out seems to have depicted Hell, especially in Luke 16:19-31 so much so that I did a video essay on that.

[@roedclaudencuadra2743]

There's so many evidence that Jesus is true, even QURAN tells about Jesus. so it means the Bible is real event especially in the New Testament.

[@TandemSix]

That would work only with Muslims when making the case for the reliability of the Bible. No sane person would take the quran as being a historical document regarding Jesus

[@brianbarr2716]

mythological doesn't mean unreal, in many ways it's a sign it was more real than anyone can adequately speak of. At any rate if you're going to call that thing circumstantial evidence you could at least acknowledge that yours is too.

[@george4125]

That’s a hard one to get people to understand. Mythical is encompassing of the inner life. People who use mythical in a negative sense are actually materialist who think the outer fact is more important.

[@Zilam]

I love that of all the places in the country, you pointed out Southern Illinois. I was born and raised there, so I know it often gets overlooked (for good reason). Anyway, great video as usual!

[@rickhanson3293]

There are so many parallels because it is part of same story. I agree that it was in no way stolen or as simple as one borrowing from the other. I continuously find so-called accusations and contradictions that fall apart with at least a full chapter reading. The detractors will pick a few verses here and there and call it a day. Must be nice to not be disturbed about certain things considering they read nothing. In between and even if sick or tired I will read chapters at a time simply on the off-chance that I am wrong and they are right. It is not working in their favor to say the least and I do have an open mind. I love the fact that he uses an example of his own life against the idea of strict mythologies. I, too, have had a rough life, strange, hurtful, good, etc. and many things inexplicable via any means other than what the bible talks about. I can wield a wrench just as anybody, but science only helps and does not fully explain. And mythology is not always mythology simply because they want it to be.

[@alfredvickers4054]

You should go into more detail on the typology of the Bible. There are fascinating parallels from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the Old Testament. It's far more than the authors simply highlighting parallels that happened to exist--the Bible is a grand narrative with intricately woven stories and layers of symbolism which all culminate in Christ and the founding of His Church. God, who divinely inspired the writing of the Scriptures, is the first and greatest Storyteller, but His characters are real people and His story is all of human history.

[@rustyshackleford2841]

Jesus was real, there was a man with incredible abilities that change the world. It spread like shockwaves. There must have been a incredible event.

[@christisking970]

Those stories are foreshadowing of our savior

[@junelledembroski9183]

So, Luke highlighted certain things from Mary’s life to show she was the new arc of the covenant?

[@Noticer-in-chief]

Christians have always acknowledged the parallels. The early Church viewed/views these parallels in the scriptures/"old testament" as a foreshadowing of Jesus Christ.

[@steveangell1072]

They search and search but never find Jesus in the Old Testament. Not there. Jesus was NOT a Jew nothing Jewish about him.

[@evertonporter7887]

@@steveangell1072 Matthew chapter 1 and Luke chapter 3, verses 23-38.

[@Rocky-ur9mn]

@@steveangell1072 Isaiah 53 , Daniel 7: 13-15 , psalm 22 .......

[@steveangell1072]

@@Rocky-ur9mn It starts in 52. It is not talking about Jesus: 12 For ye shall not go out with haste, nor go by flight: for the LORD will go before you; and the God of Israel will be your rereward. 13 Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. 14 As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men: 15 So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider. This is not your Jesus. Kings did not receive visions all in many nations and Jesus was handsome not marred more than any other man. 53:1 Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed? 2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. 3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Again comely no one followed him all despised and rejected him. Man of sorrows Jesus was happy. Lots of grief Jesus only had that in the last few hours of his life. During those few hours did 3 happen but this seems to be speaking of the entire life not just a few hours. 4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. He was not smitten of God. You claim he was God. In his last hour he could not take it and did accuse God of forsaking him but again this is speaking of the entire life of the Servant(s). 5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. Again just in the last few hours of life. Hebrew says torn apart like by a lion. Not bruised. No one was healed as he died. So no one was healed with his stripes. I get the argument of human sacrifice. But God forbids this and you simply have no clue what sacrifice was for in the Bible (Old Testament). Read Job and think of those hundreds of thousands forgiven with no sacrifice. Moses did not sacrifice either to give the people forgiveness. Sacrifice was to express love for God not to ask for forgiveness it was partially about thanking God for forgiving them of accidental sins. Need I go on? I mean it is not like you really read your Bible. You wear the glasses of Christianity. Swear out to your God Jesus whom you put in front of the true God of the Bible. You do not even pray to God you pray through Jesus. You believe Jesus will give you eternal life, though even as Paul said. "All men die and fall short of the Glory of God." No one gets eternal life. We all die. We do live thereafter but that is not eternal life. Our soul lives eternally and the soul of each of us lives eternally with or without Jesus. Jesus entraps you and you can not even read your Bible with open eyes. Daniel 7: 14And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. We all wait for this to happen. Your Satan rules this earth not God. One day God will come and there will be peace everywhere on earth. Jesus did not do that. No Jesus brought about the destruction of Jerusalem before your Gospels were even written. Mark ended at verse 11 with an empty tomb but no ressurection. Compare the four Gospels on the Resurrection you know not who went, when they went, earthquake?, and on and on. They tell four totally different accounts even though the Apostles had had decades to discuss what happened that day they disagreed with each other on basically everything. Is this how good men act. Do good men just reject what thee other good men said and write their own account with no indication at all that others disagree with them? Psalms 22:(To the chief Musician upon Aijeleth Shahar, A Psalm of David.) My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring? Wow Jesus quoted Psalms 22. So what. I can quote it does that make me God? But really do you not get that this is David and his account of how he felt andd acted asking God for forgiveness after his sins were pointed out to him. I guess not. Strange how Christians just think they know selected verses of the Bible and somehow those who disagree with them do not. Every Jew I have spoken to knew of Isaiah 53. They rarely read it because they are living as that servant. It reminds them of how God is punishing them for not truly following God, so they avoid it. I am Old Testament Only but not a Jew BTW. I do find Rabbis are good teachers you should listen to them Tovia Singer for example on you tube. Guess I addressed the video on the Resurrection. Satan sacrifices humans. Not God. Never. Also the lamb who had the sins placed upon it was let go in the wilderness to live and take the sins to god. It had not a single blemish. Its body was perfect, no bruises. Another one was sacrificed but it had no sin prayed upon it and it was burned. Not just killed. The priest who did this were of the Tribe of Levi. They were not some thugs/soldiers. None of this is anywhere close to what the Bible says. In fact it is all upside down. As above so below is far more what it is. Satanic by another word. Why is every step of it the reverse of the way sacrificing was done in the Bible. Another example it was done in the Most Holy place not the skull of a rock. Who do you worship really? Seriously who? The Son of Light? 1 Thessalonians 5:5 The Light Bearer? Matthew 5:13-16 Who is that? Show me Baptism in the Bible. Show me born again in the Bible. What religion did Jesus teach. It was not Jewish. It sure seems to me like some Cult. Magic tricks as well. These are rare in the Bible. No one walked on water. Only a single ressurection by Elijah.

