The Historical Evidence for Jesus' Resurrection w/ Dr. Calum Miller & Dr. Max Baker-Hytch

[@Unifluxx]

Thank you very much for your work, Cameron! This was great! I thought it would be nice to have a short overview of the resources mentioned at 14:53 for further studies. So here it goes: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Gary R. Habermas, Michael R. Licona) The Son Rises (William Lane Craig) The Resurrection of God Incarnate (Richard Swinburne) Resurrecting Jesus (Dale C. Allison Jr.) Jesus, the Final Days (Craig A. Evans, N.T. Wright) Timothy and Lydia McGrews article in The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology Jesus Under Fire (Michael J. Wilkins, J.P. Moreland) Fabricating Jesus (Craig A. Evans)

[@myopenmind527]

Hey Now thanks for keeping this discussion balanced. Is suspect few Christians understand the evolutionary origins of their religion in both the Hebrew Bible ... kzbin.info/aero/PLh9mgdi4rNeyuvTEbD-Ei0JdMUujXfyWi

[@gowdsake7103]

So the evidence is there were stories that the stories were true ! ok ya got me I am convinced NOT !

[@enmanuelsan]

Just passing by to tell you that Paulogia debunked you(again) kzbin.info/www/bejne/l5bJk2uKp6qEgqs

[@Akkordeondirigent]

"Work"?! Pulling unsubstantiated claims out of nowhere is "work"?! That´s not "work": It´s making stuff up.

[@tcard7101]

@@myopenmind527 If you watch those as a Christian, get ready to have your world view shattered.

[@kisskid7]

It's interesting to me that these guys spend years studying this stuff.. And within a few minutes or hours, everyone on KZbin is suddenly an expert

[@therealestmc85]

You dont need to be an expert to assess evidence. Something is either true or it’s but not. I have not seen any evidence that Jesus’s is God or the son of God. If the argument is that Jesus existed then I am willing to accept but any supernatural claim attached Jesus existence has to proven. This video wasted 3 hours of my time.

[@МыколаНетребко]

Christians only study the same ole tired arguments for Christ. But if I had such a scholar in front of me, I'd ask him the following: 1. What happened to the non-Greek speak Jewish Christians, that are so prominent in the Christian Scriptures, but are nowhere to be found outside the Gospels? In other words, the trace of Christians that is there is a trace to Jewish heretics from a Greek speaking Christian point of view. 2. How could it be that Jesus, when he was still alive, was considered to be the risen John the Baptist? How could this bit be historical?

[@kisskid7]

@@cygnusustus People have failed to debunk the Bible since it was created - so if you think you're smarter than Stephen Hawking, I'm listening

[@kisskid7]

@@cygnusustus None of what you've claimed to be debunked has been debunked. You're spewing rhetoric and calling me a child. You have given no credible argument to debunk these stories. I've yet to hear anyone who can give a credible argument against these stories. And i was a huge skeptic/atheist for years I know your arguments, the ins and outs 1 thing that I've learned is that life itself doesn't even agree with the atheist.

[@kisskid7]

@@cygnusustus Why call me a child and a liar? Your assumptions are as bad as your rhetoric. Which is far from truth or of being proven. Your claims are baseless and theoretical at best. I'll wait for science to continue its worm holes based on theory and laugh when it continuously disproves itself - Further proving that no word holds more truth than the word of God. Seeing how I've struck a nerve with you, I'll leave on this. Jesus is LORD. And there is peace with God. You're only hurting yourself by holding true your baseless assumptions instead of searching for truth and answers that so obviously align with the very fabrics of the universe. Praise God. Hope is not lost for you or anyone - I never thought that i would be where I'm at today.

[@stevecollins5290]

I listen to these teachings while I drive...I drive 18 wheelers...all day long! I look forward to the REALLY LONG ONES! You're DEFINITELY improving! Thanks for the great work!

[@user-ym5is9zy4b]

Thank you for your hard work.

[@Maxbps88]

Thank you for doing what you do. God Bless & Godspeed.

[@vhawk1951kl]

Those that abuse capital letters not only emphasise nothing but the hysteria of the abuser, they also declare the abuser to be a lunatic Abusers abuse all sorts, who or what remains to be seen or prosecuted.self -abuse like abusing capital letters is like masturbation generally best not done in public.

[@stevecollins5290]

​@@vhawk1951klWHATEVER!😅

[@vhawk1951kl]

@@stevecollins5290 that is the sort thing sulky imbecile teenagers say

[@aidanpetersen7060]

Sorry that’s not long enough

[@mariembuenaventura1278]

Yeah.. maybe if its 1 whole day.

[@nmoriss]

How about eternity ?

[@patrickhall901]

You're right, this wasn't nearly long enough. You need a full 24 straight hours to even start to properly brainwash someone.

[@patrickhall901]

@Gail Hunter, they probably tried but put in the wrong ones, probably why I've been clucking like a chicken every time a bell rings. LOL

[@CedanyTheAlaskan]

@Sievon Redalious Why is it "bad"? Or are you just gonna put a statement and not any defense?

[@eskercurve]

Cameron this came in my recommendations at a very opportune time. I've been looking at the Bible as a historical record lately and the thought that the Christian belief without the resurrection is empty came to me, so naturally I've been thinking I need to do homework on it. I'm only 1/3 of the way into it, but this has already been a huge blessing. Thank you so much. The Holy Spirit is working in and through you. Keep it up!

[@gg2950]

Historical record 😂😂😂

[@AbandonedVoid]

Look into Bart Ehrman and Joshua Bowen if you want a more honest look at the scholarship on the topic

[@vhawk1951kl]

what" historical record" or the beliefs of who?

[@joshuavandernoord6912]

Don’t let the atheist comment patrol get you down Cam. Great video and greater arguments!

