"I'm not going to address blogs or KZbin videos. Only theories with actual scholarship behind them. So, first, aliens..."
@SapphWolf3 ай бұрын
I'm glad that stood out to someone else.
@MrDalisclock3 ай бұрын
@@1mrs1 I wonder if Gary is angling for a job at the History Channel.
@pesilaratnayake1623 ай бұрын
Can't wait to find out his citations for aliens as an explanation for the resurrection in journals and peer-reviewed literature!
@albineigengrau32123 ай бұрын
The Minimal Spock Theory.
@utubepunk3 ай бұрын
@@MrDalisclockNah. Capturing Christianity.
@JohnWickPresents3 ай бұрын
The fact that other apologists don’t call out Gary on his nonsense just proves how dishonest the whole crew is.
@tomfrombrunswick75713 ай бұрын
Possibly more self delusion
@lyongreene82413 ай бұрын
They do. Have you not heard of Erik Manning’s channel “Testify”?
@adamruuth55623 ай бұрын
Starting with Sean McDowell.
@rcktneo3 ай бұрын
@@lyongreene8241you mean, TestifyApologetics?
@soonerarrow3 ай бұрын
@@lyongreene8241 Thank you for sharing that. I did go over and browse through a small number of @TestifyApologetics videos. He certainly doesn't appear to have the typical 100% "belief at any cost means never criticizing other currently believing Christians" that most of the apologists have. Having Dr. Kipp Davis on his channel discussing the debacle with the alleged archeology find of a Mt. Ebal curse tablet was just one example of that. With all that being said, he had a video with Lydia McGrew about "Trusting NT Scholarship" which I did watch about 8-10 minutes before I could stand no more. I was aware of her views regarding the pre-supposition that the Bible is inerrant, which is demonstrably false, before watching this and then add that she doesn't have a degree in any field of NT studies. So, to me, asking her about this topic is no different than asking a cheerleader for a farm team of the New England Patriots what it's like to be the quarterback for the San Francisco 49'ers. I will go back and spend time watching some of his videos. Again, thanks.
@Chrismas8153 ай бұрын
Gary using testimony alone to attack Hume is poetically ironic
@ji80443 ай бұрын
Habermas is a theologian, not a historian. For instance his 5th premise is false, even according to the New Testament: 5) that James, Jesus’ unbelieving brother, became a Christian due to his own experience that he thought was the resurrected Christ" James never became a Christian. He remained exclusively Jewish like his brother Jesus, and living in Jerusalem until his murder. Even in Acts Paul recognizes that James was Jewish. Habermas is a theologian, not a historian.
@longcastle48633 ай бұрын
👍 _!!!_
@KaiHenningsen3 ай бұрын
@@ji8044 Not to defend Gary in any way, but at the time, being Jewish was not in conflict with being Christian according to Christians - in fact, before Paul, Christians believed being Jewish was a requirement for being Christian. That was the reason of the feud between Paul and Peter, Paul said non-Jews can be Christians. To this day, there are a few Jewish Christians ("Messianic Jews").
@ji80443 ай бұрын
@@KaiHenningsen "but at the time, being Jewish was not in conflict with being Christian according to Christians" You have just refuted Habermas, not me. At the time there were no Christians as a separate theological entity. That is another reason James could not have "become one" as Habermas says. -" in fact, before Paul, Christians believed being Jewish was a requirement for being Christian" Jesus, his family, and all of his disciples were Jews, not Christians.
@petersage51573 ай бұрын
I was actually taking a deep breath to say "objection - hearsay" a moment before Gary outright admitted it.
@michaelstanet74533 ай бұрын
Vignette of the last 1000 years or so... Person A: "I don't believe there is a God that interacts with reality in detectable and measurable ways." Person B: "There is a God that interacts with reality in detectable and measurable ways." Person A: "Okay, in what detectable and measurable ways does this God interact with Reality?" Person B: "That is not reasonable to ask!"
@Nocturnalux3 ай бұрын
Person B has a book! More, a bunch of old books! Why isn’t Person A convinced by very old books…?
@michaelstanet74533 ай бұрын
@@Nocturnalux 😁
@s4ss1n3 ай бұрын
@@Nocturnalux because if said "old books" are only updated with hypotheticals and theological apologetics and not imperical and evidential verification that can be checked and tested then it holds no use for convincing at all. take darwins evolutionary theory, do we rely on his works alone or have we got more upto date and extra disciplines that help further our knowledge and to show evolution to be true, einstiens theory of relativity has a similar situation. while they were outstanding works of the times they were publisized, in no way are they alone in the ability to convince in modern terms. because they have been furthered, based on these past works, accumilating in retestable and authenticational useage and advancment. 😉
@rainbowkrampus3 ай бұрын
Some version of the Kalam has been kicking around since before christianity even existed.
@michaelstanet74533 ай бұрын
@@rainbowkrampus Some versions of the Kalam do not even posit a God exists. The others lack the detectable and measurable part.
@brigidandair3 ай бұрын
My guess about Habermas' NDE story is that it was the famous one about Pam Reynolds, remembered so badly that Flew didn't recognize it. Pam Reynolds underwent surgery for an aneurysm, and had to be put in a "cardiac standstill". That is, to be anesthetized, her body temp brought down to just under 60 degrees, and have the blood drained from her head for them to operate. During the operation, she flatlined and almost wasn't able to be revived, becoming legally dead, but they managed to save her life in the end. A year later, she told her psychiatrist about it, and how she saw herself in the room, with 20 doctors, described one of the instruments they used, told what she's heard the doctors saying, and said that she heard Hotel California playing. Out of curiosity, her psychiatrist checked it out and found that that was the number of people in the room, the chief instrument they used looked like what she described, the recounting of the conversation she heard was fairly accurate, and that they did, indeed, play Hotel California. This is super interesting, but the leading hypothesis is that she experienced what is known as "anesthesia awareness", something that happens to about 1 in 2,000 cases of surgeries where anesthesia is administered. It is the phenomenon of regaining partial or full consciousness when anesthetized, but being unable to move, so having some measure of awareness of the operation. Pam Reynolds, notably, did not experience the whole operation, only before the complications where she technically died, spending the rest of it with a more typical NDE of talking to her dead loved ones. This is literally the closest I can find to what Habermas was describing, and if it is what he was referring to, he was *grossly* misrepresenting it. Or proving that even then, his own recollection of information he'd learned cannot be trusted, and demonstrating how much a story can grow when passed by word of mouth. Either way, it's another self-own.
@andreasplosky85163 ай бұрын
Gary is just straight lying about Hume. I can't stand that hack, Habermas. The dishonesty of that guy just makes me puke.
@chrisgrill63023 ай бұрын
But he writes lots and lots of pages!
@skinnyhedgehog3 ай бұрын
About Hume and quite a few other people. It really makes my stomach turn when he lies about things that are _on tape and verifiably false._
@swolejeezy26033 ай бұрын
Yeah to me it's either Habermas is lying about Antony Flew or his memories are genuinely distorted by pride or age to make him seem cooler than he is.
@RoligHoomanEmperor3 ай бұрын
Imagine sitting in a debate with someone who have made it abundantly clear that he has no intellectual honesty and will embellish any story in his favor, and he starts telling an unverified tale about NDEs.
@erinclark56813 ай бұрын
Habermas is relatively new to my radar, but I gotta say, I didn't expect a straight-up, unabashed liar. He retells stories just like a friend of mine's narcissist ex.
@corringhamdepot44343 ай бұрын
Gary Habermas spent thousands of hours producing hundreds of pages of evidence, but he still ends up saying that when people don't accept his evidence, it is because they won't presuppose the existence of God and miracles. .