[@steveangell1072]

@@evertonporter7887 I know the New Testament. If someone comes up to you and says I am a Christian. Then speaks of his God Zeus do you consider him a Christian? The old testament says the wife (Young Woman not a Virgin) of Isaiah would give birth and name their son Emmanuel which they did. So how is this Jesus? Jesus Jesus Jesus not Emmanuel. Why ignore the Isaiah and give your son a different name than commanded? I mean who should you trust Isaiah or some angel? Why would an angel of God say fulfill this prophecy but not the name part. Without the name part it is not fulfilled at all. Seems more likely to me it was not an angel. Easy to read a verse of the Bible then use it for bad intents. Matthew changes young woman to virgin. Why misquote the Old Testament. Also it was clearly speaking of Isaiah's wife. Prophecy was fulfilled and God was with Isaiah and his wife and all of Israel when they named their son Emmanuel.

[@ravenfly01]

This was the best period. I love all of your videos dear. Thank you so very much !!

[@cornycontent1915]

Mr. Philosophy, a few weeks ago I posted a big question to you on one of your videos, but I suppose you didnt see it on time. For future reference, is there anywhere more conducive to post inquiries?

[@mugglesarecooltoo]

Probably patreon?

[@cornycontent1915]

@@mugglesarecooltoo preferably free

[@sabinpanta4002]

Hi Mike, when you say the pattern are random, is that random because the verse and chapters aren't in chronological order? If this is the case, not sure i get this because in the earliest old testament canon, the books weren't in the order as we have at the present.

[@caos1925]

they still have a chronological order within themselves like the book of Kings, a son must always come after their father not before.

[@paradisecityX0]

Yet another blow to mythicists (who are worse than young earth creationists at this point)

[@lukyncz3778]

The shroud of Turin? Will there ever be a video on this topic?

[@neliborba101]

Jesus is God, the Son of God. The New Testament is not the rewriting of the Old Testament. His miracles were not IMMITATIONS they were true and real. Viva Cristo Rei!

[@maxittome]

The old testament was pointing to Jesus right from the beginning.

[@kemet4083]

Yes the first Word in genesis 1:1 its a prophecy about Jesus, i have a video on that kzbin.info/www/bejne/qGa8epWefc5_iLs

[@lauraandrews1676]

These claims only sound convincing if you believe that if there are similarities between two things, then only one of them can be real.

[@alfredvickers4054]

I don't get why some atheists work so hard to deny the obvious truth with ridiculous theories. Just accept the truth already! Even the enemies of the early Church were so confident in His existence that they felt the need to explain away His virgin birth, working miracles during His ministry, and His tomb being found empty. So the enemies of the early Church were admitting that the basic narrative of Jesus was true. Then there are all the Messianic prophecies that were undeniably written before the time of Christ which He perfectly fulfilled, even ones that if He were merely a normal human He could not have orchestrated to come to pass. Jesus was real and really fulfilled prophecies written centuries before His birth, but atheists would have us believe that it is all coincidence or that the Jesus narrative was a compilation of random Old Testament passages in a random order with no rhyme or reason. I'll believe the more reasonable option, that Jesus was real, and parallels mean the Old Testament was always pointing toward Him, because God exists and is in control and Jesus was always the Messiah promised to come. God knew what would happen, what He would do and experience, and chose to foreshadow it from the beginning. He is the first and greatest storyteller.

[@bricxPBR3x4]

by that logic I'm Abel, my one co worker who was like a brother to me got jealous because our boss liked my work better and in a sense he stabbed me in the back by trying to get me fired

[@SimpleAmadeus]

I don't agree with your approach to respond to this objection. The Old Testament does contain many "pointers" to the future Jesus. Jesus Himself hints at this (John 5:39). This makes sense, since if God wants us to recognize Him as the God of Israel, it is ideal, probably necessary for Him to repeat notable things that are written in Israel's scripture. To suggest that these may just have been coincidences does not match Christianity, so it does not make for a coherent Christian response. Especially since the type of coincidences you are talking about (the word Egypt, freeing some people, sharing a name, having one eye) do not compare to "coincidences" of reoccurring miracles that only God could perform, such as multiplying food or raising the dead. More importantly, I feel that in this response, you are missing the point. I think the core of this skeptic argument is to propose an atheist explanation for the existence of fulfilled prophesy. If it can't have realistically happened in a Godless reality, then it can only have been fabricated afterwards. I don't think this video really tackled that particular pillar of skepticism.

[@mgw9562]

No the old testament is the mold that Jesus filled.