[@CapturingChristianity]

It doesn’t get me down at all! Thanks!

[@Joshua-ev9uw]

This goes deeper than I ever even thought of and I thought my thoughts were deep. This was SO well worth 3.5 hours. I've never heard anyone explain every single aspect of every single detail and give such a great history and cultural background so we know what's REALLY going on. Stuff like this will absolutely stump almost any atheist in their tracks. They have every single aspect of the resurrection laid on in logical evidence, historical evidence, biblical evidence, non-biblical written evidence, and definitely the evidence that EXPLAINS all there is to know so you can PROPERLY evaluate what we're reading and we need to understand that we don't know Greek or Hebrew and we don't know the original words and what they really mean. We just know how they were translated to English and doesn't give the background (it's not a history book) of the culture or the definition of the original word so we weren't limited to English! THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!!

[@TheTruthKiwi]

Nope. Not stumped at all. Hearsay and using the bible to prove the bible is not conclusive evidence. There was most likely a person named Jesus who was very influential (and was possibly an amateur magician) but there is no evidence that any supernatural claims are true, just as there is no evidence of any supernatural claims made in the bible whatsoever. Confirmation bias, delusion, ignorance, wishful thinking, indoctrination and gullibility are powerful things. The universe and life most likely originated naturally and wasn't magically poofed into existence by some omnipotent entity from another dimension. Pretty much every isolated civilisation on earth has made up its own myths and legends regarding origins, it is human nature to make things up when we don't have all the facts and christianity is no different.

[@gg2950]

an hour in and not stumped yet 😁 I’m also unconvinced it’s really worth the extra 2.5 hours.

[@kazumakiryu157]

Brother, I doubt this would stop any atheist in their tracks! They don't really care about the evidence! Any amount of evidence that is remotely convincing are "religious lies". They come into the video assuming that the Bible is one big lie, full of "fairytales". They're still using the Humean argument against miracles😂. If you showed them a miracle right now, they would think that you were performing a magic trick or they were hallucinating. Look, no matter however much evidence you give, the philosophical arguments, the scientific evidence, the archaeological evidence, the historical evidence - there's always a naturalistic answer! It really is hard to convince someone so blind. Only God can open their hearts.

[@musashimiyamoto586]

Almost any atheist? Well, it didn't stump me and I expect you won't find much other confirmation for your rather daft assumption elsewhere, either. But you are right about one thing: It's NOT a history book. That tells you all you should need to know. Also, the Old Testament is nothing but a book of mythological stories with a few historical characters and even events strewn in, many and the biggest ones of which either neve rhappened, were misrrepresneed or taken from other cultures and woven into a constructed narrative that later has taken hold of humanity like a fungus. So, if the first book of fairy-tales is basically a lie, what does matter the second one matter?

[@vhawk1951kl]

What are you calling " thoughts"? You have no idea? that you are about to demonstrate.

[@Toys4YouJucariiPentruTine]

Beautiful ! Thank you meticulously explaining and hard work 🙏

[@antoniocoffa1144]

Been checking all your new stuff over the last 8 months or so and this is fantastic. Great work.

[@michaelx5070]

Best afternoon at work ever.

[@chrismullan2125]

Listened to this as part of the podcast series. Absolutely worth taking the time to listen, Max and Callum are clearly well versed in this area and Cameron does a great job asking the right questions. Any further word on their potential book?

[@CapturingChristianity]

I loved listening back to what they had to say. So much useful information! I'll reach back out to them and see where we're at with it.

[@chrismullan2125]

Yeah I actually sat and took notes from this podcast series to help me along with my study in this area and thought it was great. It was an enjoyable listen with plenty of great insights! Would be keen to read the approach they were talking about taking with the book. You have some quality content on here with some great minds, just purchased knowledge of Christian belief after hearing you discuss about reformed epistemology which I hadn't came across before which has me intrigued. Added bonus that your setup is asthetically on point 👌 Keep it up!

[@enmanuelsan]

No ,they are not Paulogia just debunked them (again) kzbin.info/www/bejne/l5bJk2uKp6qEgqs

[@epiccollision]

Yeah this was a pile of xtain apologizing for how the bible doesn’t match history, but they then use it to describe history...the bible can’t even get the most basic historical facts correct, like the “exodus” that couldn’t have happened due to physics and human frailty...it’s just so sad, go join amway or something equally pathetic

[@Joshua-ev9uw]

​@@epiccollision So the creator of the UNIVERSE with trillions of trillions of planets, who CREATED physics and human frailty, couldn't do the simple events in Exodus? God doesn't obey physics......He is the CREATOR of it. It doesn't limit HIM. HE can limit IT though. He could change it too. To say you don't believe in God, who is described as all-knowing" and all-powerful because of the laws of physics is like saying you don't believe in quantum mechanics because of the laws of physics. That's a much, much better analogy that you could've used than simply "Exodus." Don't think there's a limit to the God we believe in's power.

[@RadicOmega]

Cameron I think it would be helpful to break this video up into five parts, I find it difficult to start a 3 hour video even knowing I can come back to it any time. Perhaps having a broken part playlist of this video will be helpful

[@CapturingChristianity]

RadicOmega It’s broken into 5 parts on our podcast. Check there.

[@adamclark1972uk]

​@@CapturingChristianityGood rebuff. Well played.

[@theberrby6836]

*Very off topic* but I like how the first part says "Cameron sips coffee".