@AJansenNL3 ай бұрын
Bingo!
@Mar-dk3mp3 ай бұрын
hey how this cult goes? Still obsessed for what they do not even believe to keep you sick and obsessed?
@kevind82403 ай бұрын
His feelings don't care about your facts sir 😀
@Mar-dk3mp3 ай бұрын
@@kevind8240 of course you care... it bring all sickness and frustration to your life, and you do care, get out
@Mar-dk3mp3 ай бұрын
@@kevind8240 we need to forget about you, do you know? Humanity will not lose anything.
@jacobh92413 ай бұрын
If a prophet hallucinates a miracle in the woods and there's no one around to persecute him, is there a God?
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
Good one. I love it.
@MinionofNobody3 ай бұрын
I am an old retired guy. I have had close friends and family members die. I have never had a bereavement hallucination. However, I have had extremely vivid dreams in which dead loved ones have spoken with me. I don’t attach any special significance to these. It’s just my subconscious mind attempting to process grief. If I was living in a less rational time and place, however, I might well have concluded that I was genuinely receiving messages from these people. Had I been a first century follower of Jesus and had such a dream after his death, I might have been one of those people sharing stories about his resurrection and ascension into Heaven.
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
That is especially true of cultures that have preconceived concepts that dreams are messages from supernatural realms. I've had dreams about my dead dogs being alive. If I assumed that these were messages from such a realm, I'd be saying that my dogs have been resurrected in that realm.
@LordOfThePancakes3 ай бұрын
“Whoever believes receives the Lords salvation, but whoever does not believe is condemned, because he has not believed in the name of Christ" (Ezekiel 8:12) ✝️
@LordOfThePancakes3 ай бұрын
@@donnievance1942 “But God proved his love for us in this; While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” (Romans 1:4-1:18) ✝️
@paulpinecone24643 ай бұрын
@@LordOfThePancakes I was going to point out that what you quoted was both anecdotal and antithetical to what OP said. But then you included that little purple plus sign at the end and there's no refuting one of those!
@Lady8D2 ай бұрын
😂😂😂😂😂 @@paulpinecone2464
@MrMattSax3 ай бұрын
Habermas’ demonstration of the faults of memory and biases towards confirming one’s beliefs was FASCINATING
@gingivitis91483 ай бұрын
His willingness to have hypothetical convos makes him sound reeeaaaly lonely, and also if that's how he reflects on his debate/interviews I'm guessing that why his memory is so inaccurate lol
@lilrobbie2k3 ай бұрын
If Gary had even *one* instance of a scientific explanation that was later overturned by a supernaturalistic one, his book(s) would be significantly shorter and much more convincing.
@HarryNicNicholas3 ай бұрын
100%
@PCMTFI10663 ай бұрын
Did you know that there were 500 eyewitnesses to Hume saying he got philosophically walloped by a pastor in a Scottish pub? Must have happened!
@rik802803 ай бұрын
I could not believe my ears!! "Golly! Those theologian pastors sure whooped me!" And Darwin recanted evolution on his death bed. Why the heck is anyone taking this guy seriously?? And sidenote: he's implying that pastors back then were more educated 300 years ago?
@readerforlife72923 ай бұрын
This joke is funnier considering, to anyone reading it, you're a completely anonymous source that no one can verify actually witnessed the events you described.
@PCMTFI10663 ай бұрын
@@readerforlife7292 Truly I tell you, there are are some standing here today who will not taste death before my identity is revealed. :-p
@themattylee3 ай бұрын
My naturalistic theory of the resurrection is called the Habermas theory. Put simply, it is the theory that ancient Christians told stories with the same level of exaggeration and truth bending as Gary Habermas. This theory alone explains all of the historical facts of the resurrection with no miracle required.
@CafeteriaCatholic3 ай бұрын
The moment you start to consider, that Paul of Tarsus was just another apologist your faith fades away.
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
@@CafeteriaCatholic Yep. The BS started early.
@utubepunk2 ай бұрын
Hyperbole & cope are the pillars of Christianity.
@Cheepchipsable2 ай бұрын
I think you mean the Habermas Hypothesis...😁
@dougt75803 ай бұрын
Minimal facts hypothesis = we literally got nothing, here are several giant tomes of blathering nonsense to pretend that we do.
@Julian01013 ай бұрын
I usually present it as: Something happened + Some people believe in a story = Magic is real and we pretend that is history
@TheLithp3 ай бұрын
Gary is strongly giving the impression that's what this book is, yeah.
@rainbowkrampus3 ай бұрын
It's a Gish gallop in written form.
@dougt75803 ай бұрын
@@rainbowkrampusThat is an absolutely perfect way to describe it.
@jamiehudson36613 ай бұрын
I see you break his arguments down nicely and explain how they are incorrect. You ole scholar you.
@mtdouthit12913 ай бұрын
It’s absolutely adorable how Habermas ACTUALLY believes that historians believe in these “alternate theories”-the hallucination theory, swoon theory, stolen body theory, etc. 😂😂😂 The thing is, he grew up in a time where people just naturally accepted what was written, but today we realize it’s actually mythology. So he’s stuck in the past, and it’s embarrassing and quite pitiful to watch. Just go watch Mike Winger’s debate with Matt Dillahunty, and Winger was SHOCKED and UNPREPARED for Dillahunty not believing in any of those theories. He just simply believes they’re fiction. Winger couldn’t use any of his stock arguments and was STUCK! Lol.
@Soapy-chan3 ай бұрын
that's always the funniest to me when they think you're just gonna agree with their premises, as if they think we could agree with the premise and somehow still deny the conclusion
@danielbond97553 ай бұрын
Next you are going to say that we don’t need to explain every individual event in the Iliad to know that it was fictional.
@johnnehrich96013 ай бұрын
I would not, under ANY circumstances, consider Habermas or McDowell as reputable scholars.
@dougt75803 ай бұрын
@@johnnehrich9601The most charitable I can be is to call them "book salesmen."
@freddan6fly3 ай бұрын
@@dougt7580 More like 2:nd hand god delusion salesmen.
@tweetdriver3 ай бұрын
Wow! What an incredible self-own by Habermas! Giving eyewitness testimony about things that absolutely, 100% provably, did not happen, while arguing that testimony is sufficient proof that something happened. This is priceless.
@publiusii42463 ай бұрын
Its interesting that someone as advanced in years as habermas would dismiss arguments simply because their proponent is dead. Is he giving us carte blanche to toss his minimal facts as soon as he goes to the hereafter
@lnsflare13 ай бұрын
As long as the checks clear while he is still alive, he doesn't really care. Edit: Especially since he didn't seem to care about convincing people so much as placating believers.
@ourmobilehomemakeover6623 ай бұрын
I think he’s trying to suggest that it’s a “dying idea” that will become irrelevant soon because no younger scholars are supporting it. Ironically, it’s his arguments that are losing their appeal to modern audiences. As usual he seems to be projecting his own situation onto others.
@Kelley_X3 ай бұрын
By that criterion, the bible itself can be dismissed as whoever wrote it is dead now.
@HarryNicNicholas3 ай бұрын
@@Kelley_X it has been dismissed, just not by believers. creationism has been PROVED false IN COURT but the religists still claim it's true. for some reason religists are more interested in winning things than their religion. if i though god was my personal friend i'd be doing god stuff, not atheist bashing.
@johnbaustian51803 ай бұрын
Max Planck observed: "Science advances funeral by funeral. "
@sbushido55473 ай бұрын
The idea that these guys are """teachers""" is incredibly disheartening. Careers built on lies, passing those lies on to the next generations. Disgusting.