[@markp1845]

In Luke 24:13-35 there is the account of the two disciples walking on the road to Emmaus. Jesus appears to them veiling his true identity and then proceeds to open up the Old Testament and he explained to them all the passages of Scripture about himself. David Limbaugh has written a book titled "The Emmaus Code" that details how Christ appears throughout the Old Testament. Rather than provide evidence that Jesus Christ was a myth it actually shows that Jesus was real and authentic. It shows the wonderful plan of salvation through Jesus Christ the incarnate God.

[@TehRedBlur]

What a weak objection from the skeptics. Your video response is excellent.

[@Norbingel]

Could this not be said of your reading of the Genesis creation account? For instance, in one video, the one where you interviewed that author, you (or he) said that the 7 days account is not literal because, for example, it parallels ancient accounts of temples being consecrated for 7 days (or something to that effect). Could not both be true? 1) That ancients consecrated temples for 7 days, and 2) the author of Genesis intended to use this to also point to a literal 7 day creation.

[@joshf2218]

It's almost as if the life of Jesus was such an obvious fulfillment of the Jewish religion that these pious Jews who met him were willing to die to testify to him being the messiah.

[@steveangell1072]

Or that the book was just written by someone who knew the Bible (Old Testament) and they made it seem legitimate. Which it is not and easily proven false.

[@joshf2218]

@@steveangell1072 what book? The New Testament is a collection of accounts and letters from at least 7 different independent authors all bearing witness to the same contemporary facts.

[@Rocky-ur9mn]

@@steveangell1072 kzbin.info/aero/PL1mr9ZTZb3TUYymBPce08oyuhnHLLkR_B

[@steveangell1072]

@@joshf2218 Perhaps you should read Caesars Messiah. Perhaps you should see what Tovia Singer and Jews for Juddah have to say about their beliefs and how they are far different than what the New Testament says about them. Read the four accounts of the Resurrection. See if you can answer. Which women went to the Tomb? When did they go. You will need to know that back then the Sabbath ended at sunset not midnight like it does now. Was there an Earthquake to move the stone? I could go on and on. Those four men seemed to agree on nothing. 60 years to speak about it and they agree on nothing. Not just on this but throughout the New Testament.

[@joshf2218]

@@steveangell1072 so you think that because the gospels are not exactly identical in every detail that the whole of Christianity is some conspiracy? Lol it would be a conspiracy if they were identical. As for the sabbath and the women, that has been answered for.. 2000 years and counting.

[@Thehaystack7999]

The Lord gives a “pattern in all things.” Those same miracles which were in Old and New Testament times will occurs again in these last days. Look at the parallels of Jacob and Gilgamesh. It would seem that Israel tells of how he became Israel in a manner which parallels Gilgamesh and Enkidu. Jacob let Hod prevail, hence his name, the other gave into harnessing his natural man tendencies for selfish purposes and manipulation, like unto Cain or Mayhem. Jacob likely told his story in this way so those hearing it can better understand what is being taught, it was anchored in a known story. Aren’t we also to liken all scriptures unto ourselves and situations?

[@hellavadeal]

Why would they put these books together if the claim were true ? This is and illogical argument against Christ.

[@LeftyRighty777]

, let's be clear, Peter, for example, the one who existed and is buried in St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, said of the resurrected Jesus: “We have eaten and drunk with Him after the resurrection” (Acts 10, 41) but each one of the Apostles, all; They gave their lives, they allowed themselves to be killed, rather than retracting their words. The apostles and their disciples suffered torture, imprisonment, abuse, slander, poverty, temptation, contempt, threats, dangers, for many years and in many countries, even suffering horrible deaths, but not one of them (not one) gave up testifying that Jesus of Nazareth is the son of God who resurrected after death, to swear that they saw him resurrected, and saw him ascend to heaven later. JACOBO: He died beheaded on the orders of King Herod. Acts 12: 2. PETER: It is assumed that he suffered martyrdom in Rome during the reign of Nero. At the request of Peter himself he was crucified upside down. ANDRÉS: Upon reaching Edessa Mesopotamia on a missionary journey, he was crucified on the cross, the two ends of which were transversely raised on the ground, hence the origin of the expression of Andrew's cross. MARCOS: he died dragged by the people of Alexandria at the festival dedicated to the idol Máximo. SANTIAGO: The son of Zebedeo was beheaded with the sword in Jerusalem, by order of King Agrippa in the year 44 of the Christian era. FELIPE: He was flogged, put in prison and then crucified in Asia Minor in 54 AD. BARTOLOME: He was the first Christian minister in India. He translated the gospel into Hindu by spreading it throughout that country. He died crucified by a group of idolatrous fanatics. THOMAS: Also called Didimus he preached the gospel in Parthia and also in India where due to the anger of the pagan priests he was pierced with a spear. LUKE: disciple of the apostles; Macedonian physician was hung from an olive tree by the idolatrous priests of Greece. MATTHEW: He was pierced with a spear in Nadabao, Ethiopia, in 60 AD. SANTIAGO: The son of Alphaeus was crucified in Egypt. SANTIAGO EL JUSTO: According to a 2nd century historian, he was thrown by the Pharisees from a pinnacle and later beaten to death, while he was on his knees making prayers for his executioners. JUDAS: Also called Judas Leveo or Thaddeus, he was crucified in Edessa Mesopotamia in 72 AD. SIMÓN: His death is not recorded. He was the leader of the insurrectionary group known as the Zealots. JUAN: The beloved disciple of Jesus, (I know you will find it hard to believe this that follows) faced martyrdom when he was boiled in a huge cauldron of oil during a wave of persecution in Rome. However, he was miraculously spared from death. He was sentenced to the mines in the prison on the island of Patmos and it was there that he wrote the prophetic book "Revelation". He later he was released and returned to what we know today as Turkey. John died of old age and was the only one of the apostles who died a natural death. This circumstance of dying a natural death also shows that they were real people. The exception that gives credibility to the rule. Saul of Tarsus (Saint Paul) an apocryphal book, called The Acts of Paul, says that he was killed by the emperor Nero, in Rome, cutting off his head. On the other hand, Paul was a Pharisee scholar in Jewish law, he was an enemy of Christians and at one point he was the main one in charge of persecuting Christians, but according to Paul himself, Jesus told him: “Paul, why are you persecuting me? ........ To cut the story short, Paul, the Christian-persecuting Pharisee, became an apostle of Christ. His conversion is proof that Jesus existed. He was not initially one of the followers of Jesus but on the contrary, he led the persecution of the apostles, Paul did not walk with Jesus, nor was he present when the apostles say that he appeared to them resurrected on several occasions; and yet he gave his life to preach that Jesus is God who came to earth, resurrected and is to come again to judge the living and the dead. Pablo is another exception that lends credibility to the rule. How is it explained that this enemy and persecutor of Christians became an apostle and died for Christ? Could it be that Jesus appeared to him? Can you believe twelve men who gave their lives as proof of their sincerity? ? Each of them would have given their lives, in different places, in different countries, in Rome, in Greece, in Mesopotamia, in India, in Asia Minor, in Ethiopia, in Egypt, in Jerusalem, at different times, without being close to each other, because of something they knew to be a lie, the resurrection of Jesus? Who would willingly give his life for something that he knows is a lie? Why did not a single one of them recant their teaching that Jesus is the risen God? Would you give your life for someone? Surely for your children, for your parents, for something real and much loved. They did it for Jesus of Nazareth, that is: for someone very loved and real to them. Jesus!!