[@heynow3497]

Argument demonstrating that the resurrection appearances of Jesus didn't necessarily have anything to do with reality. 1. Paul says Jesus "appeared" to him - 1 Cor 15:8. 2. The appearance to Paul was a personal "vision" or "revelation" from heaven - Gal. 1:16, Acts 26:19. 3. Paul uses his vision/revelation from heaven as a "resurrection appearance" - 1 Cor 15:5-8. 4. Therefore, visions/revelations from heaven counted as "resurrection appearances." If Paul can use a personal/subjective "revelation" (Gal. 1:16) as a "resurrection appearance" in 1 Cor 15:8 then it necessarily follows that early Christians accepted personal/subjective claims of "revelations" from heaven (experiences that don't necessarily have anything to do with reality) as evidence of the Resurrected Christ "appearing" to them. In other words, not actually seeing Jesus counted as "seeing" Jesus. Even though Jesus wasn't physically present, one could still claim that Jesus had "appeared" to them. Think about that for a moment. We can then proceed with the following argument: 1. Early Christians accepted personal/subjective claims of "visions/revelations" as "resurrection appearances." 2. Personal/subjective claims of visions/revelations don't necessarily have anything to do with reality. 3. Therefore, early Christians accepted personal/subjective claims that didn't necessarily have anything to with reality as "resurrection appearances." Obviously, you can see the problem now which calls into question the whole basis of the Christian faith. If the earliest evidence can equally referring to experiences that didn't have anything to do with reality the Christianity is necessarily false. www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/cchjqz/a_logical_argument_which_demonstrates_the/ Apologists like to appeal to the later gospel stories to prove the appearances were physical but these accounts are not firsthand sources and their historicity and authorship are disputed. Paul is the earliest and only undisputed firsthand source by someone who claimed to have "seen" Jesus when the appearance to him was a vision, not a physical encounter with a revived corpse. He makes no distinction between the "appearances" in the earliest eyewitness list which means apologists have no reason to think they were different than what Paul experienced. All the gospel resurrection narratives grow in the telling which is a sign of legendary embellishment. www.reddit.com/r/DebateAChristian/comments/6hj39c/the_resurrection_is_a_legend_that_grew_over_time/

[@chapter404th]

This is false. Yes Jesus appeared to Paul and He was blinded. Did God not also appear to others in the Old Testament through visions before? Paul was also the ONLY one Jesus appeared to in a vision so that he could do the will of God. The gospel to the gentiles was actually preached first by Peter if you read the whole book of Acts, before Paul. Therefore Paul's preaching of the gospel aligned with Peter's, who was actually physically there with Jesus before His resurrection and afterward, who also gave the account of the life and teachings of Jesus. Why don't instead of trying to waste energy "disproving" the Gospels, you actually try to seek the Truth? If you seek truth you will get it. I was like you at one point, but now I came to know the truth. I have no reason to debate with you, but the facts and evidence are there by guy. Be blessed.

[@heynow3497]

@@chapter404th Did Luke copy Ezekiel's vision when composing Paul's Damascus Road vision? Acts 26:13 About noon, King Agrippa, as I was on the road, I saw a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, blazing around me and my companions. 14 We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic, ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’ 15 “Then I asked, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ “ ‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,’ the Lord replied. 16 ‘Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen and will see of me. 17 I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them 18 to open their eyesand turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’ Compare this to Ezekiel's vision. Ez. 1:4 "I looked, and I saw a windstorm coming out of the north-an immense cloud with flashing lightning and surrounded by brilliant light. The center of the fire looked like glowing metal" Ez. 1:28 "Like the appearance of a rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day, so was the radiance around him. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord. When I saw it, I fell facedown, and I heard the voice of one speaking." Ez. 2:1 "He said to me: O mortal, stand up on your feet, and I will speak with you." Ez. 2:3-4 'He said: “Son of man, I am sending you to the Israelites, to a rebellious nation that has rebelled against me; they and their ancestors have been in revolt against me to this very day. 4 The people to whom I am sending you are obstinate and stubborn. Say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says.’ So here we have the shared common themes of a "bright light," "falling down and hearing a voice," then being told to "stand on your feet" in the same verbatim Greek στῆθι ἐπὶ τοὺς πόδας σου - Acts 26:16, Ez. 2:1 and being ordered to conduct missionary work. The paradigm here is an Old Testament "call vision" where a prophet figure is called upon by God and chosen to become a missionary and ordered to carry out a specific mission. We see similar stories in Job 4:12-16, Isa 6, Dan. 10:4-21, Ezek. 1:1-3:15, Amos 7.1-9:10, 1 Enoch 14, 4 Ezra 3:1-9, 25. So if Luke wanted to compose a fictional account about Paul and since he had access to the Septuagint, this establishes the plausibility for borrowing. Now, the identifiable theme in the Old Testament for a "call vision" is: 1. Address or call. 2. Answer with question. 3. Introduction with charge. The sequence shared between the Ezekiel vision and Paul's Damascus Road vision is as follows: 1. It's a "call vision" 2. It involves a bright light 3. The person falls down 4. He hears a voice 5. And is told to "stand up on his feet" in the same verbatim Greek. 6. Is charged with a specific mission Due to the amount of similarity it's equally likely that Luke was just copying Ezekiel's vision as it is that he was recording what actually happened to Paul. Therefore, the story by itself can't serve as evidence for its historicity.

[@chapter404th]

@@heynow3497 that doesn't disprove, if anything, it PROVES the theme of how God reveals Himself and approaches people to do His will, with Paul it was different because he was a persecutor of the early Church and in the end ended up killed for his faith. It's also very subjective and can't be proven as a fact or even logical at that. Like I said before and I'll say it again, you want to disprove the Word because you don't won't want it to be true. Thing is it's very much true, there is a Creator, because there's creation and there's a lot of archaeological evidence of places in the Bible that just show its validity. Hope you open your eyes up to the truth and actually seek TRUTH, not lies. Be blessed!

[@sandrabanks2392]

@@chapter404th If the evidence is equally explained by: A. Being a historical fact Or B. The author was just borrowing the "call vision" theme from Ezekiel 1-2 and Daniel 10 to create a fictional narrative then _you_ have the burden of proof is to demonstrate historicity is the more probable explanation. Just preaching and making baseless assertions won't work I'm afraid.