@riluna36953 ай бұрын
And making them spend hundreds of dollars on the "textbooks" that carry those lies and misrepresentations of the opposing views, apparently. Pretty disgusting all the way down the line. And this is one of the softer horrors that arise in religious spaces.
@sbushido55473 ай бұрын
@@riluna3695 Yeah...making your students buy your friend/colleague's books is particularly scummy behavior. But then, I guess it does make sense if people like Habermas are the ones who style themselves academics in the field...
@riluna36953 ай бұрын
@@sbushido5547 Which at least some of them do BECAUSE it allows them to sell books on the topic. Usually not all of a person's motivation, but once you see how well it works, it's definitely gonna be in the back of your mind as you address criticism of your work.
@methodbanana26763 ай бұрын
That's not quite right, but the truth is more instructive. They aren't liars. They believe the things they say. From the outside, what they say - and the reasons they give for it - are highly questionable. But even so, they are sincere. Why is this instructive? Because it is very plausibly what was going on with the apostolic and other figures whose testimony or stories they find so convincing: sincere but, very plausibly, completely wrong.
@riluna36953 ай бұрын
@@methodbanana2676 Very wise, and very true. In reality we always get a mix of true believers, and liars looking for sheep to fleece. It can be pretty hard to tell the difference, especially with minimal information. And they're both similarly harmful to those who follow them. But there are a few rare occasions where it's vitally important that you correctly identify which is which (especially if you're going to confidently claim one or the other of someone), and sometimes for no other reason than not looking foolish and arrogant to those who know they're sincere who you confidently say aren't. As the saying goes, never attribute to malice what can be explained by ignorance. Some people simply don't know, and correcting them gently is the best chance they have of learning the truth. You don't want to push them further in by accidentally confirming all the awful things they're told about nonbelievers.
@pavelnadolski3 ай бұрын
the empirical evidence for naturalism is called reality.
@arslaanmania13093 ай бұрын
No its not, reality isn't just what we empirically observe, even if it were, there is no verification of what our observational faculties that birth this empiricism. You cannot say soundly that a psychological study with polar empirics expresses reality, it can really all be misinformation.
@frozentspark21053 ай бұрын
Overachiever
@drewcoowoohoo3 ай бұрын
Seriously? Look at the trees? What else do you have?
@longcastle48633 ай бұрын
@@drewcoowoohoo Naturalism produces results. Look around at the technological world around you. What technology has religion or belief in God resulted in?
@drewcoowoohoo3 ай бұрын
@@longcastle4863 That's a much better response, but not the OP's.
@ricks61923 ай бұрын
This tells me everything I need to know about the academic standards of Sean McDowell. He's requiring his students to learn from a book he hasn't even read himself yet. No one has had a chance to vet the book or its information and arguments and he's already decided to incorporate it into his class.
@pansepot14903 ай бұрын
Afaik he’s a creationist.
@utubepunk2 ай бұрын
One grifter helping another fellow grifter.
@Cheepchipsable2 ай бұрын
I doubt he would care, as long as it has arguments for Jebus the more the merrier.
@skinnyhedgehog3 ай бұрын
Methinks he doesn't include Minimal Witnesses because he can't attack it in any meaningful way. Great video!
@Julian01013 ай бұрын
Bingo. Habermas knows better people than him had tried, Iike Mike Licona, and the best they could respond was 'is not what the bible says'.
@jamiehudson36613 ай бұрын
That because minimal witnesses is a joke. A nice scholarly and peer reviewed article the atheist youtuber has there. Lol
@Julian01013 ай бұрын
@@jamiehudson3661 And habermas still refuses to deal with it despite knowing what it is about, at least licona had the balls to answer the question when asked point blank. Lmao
@jamiehudson36613 ай бұрын
@@Julian0101 It's a joke. His argument boils down to both Peter and Paul (who was an enemy to christianity) hallucinated, everyone believed them, and they started the greatest movement the world has ever seen. What a joke.
@Julian01013 ай бұрын
@@jamiehudson3661 Yep, and the best response you could think of is just to giggle while NOT giving any counter. Remember, habermas literally asked for any one naturalistic explanation, and when given one he ran away from it. Lmao Also, don't forget habermas' argument boils down to 'some fables from anonymous people say magic happen'.
@MrHbgabs3 ай бұрын
Every time I see Sean Mcdowell I'm reminded of the fact that he sees being gay as a "Lifestyle Choice". I have no respect for him.
@longcastle48633 ай бұрын
I’ve often thought that believing being gay is a life style choice, at least suggest the possibility the person holding this view is bisexual. Most people, otherwise, don’t feel a lot of choice in the matter.
@HarryNicNicholas3 ай бұрын
sean thinks demons possess people, at best he's dumb, but i think the worst of him, another apologist grifter.
@dansharp28603 ай бұрын
@@longcastle4863 I just had the same thought reading this comment.
@danielkirienko17013 ай бұрын
This is the definition of ad hominem. He might have stupid beliefs about other matters. It is irrelevant to the question at hand.
@whatevername85513 ай бұрын
@@danielkirienko1701 op said he has no respect for McDowell. He did not note any questions at hand or claim that McDowell's arguments are false. This is 100% NOT ad hominem. Get good.
@tombraybrook66503 ай бұрын
Could there be a better refutation for eye witness testimony than Gary failing to remember past debates? I wish someone would interview him. Ask for his recollection. Then show him the video and then grill him on why he believes eye witness testimony is so reliable.
@Kelley_X3 ай бұрын
Brutal show, Paul. Providing evidence that Gary Habermas’ memory (testimony) is extremely faulty. Will admit, I was expecting Gary’s testimony was going to conclude with “and everybody clapped”
@MarshaAnderson-i1j3 ай бұрын
@@Kelley_X I’m not giving Habermas a pass for faulty memory. He’s a flat out liar.
@williamwatson43543 ай бұрын
I've long held that hallucinations were unnecessary. People dream and in the early common era, dreams were often looked upon as prophetic. Its possible one or more of Jesus' followers dreamed he came back to life and the story spread from there. I know I've often dreamed of deceased friends and family long after they died. I'm guessing I'm not alone.
@WhiteScorpio23 ай бұрын
Or, much easier, one guy (doesn't matter which guy specifically) says "I've met a guy that looked just like Jesus" and everything else spun out from there.
@ThinkitThrough-kd4fn3 ай бұрын
@@WhiteScorpio2 Scenario: Two of Jesus' followers are out of town when he's arrested and killed. They come back a few days later and overhear a street preacher who sounds and looks a lot like Jesus. Mistaking him, they meet up with some of the disciples and tell them they just saw Jesus. The disciples scoff. They insist they saw him. They won't back down. Then they're told about the crucifixion. But they're too embarrassed to admit being wrong. "Well, he did all those other miracles. Maybe he came back to life too." ... and the story spread.
@Vinnymanvinny13 ай бұрын
I know a lot of people who have had grief induced hallucinations. 4 instance that cult that believes that Jesus is coming backin 1988 or 1888 i don't remember. They sold their businesses, sold their houses, quit jobs because they were convinced that Jesus was coming back on a very specific day and when he didn't comeback, they were despondent and thought maybe God doesn't exist. Then he had a grief induced hallucination were Jesus told him that he did comeback but that he came back in the heavenly since not earthly and that he missed understood. Sound familiar??? Cognitive dissonance theory shows many times when someone is proven that their deeply held beliefs are wrong, that they will double down. Ie when Jesus was crucified, the reality was too painful to accept that their "messiah" was shamefully executed and was not who they thought he was. So in this extreme grief, they had hallucinations and believed that he had risen. I know two people who had grief induced hallucinations
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
I dream about my dead dogs all the time. I wish they could come back from the dead, but that doesn't make me think they will. However, I'm a scurrilous atheist.