[@moosechuckle]

I always understood the similarities in old and New Testament as proof of Jesus being the Messiah. I was taught it was scripture continuously pointing to Christ. It seems odd to point something out that most amateur theologians have know for.... like Ever.

[@worldviewdetective9456]

The bigger question is: What's more likely that the Old Testament predicted details about Jesus life thousands of years in advance or that the New Testament authors made up details about Jesus's life to make it seem as if he'd fulfilled prophecy when in reality he hadn't.

[@steveangell1072]

Jesus was not a Jew. No baptism in the Old Testament. Let alone Born Again. These were pagan beliefs. Satanist are baptized.

[@michaelturnage3395]

@@steveangell1072 Are you really that much of a dullard? The rite of baptism (literally “immersing”) comes directly from purification rites in Halakha Jewish law and tradition, which is called tvilah. Many ascetics such as the Essenes as well as Apocalyptic Jewish preachers used to ritually purify people in water as a sign of new purpose given by HaShem.

[@michaelturnage3395]

@@steveangell1072 Look up Yochanan the Immerser and the Mandaeans.

[@michaelturnage3395]

@@steveangell1072 With reference to Ezek. xxxvi. 25, "Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean," R. Akiba, in the second century, made the utterance: "Blessed art thou, O Israel! Before whom dost thou cleanse thyself? and who cleanses thee? Thy Father in heaven!" (Yoma viii. 9). Accordingly, Baptism is not merely for the purpose of expiating a special transgression, as is the case chiefly in the violation of the so-called Levitical laws of purity; but it is to form a part of holy living and to prepare for the attainment of a closer communion with God. This thought is expressed in the well-known passage in Josephus in which he speaks of John the Baptist ("Ant." xviii. 5, § 2): "The washing would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away of some sins, but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness." John symbolized the call to repentance by Baptism in the Jordan (Matt. iii. 6 and parallel passages); and the same measure for attaining to holiness was employed by the Essenes, whose ways of life John also observed in all other respects. Josephus says of his instructor Banus, an Essene, that he "bathed himself in cold water frequently, both by night and by day" ("Vita," § 2), and that the same practise was observed by all the Essenes ("B. J." ii. 8, § 5). The only conception of Baptism in the early Messianic movement is displayed in the declaration of Yochanan, that the one who would come after him would not baptize with water, but with the Ruach (Mark i. 8; John i. 27). Yet a faint resemblance to the notion is displayed in the belief expressed in the Talmud that the Holy Spirit could be drawn upon as water is drawn from a well (based upon Isa. xii. 3; Yer. Suk. v. 1, 55a of Joshua b. Levi). And there is a Jewish background even to the prophecy of the evangelists Matthew (iii. 11) and Luke (iii. 16), who declare that Yeshua will baptize with fire as well as with the Holy Ghost; for, according to Abbahu, true Baptism is performed with fire (Sanh. 39a). Both the statement of Abbahu and of the Evangelists must of course be taken metaphorically. The expression that the person baptized is illuminated (φωτισθείς, Justin, "Apologiæ," i. 65) has the same significance as is implied in telling a proselyte to Judaism, after his bath, that he now belongs to Israel, the people beloved of God (Yeb. 47a; Gerim i.). According to rabbinical teachings, which dominated even during the existence of the Temple (Pes. viii. 8), Baptism, next to circumcision and sacrifice, was an absolutely necessary condition to be fulfilled by a proselyte to Judaism (Yeb. 46b, 47b; Ker. 9a; 'Ab. Zarah 57a; Shab. 135a; Yer. Kid. iii. 14, 64d). Circumcision, however, was much more important, and, like baptism, was called a "seal" (Schlatter, "Die Kirche Jerusalems," 1898, p. 70). But as circumcision was discarded by Christianity, and the sacrifices had ceased, Baptism remained the sole condition for initiation into religious life. The next ceremony, adopted shortly after the others, was the imposition of hands, which, it is known, was the usage of the Jews at the ordination of a rabbi. Anointing with oil, which at first also accompanied the act of Baptism, and was analogous to the anointment of priests among the Jews, was not a necessary condition. Baptism was practised in ancient (Ḥasidic or Essene) Judaism, first as a means of penitence, as is learned from the story of Adam and Eve, who, in order to atone for their sin, stood up to the neck in the water, fasting and doing penance-Adam in the Jordan for forty days, Eve in the Tigris for thirty-seven days (Vita Adæ et Evæ, i. 5-8). According to Pirḳe R. El. xx., Adam stood for forty-nine days up to his neck in the River Gihon. Likewise is the passage, "They drew water and poured it out before the Lord and fasted on that day, and said, 'We have sinned against the Lord'" (I Sam. vii. 6), explained (see Targ. Yer. and Midrash Samuel, eodem; also Yer. Ta'anit ii. 7, 65d) as meaning that Israel poured out their hearts in repentance; using the water as a symbol according to Lam. ii. 19, "Pour out thine heart like water before the Lord." Of striking resemblance to the story in Matt. iii. 1-17 and in Luke iii. 3, 22, is the haggadic interpretation of Gen. i. 2 in Gen. R. ii. and Tan., Buber's Introduction, p. 153: "The spirit of God (hovering like a bird with outstretched wings), manifested in the spirit of the Messiah, will come [or "the Holy One, blessed be He! will spread His wings and bestow His grace"] upon Israel," owing to Israel's repentance symbolized by the water in accordance with Lam. ii. 19. To receive the spirit of God, or to be permitted to stand in the presence of God (His Shekinah), man must undergo Baptism (Tan., Meẓora', 6, ed. Buber, p. 46), wherefore in the Messianic time God will Himself pour water of purification upon Israel in accordance with Ezek. xxxvi. 25 (Tan., Meẓora', 9-17, 18, ed. Buber, pp. 43, 53). In order to pronounce the name of God in prayer in perfect purity,the Essenes underwent Baptism every morning (Tosef., Yad. ii. 20; Simon of Sens to Yad. iv. 9; and Ber. 22a; compare with Ḳid. 70a, "The Name must be guarded with purity"). Philo frequently refers to these acts of purification in preparation for the holy mysteries to be received by the initiated ("De Somniis," xiv.; "De Profugis," vii.; "Quis Rerum Divinarum Heres Sit?" xviii. xxiii.; "Quod Deus Sit Immutabilis," ii.; "De Posteritate Caini," xiv., xxviii.). The Baptism of the proselyte has for its purpose his cleansing from the impurity of idolatry, and the restoration to the purity of a new-born man. This may be learned from the Talmud (Soṭah 12b) in regard to Pharaoh's daughter, whose bathing in the Nile is explained by Simon b. Yoḥai to have been for that purpose. The bathing in the water is to constitute a rebirth, wherefore "the ger is like a child just born" (Yeb. 48b); and he must bathe "in the name of God"-"leshem shamayim"-that is, assume the yoke of Gcd's kingdom imposed upon him by the one who leads him to Baptism ("maṭbil"), or else he is not admitted into Judaism (Gerim. vii. 8). For this very reason the Israelites before the acceptance of the Law had, according to Philo on the Decalogue ("De Decalogo," ii., xi.), as well as according to rabbinical tradition, to undergo the rite of baptismal purification (compare I Cor. x. 2, "They were baptized unto Moses [the Law] in the clouds and in the sea").