[@chapter404th]

@@sandrabanks2392 How about you don't pick and choose from the bible and use reading comprehension? There's a recurring theme in the Bible; God chooses people to bring them unto repentance. It's not that hard. What the other dude made was a baseless claim. Like I told him, as much time as you spend trying to disprove Him why don't you seek Him? Nothing you can do or say will hinder me, because I know what you say is false and I was at that state you are in before.

[@northernlight8857]

Just watched the clip with you and Braxton/Winger/Meme.Thank you for acknowledging that animals show signs that they have the capacity to suffer and feel pain. To recoqnize that it's a legitimate argument and that needs some consideration/thinking on the matter. I think you are a caring and compassionate person. That we dont agree on religion matters little to me. You are free and welcome to believe what ever you want. What matters the most to me is how we treat and coexsist with eachother and how we best represent our worldview in a compassionate manner. Have a nice day.

[@vjmout3410]

I’m a Christian as well, but I very much respect your kindness, I respect you too, and love and care about you, we need more people like you, you are better at being a respectful person than some Christians I know👍👍😊😊. If most people would respectfully disagree with other people, like you do we would not have the problems we see today. We would be a unit helping each other no matter the world view.🙂

[@Imheretohelpnhavefun]

Best content on this I have listened to. Congrats for the great work!

[@mansonandsatanrock]

So you think that word, whether spoken or written can actually prove a Resurrection? Claiming that the Resurrection is true (not just death and Crucifixion), is making a scientific claim, that a person can actually come back from the dead, for that, a hell of a lot more is needed than just what people claimed.

[@1969cmp]

Not everything can be proven in a scientific sense, that is repeatable and testable by other people. What is required is historical research or scientifically, forensic science. Did this or that happen? Did people witness event xyz.?

[@scientificmethod1409]

@@1969cmp Resurrection is very much a scientific claim because it contradicts everything we know about biology and mortality. If you're going to make such a bland claim that resurrection is real, then you have to provide a HECK TON of evidence to disprove everything we know of biology at the moment. So... good luck

[@1969cmp]

@@scientificmethod1409 Sigh....using the same bench mark, I assume you would not believe that humans evolved ultimately from a singled cell organism. The point of the Resurrection is that it is a miracle that defies normal biological trends. Of course, so does nonliving materials giving rise to life that eventually became us. It would seem that materialistic evolutionist and those who believe in The Resurrection, both worldviews have faith in miracles. 😎

[@mansonandsatanrock]

@@1969cmp Not when it comes to a scientific claim no. Before you can prove that Jesus resurrected, you have to prove it is even possible to happen to begin with. There is no way you can actually decide whether or not an actual coming back from the dead happened with forensics or historical research. This is a claim firmly in the realm of science.

[@1969cmp]

@@mansonandsatanrock I do not have to prove it to be scientific at all. It is not a testable, repeatable feat to be retested by others. It is simply a matter of history. It either happened or it did not. And seeing that you and I were not there and nor were the skeptics of the modern era who ignorantly spout 'if even Jesus ever existed' folly, we must go to the earliest known accounts. What do they say? This is forensic science, history.

[@mytwocents7481]

43:30 "you can't explain [belief in the resurrection] just by reference to what Jews already believed because everything in the Jewish beliefs before that suggested that that couldn't happen" And yet a quick look in Mark shows that Jews did in fact believe such things prior to Jesus' crucifixion: Mark 6:14-16: King Herod heard about this, for Jesus’ name had become well known. Some were saying, “John the Baptist has been raised from the dead, and that is why miraculous powers are at work in him.” Others said, “He is Elijah." And still others claimed, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of long ago.” But when Herod heard this, he said, “John, whom I beheaded, has been raised from the dead!”

[@vhawk1951kl]

As a matter of general commonsense and experience, Jewish or not, those that are dead and have been buried never walk and talk again because it is impossible, but it hardly matters because it is utterly irrelevant to whatever the way of christ teaches-for *screamingly_obvious reasons*

[@edgarmatzinger9742]

The title is: "LOADS of Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus" And then proceed to give no evidence at all. Not that surprising as there are no extra-biblical sources for the alleged resurrection of Jesus.

[@georgesmith4639]

I love the comments demanding extra biblical non-Christian sources. So would you believe if there had been extra-biblical sources? Really? As covered at 34:58 Josephus records that Jesus was known for working miracles. So do accept that Jesus really did miracles because Josephus said that? Or to believe that would you require that Josephus state the HE had seen the miracles himself? But for him to have witnessed a miracle he would have had to leave his home, family, income, etc and become a follower of Jesus, traipsing around the countryside until Jesus did a miracle. There was no TV coverage so nobody was watching Jesus from afar. So the best anyone could reasonably expect from a non-biblical source to ANYTHING Jesus did would be 2nd hand testimony from other people who were close enough to Jesus to see him face to face before his death (i.e. followers). Detached objective non-biblical sources would not even know what Jesus looked like, let alone personally witnessed him do something.

[@edgarmatzinger9742]

@@georgesmith4639 Well, Flavius Josephus wrote his texts ca 94-95 AD. But more importantly, Josephus was born in 37 AD and could thus never have been an eye witness. Josephus wrote in his _Testimonium Flavianum_ about Jesus being the messiah. However, most scholars reject the authenticity of that passage (due to christian redaction). But most scholars accept the authenticity of the passage about the crucifixion. So, in the end we have only the bible as a reference as Jesus being a miracle worker and have risen from the dead. And one source is no source.

[@georgesmith4639]

@@edgarmatzinger9742 No, it is invalid to reduce the source we do have to nothing. Maybe you could do that if there were clear motives for a deception. In the end we have one source proven to be valid based on tons of circumstantial evidence discussed in the video. No time now but I'll elaborate on this later.