@Cheepchipsable2 ай бұрын
@@donnievance1942 They do pet cloning nowadays.
@Username553 ай бұрын
Gary's recollection of his debate with Anthony Flew reminds me of my own shower debates. I've made so many people look like fools in there.
@Lobsterwithinternet2 ай бұрын
He sounds like the guy who tells how he won a fight against 15 guys and you found out later he got beat up by two girls he was trying to drunkenly hit on.
@acceleratergun75973 ай бұрын
“This is a person with no brain or heart.” Kinda makes it difficult to understand how she woke up afterwards. Could it be that Gary didn’t fully understand the medical situation of this patient?
@greatcaesarsghostwriter30183 ай бұрын
Gary's not like other doctors.
@dragonfiremalus3 ай бұрын
The reason most naturalists won't "pick a theory" is that, of the several reasonable explanations, there simply isn't enough evidence to prefer one over the other. It's a representation of honesty and a lack of credible accounts.
@VeridicusMaximus3 ай бұрын
Exactly, it's completely unlike religious faith that goes all-in and can't seem to allow one to question and doubt. These are not absolute provable hypothesis. Demanding we pick one and act like they do in regards to their dogmas as if we are willing to suffer and die for it is funny!
@jenst.3 ай бұрын
This. Its also perfectly coherent in a probabilistic epistemology. In the probability space of 1, there is exactly one hypothesis entailing that the guy ressurected (with lower P for every added detail to that story) with all the remaining non-true hypotheses occupying the remaining P. So if "mistaken" can entail the sub-hypotheses of dreaming, bereavement halluzination, etc., it can share some portion of the non-true space alongside e.g. fraud, making up stories, and even aliens and swooning. And i'd argue that there is a LOT of space after accounting for the miracle ones.
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
Absolutely. We'll never know exactly what combination of incidental events and social forces launched the cult of Christianity. It would be stupid to pretend that we had a naturalistic narrative explanation for the resurrection tale. Why these apologists even think we need a naturalistic alternative to reject their little fable is just hilarious. It's a bunch of BS written in a set of ancient books. Nothing about these books raise them to the status of credible accounts in the first place. They are a set of self-contradictory, ooky-spooky ritualistic magical yarns.
@Lobsterwithinternet2 ай бұрын
Not to mention that it doesn’t matter which one it is when you’re comparing it with a supernatural theory. Kind of like how discussions on Jesus presuppose he existed because it isn’t the point in contention.
@busterfixxitt3 ай бұрын
Habermas demonstrates the flaw in his reasoning before the intro music plays!😮 "People who believe IN A SINGLE natural explanation..." Why do 4 separate events require a single explanation? Three people became convinced of something at three different times; why should we expect they were all convinced by the same evidence?
@swolejeezy26033 ай бұрын
That's a great point. What convinces Jesus' disciple/best friend in adulthood Peter may not be what convinces his brother James who grew up with him.
@TheLithp3 ай бұрын
Oh, that's what he was getting at? The single cause fallacy?
@ramigilneas92743 ай бұрын
-Someone removed the body from the tomb. We have many options and it’s pretty much irrelevant who did it and why. -One of the disciples had a dream about Jesus that made him believe that Jesus was still alive in some way. He then convinced the other disciples who imagined to feel the presence of Jesus while praying. -James was just a peasant who was suddenly famous for being the brother of a dead cult leader. -Paul was just the Joseph Smith of his time. -The gospels and Acts are mostly fiction written by the next generations of believers after most eyewitnesses were long dead. Those are different explanations for different claims. Of course there can not be one answer that explains all of it… unless I would say that the entire story is fiction.
@NovaSaber3 ай бұрын
So basically the same error as when creationists complain that evolution doesn't explain why the universe exists (and/or when they consider the big bang part of evolution); they think that if their dogma "explains" it all one myth, the alternative has to also all be one theory.
@swolejeezy26033 ай бұрын
@@ramigilneas9274 I really wish we knew James’ story. It would be great to know what his memories of Jesus as a kid were and how he even got involved in the Christian movement.
@CinnamuerteNunya2 ай бұрын
Right after they said 32,000 hours I whipped out my calculator. Then Paul gave me the number of hours,days& years I was going to calculate. Humorous timing. Love your work Paul! Health& Joy to you and those you Love!
@Faint3663 ай бұрын
“I only deal with scholarly explanations, like aliens” 😂
@brandonfetter35593 ай бұрын
What's sad is he spent 11 years of his life on the second volume, and the absurdity of what he was writing and researching never occurred to him..
@justice87183 ай бұрын
It doesn’t matter if it’s absurd. You hate the miracles of God no matter what evidence is for it. You are absurdly evil to the very end.
@istvansipos99403 ай бұрын
he does this for a living and he (a 1st world dude in the 21st century) lives about 2 clicks away from all human knowledge. He KNOWS that is absurd, to say the least. He also KNOWS that is sells well.
@ThinkitThrough-kd4fn3 ай бұрын
He's been writing and saying the same thing for the last FIFTY years. So it's much worse.
@laurajarrell61873 ай бұрын
Paulogia, this is great. I'm surprised at how often apologists, like politicians, seem to forget recordings still exist! 👍🏼🌊💙💙💙🌊🥰✌🏼
@goldenalt31663 ай бұрын
Or they correctly assume that their followers won't check.
@justice87183 ай бұрын
Jesus Christ records everything you corrupt entities do, so don’t even bother.
@jeffmacdonald98633 ай бұрын
@@goldenalt3166 I suspect it's more like they haven't checked. That they've reworked the debate in their mind over time, thinking and talking about it again and again, gradually shifting the story to favor them more and more. It's a very human thing. It's just that usually for most of us there isn't a recording. :)
@goldenalt31663 ай бұрын
@@jeffmacdonald9863 They really don't want to admit that eye- witness testimony shifts over time with invented elements.
@Burtimus023 ай бұрын
It is damning that the guy who is insisting that first-person testimony is unimpeachable so badly misremembers an event he deems as vital to his own claims.
@reinku3 ай бұрын
And hilarious, too, because all he'd need to do to avoid this is present the conversations for what they are - hypotheticals. "Someone might say x, and if they did, I'd counter with y." He'd still be unconvincing to me, but he wouldn't be actively undermining his own credibility while doing it.
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
"Misremembers" is the charitable interpretation.
@istvansipos99403 ай бұрын
...while rejecting all the "eye witness accounts" of every other religi0n in any magical topic.
@longcastle48633 ай бұрын
How could Habermas say he sees signs that Naturalism is fading, when it is the basis of the technological world we see all around us, including advancements pertaining to medical procedures and improving the quality of our lives?
@utubepunk3 ай бұрын
Because he's a grifter who is blatantly operating off of motivated reasoning.
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
That statement was just ludicrous, comical, and delusional. Totally outside of academia even, the level of religious belief in the society as a whole is going steadily down. Wouldn't it be great to live in a future world in which theism was not just regarded as quaint, but viewed on the same level as primitive blood magic and voodoo?
@utubepunk3 ай бұрын
@@donnievance1942 I take it you mean Gary's statement, right? Not the OP's?
@nagranoth_3 ай бұрын
apologists lie for money. They always have. Not confusing...