[@Tobyyy369]

No that's not what we believe. Gospels weren't taken from the old testament. They were stolen from ancient kemetic knowledge.

[@KainL33]

Dude! You lived right next to me! I grew up in West Frankfort out near Marion and Little Egypt

[@theapexfighter8741]

Egipcians... Egipcians everywhere...

[@bricxPBR3x4]

I appreciate youtubers like you who have much knowledge and prove the truth about the Bible may God bless you Michael 🙏 I grew up a Christian but a few months ago i almost converted to Islam, but I then I came across your channel and found truth in the Bible, thank you for your work

[@mik4real435]

So all gnostic Gospels not canonized are events that actually could have happened including when Jesus killed a little boy

[@MeanBeanComedy]

It seems the similarities are intentional on behalf of Christ to make himself the Son of Man and King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Elijah fed hundreds? Jesus fed thousands! Edit: Whoops! He said that later on. 🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️😁

[@Raverraver9999]

Verse 22. “The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his ways before He made anything from the beginning.” 23. “I was set up from eternity and of old, before the earth was made.” 24. “The depths were not as yet and I was already conceived: neither had the fountains of waters as yet sprung out.” 25. “The mountains with their huge bulk had not as yet been established: before the hills I was brought forth.” 26. “He had not yet made the earth, nor the rivers, nor the poles of the earth.” 27. “When He prepared the heavens, I was present: when with a certain law and compass He enclosed the depths.” 28. “When He established the sky above and poised the fountains of the waters.” 29. “When He compassed the sea with its bounds, and set a law to the waters that they should not pass their limits: when He balanced the foundations of the earth.” 30. “I was with Him forming all things: and was delighted every day, playing before Him all the times.” 31. “Playing in the world: and my delights were to be with the children of men.” 54. This is the portion of the Proverbs, of which the Most High gave me an understanding. I understood at first, that it treats of the ideas or decrees, which were in the Divine Mind before the Creation of the world; and that, in its literal sense, it speaks of the Person of the Incarnate Word and of his most holy Mother, while in its mystical sense it refers to the holy angels and prophets. For before decreeing or forming the ideals’ of the rest of the material creation, He formed and decreed their prototype, the most sacred humanity of Christ and of his purest Mother, and this is indicated by the first words 55. “The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his ways.” In God there are no ways, and his Divinity does not need them: but He made use of them, in order, that by them we may know Him and that all of us creatures, who are capable of knowing Him, may tend toward Him. In this beginning, before He formed any other ideal in his mind, because He desired to create paths and open ways in his mind for the communication of the Divinity, He decreed, as a beginning, the formation of the humanity of the Word, who was to be the highway, by which the other creatures might come to the Father (Joan. 14, 6). Joined with this decree was that of his most holy Mother, through whom his Divinity was to enter into the world, becoming man and being born from Her as God and man; therefore it is said: “God possessed me” since both were possessed by his Majesty: for as to his Divinity, He was the possession, the property, and the treasure of the Father without possibility of separation, because Father and Son are One, of the same substance and Divinity with the Holy Ghost; and also as to his humanity, the Father possessed the Son; because He himself knew and decreed the plenitude of grace and glory, which He was to bestow upon it at the moment of its creation and its hypostatical union. Moreover, as this decree and possession was to be brought about by the mediation of the Mother, who was to conceive and bring forth the Word (since He did not decide to create it out of nothing, nor form his soul and body out of any other material), it followed that He possessed Her, who was to give Him the human form. Thus He possessed and claimed Her as his own in the same instant, providing with solicitude, that in the order of grace neither the human race nor any other, should have at any time a right or a part in Her. He alone retained the full right in Her as his portion, and so much his portion as the dignity of Mother required. She alone was to call Him Son, and She alone was to be called Mother, a Mother worthy of having an incarnate God for a Son. Now as all this far surpassed in dignity the whole creation, so did it also take the precedence in the mind of the supreme Creator. Hence He says: 56. “Before He made anything from the beginning, I was set up from eternity and of old.” We, in our present state, conceive this eternity of God as an interminable time. But what were the things “of old,” since none had been created? It is clear that the three Persons are here spoken of, namely, that She was foreseen from the eternal ages of the Divinity, by the Beings, which alone are ancient, namely, the indivisible Trinity (since all the rest, having a beginning, are recent), that She was foreseen when only the ancient Uncreated was, and before any ideals of the future creation were formed. Between these two extremes intervened the ideal of the hypostatic union which was to be verified ad extra through the intervention of most holy Mary. Both were ordained together, immediately next to God and before any other creature, and it was the most wonderful decree ever passed or ever to be passed. The first and most admirable image in the mind of God, next to the eternal generation, was that of Christ and next to it, that of his Mother. 