[@edgarmatzinger9742]

@@georgesmith4639 No, the bible hasn't been validated using (circumstantial) evidence. Maybe, some historical data has been verified. But the miracles certainly haven't been verified.

[@manuelrosado9506]

The seneatorial docket is evidence of the Lord God Jesus Christs ressurection, I have it on my channel and the library of Congress control number that is the Public Record of Jesus Christ, God's ressurection. Jesus Christs ressurection is a fact.

[@DanielApologetics]

You'all know what's true? Jesus is risen. Which means - "Christianity is true!"

[@adamalexanderray]

What’s true is God according to the Bible is directly responsible for mass-murders, rapes, pillage, plunder, slavery, child abuse and killing (not to mention the killing of unborn children). I’m guessing we should just skip over those parts of the Bible right?

[@myopenmind527]

DanielApologetics so your just adding to the claim? Have any evidence?

[@DanielApologetics]

@@myopenmind527 Did you hear the 3 hours? Have you looked into all the evidences, what the skeptics says and what the Christians respond etc.? Explain the resurrection? What really happened, you think? Im asking, because your answer will show if you have done plenty of serious research of evidences from both Christian and non-christian sources, and how each side responds to their objections. I did street apologetics yesterday. One university student hold to the apparent death theory - which has so many fallacies that not even secular NT schoolars hold to them. If you rise from the death and leave such strong evidences, like for example making 2/3 of an empire who torture, persecute and kills all whom believes in you within 300 years - I will listen VERY carefully to all you say.

[@DanielApologetics]

This is just not right Adam. Have you seriously looked into what bible schoolars and Christians respond to this comment of yours? You can even find short videos here on KZbin. This is cherry picking of bible verses and out of context. Dont take my word for it, research it for yourself. For example the caananites, where doing all those thing you mention for 400 years, sacrificing babies - burning them on a bronze made god, called Molek. God used the israelites. "utterly destroy them all" ... yet some verse down, it says "dont marry them" so it was clearly hyperbolic language. But what I really should be asking is; Why is all those things evil according to you? If there is no God, there is no good, nor evil. We are just a cosmic accident, not acting, but reacting to our chemicals.

[@myopenmind527]

DanielApologetics I don’t have to explain the resurrection. Some would just have to give me good reasons to believe it ever happened. No good reasons have ever been presented to me.

[@HammerFitness1]

Do you see any sort of problem with having a belief (say that the Christian God is real), and having that belief from some sort of experience, and then looking for evidence in the philosophical sphere to support said belief? Seems to me to just be confirmation bias, along with finding evidence for your belief instead of following the evidence where it leads, as Craig likes to say

[@G8rfan61]

I agree. Every other truth I can conceive of came from some observation from some person(s). Not only could they demonstrate the newfound phenomenon to others, those that were curious to understand the phenomenon would look to study it and follow where the evidence lead them. Theism seems to me to contradict this. I have never observed a god, nor have known anyone to have observed a god, nor have been able to find any person's observation of a god that could be verified for validity, accuracy, and authenticity. The evidence is always anecdotal, revelatory, apocalyptic or prophetic - NEVER OBSERVABLE.

[@Gumpmachine1]

Mike Cordner true, has some of the indicators of being made up

[@HammerFitness1]

Mike Cordner all I’m saying is that Christians have these beliefs, and then they find evidence to confirm their beliefs. That doesn’t seem to be very honest to me

[@G8rfan61]

@@HammerFitness1 And I agree. Peace.

[@jack3400]

@@HammerFitness1 How did you come to the conclusion that Christians just try to find evidence that support them ? What evidence have you got for/against God, and where has it led you?

[@KKruse-jb4cu]

Very informative. Thank you.

[@friendlybanjoatheist5464]

Check out Paulogia’s KZbin reply to this. Pretty devastating. And what’s with Cameron referring to his medical doctor guest as a “ scholar“? Is Cam going Ravi Zacharias on us?

[@Peter-kl8jg]

Devastating for who? Is one guy's opinion worth more than all the collective knowledge on this video? His channel seems to be a rebellion against YEC in particular.

[@SomeChristianGuy.]

My brother. 3+ hours later, your interview ended, and I was like nooooo. Youre a great interviewer. Excellent interview, Im going to be recommending to everyone.

[@goldenalt3166]

1:57:45 Did he just claim that a Christian apologist, Paul, would not make claims that when verified turned out to be a lot less convincing than they implied? That's demonstrably false.

[@manuelrosado9506]

I have on my channel the seneatorial docket which confirms Jesus Christ, God's ressurection as part of public record and the Library of Congress control number as the official public record of Jesus Christ God's ressurection. Romans 10:9 if you wish to save your soul.

[@goldenalt3166]

@Vincent Kinney Joseph Smith is demonstration that Christian apologist can be conmen making up their visions.

[@goldenalt3166]

@Vincent Kinney What does that have to do with the claims of apologists? (aside from demonstrating that they are yet again exaggerations).

[@dana5757]

God Is Love!

[@thisslightlysweetlife3402]

To the grief hallucination hypothesis I can add a personal anecdote. I dated a guy from the age of 15-21. When we broke up I grieved for a while. It felt as if I were grieving someone’s death and, at one point, I had an auditory hallucination that he said my name. I was alone so it completely startled me. I thought he must have been in my apartment. I was very young so the age theory didn’t apply. I’ve always chalked it up to the grief and that it didn’t actually happen but given that we’re not mere material and we are souls I’ve sometimes wondered if he didn’t actually say my name where he was. He was also grieving. Maybe some hallucinations are supernatural manifestations of something real. Maybe it was just a girl hoping a guy was actually saying her name. I broke up with him though so that doesn’t seem likely. Who knows.