@Lobsterwithinternet2 ай бұрын
@@nagranoth_Not to mention a lot of them were indoctrinated from a young age, making it a fundamental part of their identity.
@MrGrumblier3 ай бұрын
Thousands of people claim to have seen Mandela's funeral on TV back in the 80s therefore Mandela rose from the dead and died twice.
@LoveAllAnimals1013 ай бұрын
Religion. The one thing you can make up and never have to prove a god damn thing!
@freddan6fly3 ай бұрын
Actually all conspiracy theories are the same.
@AegixDrakan3 ай бұрын
@@freddan6fly Yup! Gee, I wonder what the connection is..... :P
@guitarizard3 ай бұрын
People do this with all kinds of things.
@longcastle48633 ай бұрын
I envy you. I used the Gd phrase and got myself suspended from KZbin. Does KZbin publish anywhere, the do’s and don’ts of making KZbin comments? I feel I constantly need to curb my language.
@Cheepchipsable2 ай бұрын
@@longcastle4863 Seems random and might depend on the forum. I got a 24 hour suspension and I have no clue what comments triggered it, and since they are deleted I can't refer back to them. Could also be random complaints from someone you disagreed with in the comments. I know when I see some random unrelated religious gibberish in the comments sections of non religious videos I report it as spam.
@andreasplosky85163 ай бұрын
Habermas' memory is predominantly a fantasy generator. He is a hero in his own mind. Everyone else thinks he is weak sauce.
@bigdavexx13 ай бұрын
Well, that's like 15 pounds of evidence. I guess I'm convinced. If it were merely 10 pounds, I would remain skeptical.
@ratamacue03203 ай бұрын
And counting!
@ramigilneas92743 ай бұрын
That’s why I believe in the golden plates of Mormonism… they were so much heavier.
@Nymaz3 ай бұрын
What's the old saying "10 pounds of 'evidence' in a 5 pound sack"?
@RoryLennon-te9ec17 сағат бұрын
You could go metric if you are a commie.
@andrewede71543 ай бұрын
Habermas is making an error commonly committed by students - jumping from "could have happened" to "must have happened."
@lnsflare13 ай бұрын
"I had this debate with a respected atheist, but I won't say who-" Gotcha, so it either didn't happen or you are going to lie about it and don't want us to look up the video.
@johnnehrich96013 ай бұрын
I would counter with "but I WON a debate with over 500 respected but anonymous theologians, some of whom are still alive." Also, "buy MY book. It is over 40,000 pages, payable in gold bars only."
@MossyMozart2 ай бұрын
@@johnnehrich9601 - Or trump's new cryroscam.
@brickwitheyes17103 ай бұрын
Wow, an hour Paul vid. I'm ready. Thanks for your hard work Paul
@johnnehrich96013 ай бұрын
Haven't watched it yet. Always hoping for THE JINGLE. (Yes, yes, yes, comes at 35:44.)
@moodyrick85033 ай бұрын
Paul, you nailed it! Gary stands on a foundation of alleged testimony. But you showed us that he himself, is prone to reinventing his own past. _To align with what he preferred it to be._
@ourmobilehomemakeover6623 ай бұрын
With respect to NDEs, esp, or anything else, we simply investigate the claims. They never pan out. Yet believers all want to insist that they’ve been proven to have actually happened, even though they never have been.
@XDRONIN3 ай бұрын
@Paulogia Only one thing I would like to add is that when the apostle Paul was arrested in Jerusalem, tried by the Jewish authorities, and was to be executed for heresy, he escaped his "Martyrdom" by the Jews by pleading to the Roman authorities to be tried as a Roman citizen in front of the Emperor. The Romans took him as a prisoner, was sent to Rome and a couple of years later was executed accused of the same crime as Peter without ever receiving a trial. Paul did not die as a Martyr, he intentionally escaped his opportunity for "Martyrdom" when he could, so; when people say the apostle Paul died for refusing to recant Jesus' resurrection, that is a blatant exaggeration of Paul's actions and written accounts made by Christian themselves
@ratamacue03203 ай бұрын
Do you remember the book & chapter for that?
@velkyn13 ай бұрын
@@ratamacue0320 "25 Three days after Festus had arrived in the province, he went up from Caesarea to Jerusalem 2 where the chief priests and the leaders of the Jews gave him a report against Paul. They appealed to him 3 and requested, as a favour to them against Paul,[a] to have him transferred to Jerusalem. They were, in fact, planning an ambush to kill him along the way. 4 Festus replied that Paul was being kept at Caesarea, and that he himself intended to go there shortly. 5 ‘So’, he said, ‘let those of you who have the authority come down with me, and if there is anything wrong about the man, let them accuse him.’ 6 After he had stayed among them for not more than eight or ten days, he went down to Caesarea; the next day he took his seat on the tribunal and ordered Paul to be brought. 7 When he arrived, the Jews who had gone down from Jerusalem surrounded him, bringing many serious charges against him, which they could not prove. 8 Paul said in his defence, ‘I have in no way committed an offence against the law of the Jews, or against the temple, or against the emperor.’ 9 But Festus, wishing to do the Jews a favour, asked Paul, ‘Do you wish to go up to Jerusalem and be tried there before me on these charges?’ 10 Paul said, ‘I am appealing to the emperor’s tribunal; this is where I should be tried. I have done no wrong to the Jews, as you very well know. 11 Now if I am in the wrong and have committed something for which I deserve to die, I am not trying to escape death; but if there is nothing to their charges against me, no one can turn me over to them. I appeal to the emperor.’ 12 Then Festus, after he had conferred with his council, replied, ‘You have appealed to the emperor; to the emperor you will go.’" Acts 25
@XDRONIN3 ай бұрын
@@ratamacue0320 HA!... velkin beat me to it, but yes, in the book of Acts, Paul's trial, he pleads to be tried as a Roman in front of the emperor I will only add that Paul's death is not mentioned in any of the early accounts, it comes from later works, but in the accounts that exist from Paul, there is no mention of him being trial in Rome, and from Roman historians, we do know that Nero either refused or ignored Roman law regarding the trial of Christians (depending on which historical account you prefer) because Nero was accused by Roman senators against him of ignoring Roman Law, and there are no historical records that Nero tried Christians according to Roman Law
@VulcanLogic3 ай бұрын
@@XDRONIN First extra-biblical mention is in the First Epistle of Clement, late 1st century. Just says that Paul (and Peter) were martyred. Doesn't state a charge, doesn't state a trial, doesn't state if recanting would have saved them, and doesn't say where; it just states that they were martyred and no other details.
@XDRONIN3 ай бұрын
@@VulcanLogic Yes, but you know that when Christians say they were "Martyred", they mean that they died for believing in Jesus or that their crime was believing in Jesus, and that was the reason for their "Martyrdom", and that would be correct if Paul, as a Jew; was executed in Jerusalem because the Jews do have laws against heresy, and that is what the entire story of Paul's arrest and trial in Jerusalem from Acts says
@HarryNicNicholas3 ай бұрын
pinecreek asked gary for a list of PhD scholars who had been converted to christianity by the evidence (during their research of course) habermas said he did indeed have such a list, but i have yet to see it. did it ever materialise?
@MDHilgersom3 ай бұрын
Yes. Fun fact, that list gave rise to the whole "Is an empty list a list" debacle.
@twowardrobeswardrobes15363 ай бұрын
You have to presuppose that it exists first
@martinelzen51273 ай бұрын
I think that list got eaten by a shocked dog in Springfield, during the debate! ;-)
@mtdouthit12913 ай бұрын
Literally all Habermas does is restate the Bible!!!! He doesn't understand you have to prove the stories in the Bible are true BEFORE you can reference the Bible as a source of truth. He just claims it.