58. “Before the earth was made; and the depths were not as yet and I was already conceived.” This earth was that of the first Adam; for before his creation was decreed, and before the abysses of the ideas ad extra were formed in the divine mind, the likenesses of Christ and of his Mother were already conceived. The forms are called abysses, because there is an infinite distance between the being of God and that of creatures. This distance was measured (speaking according to our own way of understanding), when the ideals of the creatures were formed; for then these very abysses were formed. Not only was the Word conceived before all these by eternal generation from the Father, but His temporal generation from the Virgin Mother full of grace, had already been decreed and conceived in the divine mind. Inasmuch as no efficacious and complete decree of this temporal generation could exist without at the same time including his Mother, and such a Mother, the most holy Mary, was then and there conceived within that beautiful Immensity, and Her eternal record was written in the bosom of the Divinity, in order that for all the ages it should never be blotted out. She was stamped and delineated in the mind of the eternal Artificer and possessed the inseparable embraces of his love 59. “Neither had the fountains of waters as yet sprung out.” The images and ideals of creatures had not yet sprung from their source and origin; for they had not yet broken from the fountains through the channels of God’s goodness and mercy, through which the divine will was to be moved to create the universe and to communicate his divine attributes and perfections. In respect to the entire rest of the universe, these waters and fountains were still repressed and detained within the bounds of the immense ocean of the Divinity; in his own Being there were as yet no founts or currents for outward manifestation, not having until then met their proper object, namely, men. But when these were encountered, the sacred humanity of Christ and his Virgin Mother had already furnished proper objects of benevolence. And therefore it is added:

[@iranianskeptic]

I don't know why, but every time a question or objection comes to my mind and I come to KZbin, I see that you have released a new video about it. Many thanks 😘

[@stridedeck]

If one is comparing characters from one culture to another, then just having the same names, or characteristics are not strong indications of them being a retelling of the other. It is the meaning of the symbols, characters, and events that determines if it is a retelling of an earlier idea.

[@charliewebb4330]

When you read the old testament, it has one mission with two parts, to tell history and to look forward to the coming of the messiah, and in that God has interwoven within the old testament things that foreshadowed and prophesied the things He would do in his incarnation, read the book of Hebrews, it makes it clear

[@superdog797]

Mythicism is often misunderstood as the claim that literally everything was just invented whole cloth. That is indeed a version of mythicism, but mythicism is more a framework for understanding the Biblical record, and properly understood should really be reduced to the much simpler position that the gospels are historical fiction. And from a historian's perspective, a secular historian who does work in universities etc., that is precisely what they are (obviously). You can't start your historical investigation with a religious framework because then you're not longer a historian and you are just an apologist or theologian. Robert Price is far more nuanced in his analysis than this video would lead you to believe, which constructs him and his position as a straw man here. The simple fact is that it is virtually impossible to *prove* that Jesus did not exist, so IP could say virtually whatever he wanted then declare victory. Instead, steel man construction would be more intellectually honest. The fact is that the _majority_ of the gospels are just miracle stories, so all you have to do, as a historian, is ask the question "is it more likely someone made this up, or that there really was an event more or less retold faithfully here?" The answer to that question is a no-brainer from a _professional historian's_ perspective. Which then begs the question "Well, what likely influenced the construction of these supernatural narratives?" ...and THAT is what IP isn't addressing here with any substance. The obvious answer to that is the conscious and subconscious minds of the authors, which would have included profound knowledge of the OT stories that Price points out. The parallels therefore _cannot_ be dismissed as "useless" because it is so incredibly _obvious_ that there was _some_ kind of explanatory influence there. To simply dismiss these observations as "historical coincidence" (as IP does here) or as "purposefully highlighting coincidental similarities" (as IP does here) is just faith-based rationalization in the extreme. The more likely explanation is that these stories arose just like _all the other supernatural stories_ we find in the ancient world: through evolution and retelling of old stories, through whole cloth invention and/or nuclearization of stories around a historical or mythological figure, and through conscious and subconscious creation in the imagination. If you wanna just say "I believe it all on faith" I'd have some respect, but trying to argue as if this were some intellectually fortified position that is likely the best explanation is just below someone with a reasonable level of intelligence and historical knowledge.

[@mugglesarecooltoo]

This really was a great video, as usual.