[@danielfarrell7187]

That's a fair example, however it doesn't explain multiple people having the same visual, physical and auditory account of Jesus at the same time. Also, you can acknowledge that your experience felt really but you know that it wasn't real. But all of the disciples were so sure that it was reality that they all gave their lives for the truth that Jesus was resurrected

[@ThePapsforshort]

3 hrs, though long, is a must-listen for its incredible detailed analysis of all written literature on the resurrection of Jesus. Unfettered biblical evidence with lucid commentary from 2 biblical scholars; a brilliant discussion. One of your best pintswithaquinis uploads 🙏..

[@willard73]

It makes a nice change to hear resurrection apologetics being honestly presented. Without the pre-existing investment in theism and biblical story, a naturalistic explanation of evidence is perfectly valid. Thanks both.

[@Jimmy-iy9pl]

I suppose you could posit some sort of unknown naturalistic explanation for the resurrection event, but why would you do that? What sort of explanatory value does an unknown naturalistic event that we know nothing about have over a theistic explanation?

[@AbandonedVoid]

@@Jimmy-iy9pl You don't need a naturalistic explanation of the resurrection, because the resurrection that occurs in Mark (and is copied by the other gospels) is a parable. Paul's writings about Jesus were about visions, not a resurrection, and he makes it explicit that his teachings differ from Peter's and James's.

[@davidlovesyeshua]

@@Jimmy-iy9pl Who said anything about a resurrection event? Willard said that a naturalistic explanation of the evidence is perfectly valid. The evidence for the most part is the texts we have, which you can certainly infer some physical facts from such as resurrection appearances to some of the apostles. The resurrection is a hypothesis to explain said evidence, and is not what a naturalistic explanation needs to account for. Rather a naturalistic explanation would be something like bereavement hallucinations, pareidolia, social memory contagion, stories changing over the retellings, etc., as far as resurrection appearances are concerned, and other known natural phenomena for other pieces of evidence.

[@Jimmy-iy9pl]

@@davidlovesyeshua Obviously, the Resurrection is being viewed as a rival alternative explanation against "naturalistic" explanations. If not, what's the point of contrast for naturalistic explanations? I highly doubt Willard believes the Resurrection is a naturalistic explanation.

[@davidlovesyeshua]

@@Jimmy-iy9pl Well yes, I thought you were misunderstanding things, but I guess I just didn't understand your wording. Also though I think you might be mistaken about something else: as I said in my first reply, there's no need for "unknown naturalistic" phenomena to explain the undisputed data, only some combination of known naturalistic phenomena. If what you mean is that we would need to posit some combination of known phenomena which is not a currently known combination, then yes that's kind of how history works. Historical events are in their combination at least unique in various respects compared to all other events. And given that we always have incomplete data about the past, especially before modern education/mass literacy/printing/etc., we won't ever "already know" the exact combination of known phenomena some unique event was actually comprised of. Instead we must reason about the most probable combination based on the evidence available. Now of course it's always possible that it wasn't a combination of known phenomena and some unique phenomena rather than merely combination was required for the event to occur, but this has a lower prior probability for obvious reasons (and is generally if not exclusively the domain of sciences, & preferably hard sciences, to discover). And it's also always possible that said unique phenomena is miraculous rather than natural, but this possibility is again less probable. And this is the case regardless of whether God exists, since God is at any rate not in the habit of commonly breaking (or circumventing or whatever) natural processes. The question is whether any theory utilizing only known phenomena explains the data sufficiently poorly to require unknown phenomena. The answer to this question is disputed, but I definitely lean towards the set of potential natural explanations having a higher final probability than a resurrection, regardless of whether God exists. At the very least, I don't think naturalistic explanations under predict the evidence so massively that the data become significant evidence for God since that would be necessary for the resurrection hypothesis can be invoked.

[@rickelmonoggin]

You don't need 3 hours of historical evidence for Jesus. If you had some absolutely definitive evidence for the resurrection, you could tell me about it within 3 minutes.

[@floydiandreamscapes5145]

And because atheists are so dense minute 4 you'd have needed even more evidence.

[@rickelmonoggin]

@@floydiandreamscapes5145 Sorry, but you need to do a bit better than making spiteful insults.

[@floydiandreamscapes5145]

@@rickelmonoggin apologize for being spiteful, but atheist types get off on mocking people who believe in the magical sky fairy as I've seen Him called many times. He's something to consider. 1. Jesus was an actual historical person. 2. 12 men were so convinced He was who He claimed to be 11 died as Marty's 2 of his younger half brothers became leaders of churches and died horrific deaths so if they had His body you couldn't get all of them to die 4 a lie. 3. Roman's hated Him and if they had His body would have produced it. 4 Jewish leaders hated Him and would have also. 5. Hundred claim to have seen Him after they saw Him put to death with their own eyes that's why the faith exploded in growth. That's a start if your truly interested

[@vladislavstezhko1864]

This is the best apologetic video I've ever seen

[@clevername00]

Did this book never come out? I’m looking for it currently and can’t find it anywhere. Help?

[@its__asedaaa]

Thank you for this!

[@scienceexplains302]

"If I had only the gospels, I'd still believe, because..." (a rambling description of gospels follows with no reason given to believe them). This was at least the second tease of "Here is the evidence," followed by no evidence.

[@1969cmp]

People have tried to discredit the Gospels and conducted extensive research to come out of the other end at least believing the historical nature of The Gospels, especially Luke's Gospel and his book The Acts of The Apostles.

[@scienceexplains302]

​@@1969cmp I know of a few cases of just the opposite, in general. Studying the Bible is a good way to become an atheist. Luke? The guy who apparently copied others? The guy who claimed to have researched everything, yet never gives a single source? That convinces you?