@Finckelstein3 ай бұрын
They all do, because that's literally all they have. There is no contemporary attestation, no outside sources, no real eye witnesses with their own accounts. The bible is quite literally all they CAN base their religion on. Without the bible, christianity is gone. That's why they try to inflate the value of Tacitus' account, who basically only said "There's some freaks who worship some guy" as if it was in any way proof of their claims.
@authenticallysuperficial98743 ай бұрын
I mean he doesn't take the whole bible as an assumption
@authenticallysuperficial98743 ай бұрын
Just more than he ought
@Nocturnalux3 ай бұрын
Habermas reifies the reification and the reification is reified.
@bpkg13083 ай бұрын
I'm sure he understands, but since he can't prove that those stories are true, he just assumes they're true
@njhoepner3 ай бұрын
It's funny how Habermas can't seem to defend his minimal facts argument by using his supposed minimal facts.
@CinnamuerteNunya2 ай бұрын
Who pays these quacks? Thank you for your work Paul.
@amateuroverlord80073 ай бұрын
I was literally rewatching an old Paulogia video when this dropped. That rewatch will have to wait lol.
@lostfan50543 ай бұрын
Glad I'm not the only one who can binge Paulogia for hours LOL
@pansepot14903 ай бұрын
Man, that’s painful. Reminds me of visiting my uncle at the nursing home. He was in mental decline and most of his speech was rambling nonsense.
@Mar-dk3mp3 ай бұрын
I can feel your frustration adn obsession, talking about what you do not even believe, because not even you knows what you believe in. get out from this cult called atheism ok?
@HangrySaturn3 ай бұрын
@@Mar-dk3mp
@riseofdarkleela3 ай бұрын
@@HangrySaturnand rambling nonsense too, like an illustration of the OP comment.
@MossyMozart2 ай бұрын
@@Mar-dk3mp - What are you, a witch that reads minds?
@DC_Prox3 ай бұрын
I was involved in a Twitter debate once, and I made the point that any naturalistic explanation for something, no matter how unlikely, is definitionally more likely than any supernatural explanation. Most of the rest of the thread was some guy going on and on about Hume, rather than responding to the point being made. What I said would still be true even if Hume had never been born, but there are some believers who think that if you can dismiss Hume that's basically the same as proving God. So now I cringe every time I hear Hume's name, because I reflexively want to shout "I don't care about Hume, deal with the point being made please!"
@Lobsterwithinternet2 ай бұрын
That’s because that since they put faith in individuals like Jesus or the Apostles, they think that denouncing or debunking the individual makes what they observed to be false.
@Cheepchipsable2 ай бұрын
Sounds like the creationists who keep going on about Darwin.
@sparrowthesissy21863 ай бұрын
They admit what they're doing isn't history, and it isn't science... so... what are they doing with all these thousands of hours? Cosplay?
@garethmckee592726 күн бұрын
I have hallucinated, twice. Whilst in the military, on exercise, yes very tired. Once I saw two guys sitting on a rock about 3-4 metres away, mentioned this to the guy next to me, he said there was no rock and no two guys. The other time I saw a tartan tortoise walk past me. I said I was tired!!
@robertjimenez59843 ай бұрын
All I can see is that apologist rely on the assumption that the claims in the book they have is a historical fact. Then they build on this muddy foundation and talk as if what ever they built on this mud is not going to sink. 🤦♂️
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
Yep. A bunch of unknown guys wrote a bunch of unverifiable stuff. How any normally intelligent person sees that as evidence is beyond me. Hearsay of totally unknown provenance is not remotely admitted in any court of law. Well, maybe in North Korea. Who knows?
@alexanderweddle39483 ай бұрын
I don’t know what the actual explanation is. The stories don’t give me reason to believe that a person, dead for a couple of days, became alive.
@theeldritchfox3 ай бұрын
Gary "Trust me bro, this definitely happened in a debate" Habermas
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
What does it even matter what happened in a debate or whether his opponent made concessions to him? None of that is evidence for the resurrection. I would never have made the concessions he says his opponent made. The arguments that supposedly nailed them to those concessions were really stupid arguments anyway. Habermas is really lame as a scholar. He reminds me of John Lennox, the mathematician and Christian apologist who also makes dumbass third-grade arguments for theism and Christianity. There is such a stark disconnect between the supposed academic standing of those guys and the super-primitive and philosophically unschooled arguments they make that it just amazes me.
@PlaylistWatching1234Ай бұрын
This is possibly the meanest thing you could've put together on Gary.
@billyjacobs1903 ай бұрын
These were the worst responses I've heard. He didn't answer any of Sean's questions.
@davidhoffman69803 ай бұрын
Who didn't? Gary or Paul?
@Nocturnalux3 ай бұрын
And these were softballs…!
@dingdongism3 ай бұрын
@@davidhoffman6980Obviously OP meant the interviewee, Gary.
@davidhoffman69803 ай бұрын
@@dingdongism it's not so obvious. I've encountered many apologists who say the atheist performed poorly despite that not being the case.
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
@@davidhoffman6980 It is obvious, because Paul was not in Habermas' presence and McDowell was. Paul could hardly ask Habermas questions on a video made when Paul wasn't present. Duh.
@timeshark87273 ай бұрын
My psychology class in college did an experiment involving inducing hallucinations through simple peer pressure. A few of us would stand by a tree looking up and pointing. When people came over to see what we were pointing at, we said there was a snake in the tree. After a few moments (varies between people) the new people would agree, and even argue with each other about where and what color the snake was.
@scienceexplains3023 ай бұрын
Habermas effectively said, “I don’t accept naturalism, so I don’t have to defend my position.”
@Lobsterwithinternet2 ай бұрын
Then you should tell him to go live like they did before the Scientific Method was a thing and see how he prefers it since he doesn’t believe in it.
@Philusteen3 ай бұрын
The last time I saw this much naked strawmanning was when I inadvertently stumbled across some Wizard of Oz fetish fiction. 😆
@Paulogia3 ай бұрын
Bwa ha ha
@martinelzen51273 ай бұрын
Agh! Now that's a horrible vision! If I get temporary blindness I know who I'm blaming! ;-)
@RichWoods232 ай бұрын
"Inadvertently"? Yeah, right...
@karlu85533 ай бұрын
Funny how Gary's own first person account of a conversation and event he took part in, actually demonstrates the unreliability of eyewitness testimony and the tendency to embellish stories over time even by the person who took part in the conversation - let alone how it would be embellished by the people repeating his already-embellished story further down the chain again and again. Imagine Sean telling that story (already misremembered and embellished by Gary) to his dad who then tells it to J Warner Wallace who then tells it to Frank Turek...how far from the original video it would be
@jfh6673 ай бұрын
I'm also a Canadian but from a province very different then Paul : Québec. When I was a teen there was a super big story of an international cult that committed mass suicide to reach the space ship of their religion. Thats how much they believed in their religion. It doesn't make their religious claim true. Being willing to die for what you believe doesn't make it true.
@danielkirienko17013 ай бұрын
Are you talking about Heaven's Gate?
@hammerotongo46773 ай бұрын
That was Heaven's Gate and it turned out that they really did successfully reach the spaceship like they intended, so your example doesn't work in this case
@Lobsterwithinternet2 ай бұрын
@@hammerotongo4677As a hyper-intelligent lobster, I can confirm this is true.
@Cheepchipsable2 ай бұрын
Lol, just wrote a similar comment. I'm sure there were a lot of "true believers" in Jonestown too.