[@canonjean-mignon4985]

Deja-vu?

[@mugglesarecooltoo]

@@canonjean-mignon4985 No, I saw it on patreon.

[@canonjean-mignon4985]

@@mugglesarecooltoo nice

[@bobbyr.7578]

numbers 12:4 At once the Lord said to Moses, Aaron and Miriam, “Come out to the tent of meeting, all three of you.” So the three of them went out. 5 Then the Lord came down in a pillar of cloud; he stood at the entrance to the tent and summoned Aaron and Miriam. When the two of them stepped forward, 6 he said, “Listen to my words: “When there is a prophet among you, I, the Lord, reveal myself to them in visions, I speak to them in dreams. 7 But this is not true of my servant Moses; he is faithful in all my house. 8 With him I speak face to face, clearly and not in riddles; he sees the form of the Lord. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?” 9 The anger of the Lord burned against them, and he left them. 10 When the cloud lifted from above the tent, Miriam’s skin was leprous[a]-it became as white as snow. Aaron turned toward her and saw that she had a defiling skin disease, 11 and he said to Moses, “Please, my lord, I ask you not to hold against us the sin we have so foolishly committed. 12 Do not let her be like a stillborn infant coming from its mother’s womb with its flesh half eaten away.” 13 So Moses cried out to the Lord, “Please, God, heal her!” 14 The Lord replied to Moses, “If her father had spit in her face, would she not have been in disgrace for seven days? Confine her outside the camp for seven days; after that she can be brought back.” 15 So Miriam was confined outside the camp for seven days, and the people did not move on till she was brought back.

[@thetheoreticaltheologian2458]

Where Israel failed, Jesus fulfilled in perfection/righteousness! For example, the Jews were in the wilderness for 40 years because they failed Gods test, where Jesus went into the wilderness and fasted for 40 days for which He passed!

[@ReverendTFunk]

Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. 45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures. What Scriptures did they now understand? The Law, the Prophets and the Psalms.

[@strider_hiryu850]

they slapped the Jesus name on another prophet's work. Joshua is actually Elijah, but miscredited. Elijah did all the work, Jeshua gets all the fame. he's like a singer, while someone else wrote the song(s). it's kinda like how everyone knows the 3 days sacrifice is a retelling of older myths too, such as Prometheus. but "Jesus" didnt perform any miracles, and neither did Elijah, because magick is literally impossible. and 4 of the 7 virtues are Stoic principles: Justice, Courage, Temperance, and Wisdom.

[@alfredvickers4054]

Go back to r/atheism. No one who actually knows what he's talking about thinks Jesus was a rip-off. He actually existed. His life is the only explanation for the Christian Church suddenly popping up (people wouldn't randomly join a new religion with no evidence for its claims and be willing to die for belief in a man who they couldn't be sure even existed, and there are passages in the New Testament which encourage people to visit sites and talk to witnesses rather than just blindly believing), and the enemies of that Church admitted the basic narrative of Jesus was true but sought to explain away things like the empty tomb. Did you even watch the video? It shows how there being parallels in people's lives to earlier events is hardly rare, so similarities do not automatically prove that Jesus didn't exist. Was JFK's assassination made up just because there were parallels to Lincoln's assassination? Was Hitler's invasion of Russia made up just because it echoes Napoleon's similarly failed invasion? There are probably parallels in your life to other people's lives, so I guess you don't actually exist and are just a rip-off of one or more other people. Maybe you're just a retelling of an ancient myth, so I guess I should stop talking to you.

[@renren1641]

Maybe him mimicking the Old Testament is proof that Yeshua wrote it?* *I'm not supporting modalism, just being clever.

[@worldviewdetective9456]

The bigger question is: What's more likely that the Old Testament predicted details about Jesus life thousands of years in advance or that the New Testament authors made up details about Jesus's life to make it seem as if he'd fulfilled prophecy when in reality he hadn't

[@chippedtooth6296]

Jesus didn't know how to write, nor is any of the New Testament written in a way which would make sense if he had been writing it. When would he even write it?

[@worldviewdetective9456]

@Jonathan Dolan Just because they are verses in the Bible that align with the real world doesn't mean the Bible is divine in origin. There are verses in the Quran that align with the real world but that doesn't mean Islam is true.

[@worldviewdetective9456]

@Jonathan Dolan Can you give me a specific example of a verse in the Bible that predates it's scientific discovery?

[@worldviewdetective9456]

@Jonathan Dolan The verse Psalm 8:8 is incredibly vague and only describes the fact that there are currents which can be observed simply by swimming or taking a boat out into the ocean. It doesn't describe the fact that certain currents are warm and cold nor the fact that the currents relate to different continents. The fact that the ocean had currents was well known by the year 800 BCE since as early as 3000 BCE the Ancient Egyptians were building sea-bound ships trade with Lebanon and Punt. In fact, the Egyptian story "The Shipwrecked Sailor" written in 2200 BCE even features a sailor who claims to have been "brought to this isle by a wave of the sea” so humans definitely knew about currents way before Psalms was written in 800 BCE. Sources: courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-hccc-worldcivilization/chapter/ancient-egyptian-trade/ sourcebooks.fordham.edu/ancient/2200shipwreck.asp

[@InauboaYaiphare]

I just want to see this channel creator he worked soo hard i watched most of his video his explenation are so loud and clear i just wamt to said thankyou i am from india Northeast manipur

[@robertschlesinger1342]

Very interesting and worthwhile video.

[@manojgabriel84]

Is this the main reason there are Jesus mythicist?

[@InspiringPhilosophy]

No, but they do rely on this at times as one of their reasons.

[@williamsmith8790]

Are you kidding with this? You do know that every part of the Old Testament is a foreshadowing of Jesus? If you’re going to be a hater, do it better….

[@slimetimetvwithjojo1672]

The book was designed from the Father to the Son . Jesus Christ the Son of God the Almighty was prophesied to come save the world from evil.