[@1969cmp]

@@scienceexplains302 The opening line of Luke and Acts gives us a hint of the type of narrative. The Gospel of Luke is an investigation by Luke. He most likely was not at the events but does an investigation like a historian of the events in The Gospel, interviewing people etc, as you'd expect from a historian. Then Acts flows on from there for which he is present in many of the events. Sir William Ramsey, the archeologicalist, tried to disprove Luke as authentic history but hìs investigation made him realise that Luke is a genuine historian of the highest caliber. Cheers.

[@scienceexplains302]

@@1969cmp No, maybe mediocre caliber. "Luke" does not tell us who he is, what his qualifications are for knowing or analyzing any data, what his sources are, how he decided to include some things and not others, or how he weighed different types of information. He seems to have copied portions of Josephus without attributing it. One clue of this is that he mentions two of the same people together, but he gets the chronological sequence wrong, but matching Josephus' order in J's writings. Luke gives every indication that he believes every theology-related claim that fit his narrative and discarded anything that didn't. If getting some geological names and Roman titles correct makes him a top-caliber historian, then certain fiction writers are Uber high-caliber, because the best authors research the daily lives of that time period and got history correct in much more detail than Luke did and without the ridiculous supernatural claims. "A World Without End" is a great example. How did Luke investigate 1:11 "Then an angel of the Lord appeared to him"?

[@1969cmp]

@@scienceexplains302 ....you are at odds with Ramsey and Wallace. And Ramsey did far more investigation into Luke than you or I will be able to achieve. 😎

[@mytwocents7481]

"What is one of the worst objections you've seen to the resurrection?" Worst, as in a powerful objection or worst, as in an unconvincing objection? Whatever Cameron was looking for, they certainly didn't consider any of my personal favorite objections: * Inconsistencies in the empty tomb narratives Matthew: The tomb-visiting women run into the risen Jesus while returning joyfully from the tomb. John: A tomb-visiting woman runs into the risen Jesus while weeping beside his tomb. Luke: No woman runs into the risen Jesus. Between Matthew, Luke, and John, the tomb angels never say the same thing twice. * Inconsistencies in the appearances to the male disciples Matthew records one appearance to the disciples on a mountain in Galilee while John records three such appearances, none of which matches Matthew's. The ascension is mentioned only by Luke. Pentecost is predicted in Luke, happens prematurely in John 20:22, and isn't mentioned at all in Matthew. The resurrection "evidence" is inconsistent enough to be self-refuting.

[@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns]

Cameron, maybe host a debate between Paulogia and Inspiring Philosophy (or WLC, or Boyd etc)?

[@andrewfisherman3811]

I keep thinking this channel is an atheist spoof! "The evidence is surprisingly strong!" What evidence? It's a matter of faith. You either "believe" it or you don't. I'm not sure these guys are really Christian at all!

[@Whatsisface4]

The more arguments there are that don't confirm God, and that you use so many here is a tacit admission that none do as then you would only need one, can be used as an argument against God.

[@Kinabus2]

Looking forward to diving into this! Thank you Cameron!😊

[@jimscobie6646]

I had a dog. 2 1/2 years ago. He wasn't feeling well. I went to work and when I got home He was dead. His body was extremely stiff and gross smelly liquids were seeping from his mouth and rectum. He was dead for probably 10 hours or so. Dead is dead. Cameron, I hope you have another career lined up because lying to people is not a good one.

[@bobbyfischersays1262]

I'm confused. Are you citing your anecdotal experience with your dead dog to prove that Jesus couldn't have risen from the dead?

[@blaisingm]

Anything that you have to keep repeating over and over to yourself to be true... is probably not true. Do people say to themselves... gravity is true? Over and over again? The Pythagorean theorem is true. The Pythagorean theorem is true. It’s true. It’s actually true. Sounds self deceptive, no?

[@onepiecefan]

blaisingm no but as an athiest I would say god isn’t real over and over again

[@MrWeedWacky]

@@onepiecefan An atheist says "I am not convinced by the claims and there is not enough evidence to conclude if a god exists"

[@patrickhall901]

@@MrWeedWacky, that sounds more like an agnostic rather than an atheist.

[@MrWeedWacky]

​@@patrickhall901 agnosticism is a person who says that you CAN NOT KNOW anything about the existence or nature of god and therefor does not care. you can be an Agnostic Atheist - saying there is not sufficient evidence because you can't get evidence. An Agnostic Theist - a person saying There is a god but I don't give a flying F because I don't know what he wants! a Gnostic Atheist - a person convinced a god can't exist... and a Gnostic Theist - a person convinced a god - their particular god in fact, exists. and then of course you can be either Atheist by itself, Theist, Deist, Polytheist, Gnostic and Agnostic all by themselves. cleared up for you?

[@patrickhall901]

@@MrWeedWacky, agnostic, a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God. That fits what your original comment said and the definition has nothing to do with not caring. Your definition for agnostic atheist is a "in your own words" definition is atheist. Gnostic atheist it's also just an atheist, no real difference in definition. You do know that all theses almost definitions you've given doesn't chamber the fact that you attributed the mindset of an agnostic to an atheist. Even if you had put agnostic atheist I your original reply, it still would fit. The person said "as an atheist" and your example of what you think one thinks doesn't for the actual definition.

[@michaelgkelly4009]

TRAGICALLY IMPORTANT: is for author to remember that a Roman platoon of 16 soldiers were dispatched to guard the tomb!!!

[@Greyz174]

Huh thats weird, i just checked mark luke and john and theres no hint of armed guards or a sealed tomb stone......

[@CausalityLoop]

If an ancient historian says, 'There is this group of people called Christians, and they worship this guy called Jesus they believe was resurrected by God,' I'm not sure how that's evidence for the resurrection. Seems to only be evidence that people believed the story.