@jfh6672 ай бұрын
@@Cheepchipsable Truthest place on earth.
@davidhoffman69803 ай бұрын
@22:45 "As far as we know, none of [the disciples] ever recanted." Well if that's compelling then you need to be aware that Joseph Smith and his witnesses never recanted, so I guess either Gary is going to convert to Mormonism or stop using this talking point right?
@Jim339333 ай бұрын
Whenever Hume is mentioned I can't help but think of Monty Python's Philosopher's Song
@HarryNicNicholas3 ай бұрын
whenever people resort to quoting old philosophers i wonder if thy have anything of their own.
@scienceexplains3023 ай бұрын
*NDEs* I saw a doctor (woman) on a documentary who was shaken by a patient’s NDE and thought this case was the best evidence. But the details say otherwise. Reporters had gone to the patient’s house days after the recovery and wrote down his memories at the time. We can’t know what the patient remembered upon awakening. The patient got the direction and purpose of the consulting male surgeon’s movements wrong, which would have been impossible if the patient’s spirit had been seeing the surgeon. The doctor relaying the NDE focused only on the things that were vaguely correct, all of which could have been derived by sound, which is apparently the last sense to “die”.
@Marine_Veteran_Vegan_Gamer3 ай бұрын
No one tell them religion evolves.
@michaelmeszaros69823 ай бұрын
Listening to Dr. Habermas, I am reminded of the saying, "A mind is a terrible thing to waste", or as vice-president Dan Quayle once tried to quote it, "What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is." YES, how true that is. RockOn, Paulogia.
@justice87183 ай бұрын
God made your mind to honor him, and you wasted it on hating him.
@SavedFromFaith3 ай бұрын
I got to give it to Dr. Habermas. At least he’s consistent. He believes based on hearsay evidence, and he hopes people believe him based on hearsay evidence.
@soyevquirsefron9903 ай бұрын
Gary will only engage with interlocutors who have certain credentials; certificates of death.
@mrapistevist3 ай бұрын
The argument from page count. 🤣🤣
@pesilaratnayake1623 ай бұрын
Gary: These are the minimal facts that a large majority of relevant scholars accept. Critics: These are some ways the minimal facts can be explained through naturalistic means. Also Gary: But your hypothesis doesn't explain these _other_ facts that aren't generally accepted as being accurate! Is that moving the goalposts?
@Paulogia3 ай бұрын
100%
@nagranoth_3 ай бұрын
also, the first thing critics should say is "most THEIST scholars accept them as fact by nothing but assumption. A fact is something you can demonstrate is true. Demonstrate please, otherwise it's just an argument from popularity fallacy"
@pesilaratnayake1623 ай бұрын
@nagranoth_ yeah, even secular scholars tend to agree on many of them. Crucifixion, appearances to Paul and Peter. Stuff like that. Much of it is from all four gospels agreeing, or Paul's first-person testimony. I take Paul at his word of what he thinks he saw - not what he actually saw. I don't take the gospels at their word, especially since the earliest and only arguably reliable account (Paul) gives none of the details to corroborate the details. He doesn't even make it sound like he's aware of any aspects of Jesus' life or death.
@blairmcian3 ай бұрын
Habermas is one more sad case of someone whose self-esteem depends on never conceding he’s wrong. And McDowell is despicable, as all apologists are, for working to reinforce belief even if untrue.
@JasonHenderson3 ай бұрын
30:16 "what if someone who didn't know me 20 years later wrote down a story about my dead wife appearing in the classroom, and they claimed that 500 people saw it" -- Gary, probably
@luismarroquin84533 ай бұрын
I dont write very often, but i just want you to know Paul that your extensive job is well appreciated, you have helped me in so many ways and i truly thank you for your efforts, they don’t resonate in death ears.
@JamesRichardWiley3 ай бұрын
Gary is reading the same story that I read and drawing a different conclusion.
@brave_sir_robin52142 ай бұрын
"Gary, for a guy whose career is essentially resting on the reliability of testimony, I'd suggest you stop giving testimony about events that can be fact-checked" BOOM😆. Love your content Paulogia, It has been super helpful for me through my deconstruction. Keep up the great work!
@swimbutsu29273 ай бұрын
Having gone to school in the US, I wouldn't even bat an eye at a course requiring $200 worth of textbooks. Seems like maybe we should do something about that.
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
Universities should have ethical rules that prohibit professors from profiting off of textbooks that they require. Or else they should have to disclose that in the course catalogue. The grifters would be identified then. I had a professor that required an expensive lab kit that was made by a company he owned. You couldn't even buy a used one from a previous student. You had to show one of his grad students a purchase receipt for a new one. Most students had no idea they were on the hook for this lab kit when they signed up for the course. That sh*t is totally corrupt and should never be allowed.
@swimbutsu29273 ай бұрын
@@donnievance1942 I've had that same experience with books that the prof wrote. I took one class where 3 separate books were required, all had to be that year's edition, and all were written by the prof. We never even used one of them! He was just blatantly using his position to enrich himself at the expense of his students. I reported him to the dean of his section and was told he could require any books he chose for his courses. Our entire education system is falling deeper and deeper into the territory of a straight up scam.
@nagranoth_3 ай бұрын
that's normal world wide...
@iatebambismom3 ай бұрын
This video autoplayed while I was not watching, and I thought Peter Griffin had become an apologist.
@Alan-gi2ku3 ай бұрын
Thanks! Call it combat pay.
@Paulogia2 ай бұрын
ha! thank you
@Boundless_Border3 ай бұрын
That part around 48:50 seems obviously demonstrative of the unreliability of memory and testimony. Which, as you said, undermines the case he's making and, by extension, the case most theists take regarding the resurrection. Anyway, good luck with your Magnum Opus.
@henriquesousa49943 ай бұрын
Ravi Zacharias was a liar, Bill "Low Bar" Craig is a liar, Habermas is a liar, J. Warner Wallace is a liar, ... who am I leaving out of the red-handed liar list?
@freddan6fly3 ай бұрын
Don't know, perhaps all the others?
@ThinkitThrough-kd4fn3 ай бұрын
If you mean not just that they lie but have been caught at it, I'd put Sean's dad at the top of the list.
@CheatahX3 ай бұрын
Apologists top the list.
@ramigilneas92743 ай бұрын
Lee Strobel and Josh McDowell.
@alanmurray59633 ай бұрын
Frank Turek, Joel Osteen, Ken Copeland, Jesse Duplantis....every American televangelist
@rickwilliams74312 ай бұрын
*_You nailed it_** ;* With beliefs that stand on a foundation of testimony, (hearsay), Gary is shown to be highly inaccurate about his recollections regarding conversations he's had.
@Soapy-chan3 ай бұрын
"I'm not telling you who it was, but I debated [...]" I just can't. I just CAN'T with this guy.
@mkl22372 ай бұрын
That info is available …. Easy to find out.
@Soapy-chan2 ай бұрын
@@mkl2237 that's not the point. he's deliberately avoiding naming someone because he knows that he's lying about it
@mkl22372 ай бұрын
Totally incorrect. It’s hilarious to see you reading into the psyche and motives of others and accuse people of lying either because you don’t like their point or you’re too naive to actually grasp the situation or both. Thx for the laugh.
@mkl22372 ай бұрын
Ni Fang-Pi, Pengyou.
@Soapy-chan2 ай бұрын
@@mkl2237 except not incorrect of course
@GalapagosPete3 ай бұрын
“An atheist came up to me - big atheist, strong atheist, tears in his eyes. I said to him, pick a theory! He said to me, sir, sir, I cannot do that, because if I do you will refute it and make me look silly.“ Also, as soon as some excuseologist says “Y’all just wanna sin,“ I no longer take them seriously -if I ever did in the first place.