[@flamingswordapologetics]

It's called types, shadows, prophecies, no reason to defend it from a "natural" literary perspective. That Jesus fulfilled these things is simply a great "apologetic" that He was who He said He was. While some of what IP presents might be relevant, I'm disappointed in IP's approach here. Jesus said this Himself - Luke 24:27- And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. While other ancient literature might have used the same framework, we see Jesus actually fulfilling what was written before, which perhaps could be faked or written after the fact in other works, we have good reasons to believe that is not the case here, especially since many of the more direct fulfillments point to what happened leading up to and on the cross etc...

[@matheusmoura4848]

Wait, it is just me or Plutarch just made Nietzsche famous Eternal Return Argument on that passage?

[@achildofthelight4725]

History repeats itself..... and the story will eventually be told again to raise man up after the fall of man once again

[@michaelturnage3395]

When God establishes his kingdom it will be a brand new creation. There won't be anymore falling. Hell and even death itself will be thrown into the lake of fire.

[@powerofk]

The thing is, too, that Jesus didn't just repeat things from the Old Testament - he took them to another level. For example, Elijah fed 100 men, but Jesus fed 5000 men (not counting women and children) on one occasion and 4000 on another occasion. So Jesus did a similar miracle but on a much grander scale. And only Matthew was writing for a Jewish Christian audience.

[@jeanhaliburtonwills]

stolen this stolen that....the word 'stolen' only appplies in a context where you can specify something like intellectual property laws

[@carlknaack1019]

It was common for Rabbis of that day to perform acts that mimicked a given work, it was called by some Remez and could be performed either through an action or a spoken account.

[@scottlouissmith2382]

There is one verse in the Bible that will make you think. "Many will come in my name saying I'm the Christ and decieve many

[@עמיחיאלימלך-כ8ל]

Jesus wasn't a myth....the Gospela are. Jesus is God,Jesus born from a virgin,Jesus and Elazar(Lazaros)=myth. Jesus from Nazerath=history.

[@abronbans3464]

Old testament mixed with deception and truth sky gods we didn't know who's who the real powerful ones was????

[@Caioknight]

Hey Mike, how long does these videos take to be made?

[@MountainFisher]

Luke is considered by many archaeologists as a historian of the first order. Very reliable and accurate, and while Paul spent two years in prison in Judea Luke interviewed many eyewitnesses of Jesus, especially Jesus' Mother Mary. She would have been alive and Luke obviously spoke much with her. In the Temple were kept all the records of who was descended from King David and much further back. Not only Joseph was, but Mary was descended from David as well through David's other son Nathan. Matthew only goes back to Abraham, but Luke, a Greek Gentile takes the genealogy back to Adam. Per the customs of the day Luke would list the Lord Jesus a son of Joseph and not of Mary. Yet either way, by adoption or by blood the Lord was descended from King David of the line of Judah as prophesied.

[@neilsumanda1538]

2:13 in your "exodus" did you happen to stumble upon a pyramid or a pharaoh's tomb or maybe a collection of scrolls hidden in a clay jar?..

[@nongwadbniah2262]

Theology can be invented and can be assumed and imagined by anyone.

[@matthew-jy5jp]

I disagree with your premise that people invented mythology to make the Kennedys more interesting. They compared the Kennedys to Camelot because John F Kennedy use to listen to the record Camelot. And they've compare Moses to Abraham Lincoln not to George Washington George Washington is compared to Cincinnatus a Roman Emperor who gave up his power same way George Washington did. What atheists do is make up any excuse not to believe the Bible it's not the same comparison as the other situations you mentioned

[@RicardoMartinez-mu8od]

Hey IP I wanted to know your thoughts on the subject of internal dialog. I just came across statements suggesting that people with no internal dialog do not recognize there own voice in there minds and thus confuse it with a voice of God. Seems like an okay theory but I feel like there is to many assumptions. Any references to point me in the right direction to investigate this?

[@toasttoast789]

And yet you all always skip over the fact yahweh is satan and jesus came to free us from the evil creator of this world 1st chronicles 21 1 Vs 2 Samuel 24 1 Hosea 13 5-8 Vs Rev 13 Peter 5 8 Read yourself

[@davidtakyi14]

The parallels of Price is hilariously bad, The Odyssey, really😂? So according to him, he's claiming to be comparing the life of a supposed fabricated Jewish man(Jesus) who is historically proven from canon and non-canon sources from the Old testament and yet added a fictional character from a pagan source?😂😂😂, and i could actually do better by paralleling Jesus to Joseph of Genesis in the Old Testament. 1. They are both loved by their fathers dearly 2. They were Shepherds of their fathers sheep in literal and non- literal sense 3. They were both sent to their brothers 4. They were both hated by their brothers 5. Others plotted to harm them 6. They were both Tempted 7. They're both taken to Egypt 8. Their robes were taken from them 9. They were sold for a price of a slave 10. They were bound in chains and falsely accused 11. They were placed with two other criminals yet one was saved and the other was lost 12. They both had public recognition by 30 years old. 13. They were both exalted after a period of suffering 14. They forgave those who wrong them and were saviours of their nation 15. Their detractors thought they were harming them but God turned it for good. Remember people, I'm not even a scholar 😂😂😂😂.

[@GreenMorningDragonProductions]

What if the new testament happened first, and then the old one was written to fit it, to completely bamboozle us?

[@kemet4083]

Nah because we have scrolls from the old testament that its over 2200 years old

[@davidclark6694]

Why is there even a discussion pertaining to the separation between the old and new testaments? They are the same thing. Nothing in the new is new. Learn Greek and hebrew and you'll understand that its Always been the same covenant.

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

This discussion kind of mirrors my own thought that prophesy is often (always) fulfilled in retrospect. In other words, we cannot divine the events of the future by studying the words of the prophets. Only by examining our history do we see how those "predictions" actually manifested. Pattern recognition is something humans do pretty well.