@bartfeather6176Ай бұрын
“And I said, and I said, and I said “…..but Gary didn’t really say what he said he said.
@brianhurd33553 ай бұрын
I'm having flashbacks to being a doubting teen and having sit-downs with dogmatic old porch-wizard types like Habermas. I feel for McDowell trying to get a point in edgewise.
@rizdekd39123 ай бұрын
I too was pretty young when I was introduced to a prattling parson who...good intentions aside...tried to convince me as i was deconverting. His go to was CSLewis book, Mere Christianity I found it completely useless to answer any of the questions I was facing. Eventually the questions won out and I've not looked back toward Christianity.
@michealpadraigpriomhuaduin78123 ай бұрын
Wow, all the anecdotes that don't make a point from Gary Habermas, it saddens me that he has such reach while demonstrating such poor critical thinking.
@andreasplosky85163 ай бұрын
Poor, and extremely selective, critical thinking is the main requirement for being a christian. Without it there would be no christianity.
@sypherthe297th23 ай бұрын
He really doesn't. Apologists aren't taken seriously in academic circles because to call their work sloppy and biased would be extraordinarily generous.
@michealpadraigpriomhuaduin78123 ай бұрын
@@sypherthe297th2 Indeed, but that’s not what the general public who don’t necessarily have the education to discern this stuff see, and then this trains them in bad patterns of thought and ends up having a huge effect on how the general public analyses the world and interacts with it. Ends up causing quite a bit of harm.
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
@@sypherthe297th2 They probably have to be in religious schools to even survive the sense of inferiority they would chronically suffer in the faculty lounge. Imagine being there and being surrounded by a bunch of particle physicists, paleontologists, and biochemistry researchers.
@TheRealPaulMarshall3 ай бұрын
Wait, wait wait. Are you trying to tell me that an apologist ... lies? ... like,... for a living? My flabber is most thoroughly gasted. Whatever shall I do now?
@JadedzUzi3 ай бұрын
Seems like recalling accounts from years ago isn't a good method of history...
@jio-lito3 ай бұрын
When I heard Stephen A. Smith I thought “The loud mouth from ESPN? Oh Lawd!! when did he become an expert in biblical scholarship?” 😂😂😂
@scienceexplains3023 ай бұрын
*“Put their lives on hold,”* doesn’t help Habermas. People who commit to things often double down when it seems to fail. Hiding Jesus’ body is not out of the question, *especially* for people who put their everyday lives on hold.
@twowardrobeswardrobes15363 ай бұрын
Evolving the story and carrying on the disciple lifestyle beats going back to fishing.
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
@@twowardrobeswardrobes1536 No kidding. Especially in the 1st century. No motorboats or mechanized net hauling gear.
@Lobsterwithinternet2 ай бұрын
Tell me he hasn’t read _A Tale of Two Cities_ before.
@Seapatico3 ай бұрын
As someone who yearns to know everything in every book but who finds reading to be extremely difficult and time consuming, I can't tell you how much I appreciate the amount of reading and synthesizing you do for us ♥️
@rodneytgap53403 ай бұрын
Can the guy who thinks an event happened because it must have happened because it was said that it happened please stop saying 'circular'? There is maybe some too much protesting going on there.
@plannein2 ай бұрын
And why does no one ever call this dude out for lying about that debate
@chrisgrill63023 ай бұрын
"Hume's critique of miracles just wasn't long enough". "Pastor-philosophers whipped Hume but I won't say how". LOL. Oh Gary...
@Cheepchipsable2 ай бұрын
They got all up in his grille!
@philw60563 ай бұрын
When he asked "money wise", I actually had the hope that he thought about the students and if they can afford the books. It would have been a good opportunity to offer them a discount. But I must assume, that he was only interested in the guaranteed sales.
@AlexStock1873 ай бұрын
I think Gary’s point about “How many scholars” is that while there is a buffet of naturalistic explanations, no one option has gathered a consistent momentum; the explanations disagree with each other. He suggests this points to them being ad hoc rather than derived from the available evidence, as objective scholars looking at the evidence should end up circumambulating one or two of the models. Put more directly, if Paulogia’s model is the correct one, why is it not the explanation that most secular scholars give? I hope that makes sense. I have many issues with Gary and he is an unhealthy blend of dishonest, stubborn, and ignorant. But I think this particular point is worth considering. The problem is that he assumes the evidence is simple and straightforward; were that the case, it would be a fair critique. But if the evidence is ambiguous and messy, competing models is a fair outcome.
@violeth22553 ай бұрын
If that is indeed Gary's intended point, then it is a useless observation. If there are 5 routes I can take to and from work and my family cant decide amongst themselves which way I took because of what's happening on said routes this morning (there's construction on one, one is a lot slower normally, etc...), that doesn't justify my neighbor's assertion that I just teleported into work today.
@jasonrollins63603 ай бұрын
I issue at hand is that it does not matter. Any naturalistic explanation will be more probable that one that relies on miracles. The people that come up with the alternatives are trying to show that there are plenty of ways to fit the data using known natural phenomenon. Every single alternative has to be ruled out or shown to be less likely than the likelihood of an actual resurrection. That's the point of the "Jesus is just and alien hypotheses". As far as we can tell, the existence of aliens is more likely than a resurrection as we know that life can form on planets. It is therefore possible that Jesus was an alien that fooled the population of Judea with advanced technology. This is still more likely than a resurrection because we have do not know of any known phenomenon that allow someone to come back from the dead. Besides this one account from "witnesses" 2000 years ago, it's never happened before or since.
@AlexStock1873 ай бұрын
@@violeth2255 His (unspoken here) point would be that a bunch of neighbors (in this case believing New Testament scholars) agree on one perspective, while all the other witnesses/route-takers seem to have no consensus. Group A (believing scholars) has strong consensus, Group B (unbelieving scholars) has little consensus.
@donnievance19423 ай бұрын
That is not a particular point worth considering. There are proportionately few items from two thousand years ago for which enough evidence remains to put forward plausible hypotheses to even describe, much less "explain" them. That lack of information does not in any way provide evidentiary justification for a whopping magical tale.
@violeth22553 ай бұрын
@@AlexStock187 Okay, so 6 neighbors think I must've teleported to work today, while my friends are all disagreeing about possible routes. Still doesn't justify the assumption that I teleported just because I wowed them with a few magic tricks that one time. It is a useless observation.
@jennifertennent83193 ай бұрын
I haven't been following your work as closely as I did a few years ago, but I still appreciate your hard work and dedication. I don't think I can give you enough praise for your long form discussion, civility and lack of swearing. I am not particularly offended by swearing, but it's nice to know you are considerate of others who would tune out what you have to say for this reason. I am thankful that neither of my parents were strongly religious and I haven't grown up in a community where there are religious people constantly preaching to non-believers. Your videos have validated the skepticism I felt toward religion in high school when I started to get curious. Though by the time I came across your content I was far beyond my high school years. I am willing to concede the possible existence of the supernatural and paranormal as phenomenon that we simply don't understand--yet. Maybe this is exaggeration and click bait, but it's been a very common occurance to see headlines about NASA finding something in the depths of space that shouldn't exist and defies our current understanding of physics. I mean considering we lack the technology to colonize our solar system and efficiently travel at or beyond the speed of light, our perspective and understanding of the known universe is very limited. Cheers!
@Paulogia3 ай бұрын
Thank you so much for the kind words and generous support! Both mean much.