[@myopenmind527]

Historians don’t accept the resurrection as an historical event. This entire podcast is perhaps the most pathetic special pleading I think that I’ve ever heard. I don’t think I’ve ever heard three people who palpably wanted to believe something were true. You can here the bias and lack of basic skepticism throughout the entire podcast. Here are very bad reasons to believe..... 1. Poor understanding of reality 2. Indoctrination 3. Confirmation bias 4. Emotional appeal 5. Fear 6. Weak epistemology 7. Guilt 8. Herd behavior 9. Narrow mindedness 10. Authority bias I think I heard them all at one time during the podcast. Listen hard and tick them off as you go.

[@myopenmind527]

R5 Zoeira BR Yes, I did. Yes, I can, all the usual things. Nothing new. Nothing which explains any of the supernatural claims.

[@myopenmind527]

R5 Zoeira BR they provided lots of narratives from lots of sources. They didn’t provide any #evidence.

[@myopenmind527]

Gabe Norman wasn’t so much a video, more a #podcast. No video footage in the duration of the talk.

[@G8rfan61]

@Gabe Norman I listened to this 'video' as well. Which ONE of the evidentiary presentations do you think best substantiates the claim that Jesus resurrected from death?

[@myopenmind527]

Gabe Norman that statement makes zero sense. Here’s why.... "God exists!" "Can you prove that?" "No" "Then I don't believe you"

[@ekulio]

Grave robbery seems super unlikely - he wouldn't have been buried with anything valuable, and body snatching wasn't really a thing prior to the 19th century when cadavers started to be in demand for medical study.

[@Greyz174]

Wasnt body snatching one of the first things the disciples thought of in the gospels?

[@monthc]

Just heads up if you're listening in the car, those sirens are in the video 😂

[@dana5757]

Господи, Помилуй! Господи, Прости!

[@jameslewis3793]

If bias for something automatically makes someone untrustworthy, then no one can be trusted, because we all have biases for and against things.

[@smariscal24]

that Bias" problem ( not your comment) is a non sense, we all have it, and nobody thinks that if is the truth the bias does not matter.

[@mzavros]

That's why we have science.

[@jameslewis3793]

@@mzavros Not sure what you mean by that. Science in and of itself does not stop scientists from being biased. It can be abused, buried or misused like any other tool that humans have developed.

[@mzavros]

@@jameslewis3793 then it is not proper science.

[@jameslewis3793]

@@mzavros You are correct. Just because people are scientists does not mean they are using proper science, just like someone being a preacher doesn't mean they are using their beliefs properly. People are people. Whether in the field of science or religion, we are all equally subject to bias.

[@justincole8039]

I love how they gave a counter argument and then just absolutely destroy it with evidence lol

[@TenTonNuke]

I don't understand. How are written recordings of what people of a religious cult believed, written decades after the supposed resurrection, "historical evidence" of the resurrection? Josephus didn't even believe it himself, which is why he remained a devout Jew.

[@terrylufseyiii748]

Some of the gospel writings came about as early as 2 years …. It wasn’t written decades after and it’s not a religious cult . It’s a belief in fact

[@daman7387]

Super comprehensive - this is a great way to get the important info in a detailed way without having to read a whole book. Not that it wouldn't be really great to read a book lol

[@StephaniePeeleIAm]

If Christianity is true, then you can prove that a man named Jesus is a mind that is responsible for the formation of our universe. How do you go about proving this?

[@Software.Engineer]

That would be a deduction from if Jesus is actually who he said he is. If Jesus' mind is God's concience then yes, it would have been there from the beginning obviously.

[@StephaniePeeleIAm]

@@Software.Engineer So how do you prove that Jesus is a being that created our universe? Can you step me through how this is proven?

[@eversosleight]

I'm catching this after work but was the archeological find of High Priest Caiaphas burial discussed? This is huge. Thanks for this!

[@damien9046]

Very informative discussion. There is no doubt that they both have put years and years into there research and are open minded enough to consider all the possibilities. I believe in Jesus and don't usually look at videos that "prove" he is real as I already know that he is real. But I am glad I watched this. Thanks.

[@petermetcalfe6722]

There clearly isn't any historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus. If there was there would be no atheists and only one religion. Using the Bible, which is all there is, is circular reasoning. This video works fine for the biased believers but not for evidentialists and rationalists.

[@leovere]

There clearly isn't any scientifical evidence that the earth is round. If there was there would be no terraplanists and everyone wound believe the earth is round. Using the science, which is all there is, is circular reasoning. Round earth books works fine for the biased round earth believers but not for evidetialists and rationalists.

[@jonyjony2499]

@@leovere it's going to be a really long time until you realize the amount of cognitive dissonance you've been had to marinate in, in order to be in denial that you very well could be on the "flat-earther" side. Have you ever asked yourself "but what if I'm wrong?!?" "How could I be proven wrong?!' Have you ever thought about how you straight up said "that's enough evidence for me" about some stories in a bronze age tribal book of fairy tales, where "God"s first murder was a dude who didn't want to cum in his sister-in-law ?!?

[@christianjohansen6182]

At approx 1:58 Pauls mention of Jesus revealing him self to 500 persons at once, are discussed. Here it's said that people in Corinth could just go and ask those eye witnesses. But I suspect that would not be easy for most people at that time. Travel to Judea and ask witnesses.

[@Jimmy-iy9pl]

Jews were obligated to visit Judea at least once a year to celebrate Passover.

[@username4483]

I swear the vast majority of the dislikes come from ppl who didn’t even watch the video 😂😂

[@lesblase3667]

@@HarryNicNicholas only a sinner could say that with their chest like you have sir. Takes one to know one. Your comment alone is revealing to who you are. A prideful man. Many men who have come before you who are just like you have all fallen short. You’re not saying anything at all. Yeah you’re a fool to think Christ never rose from the dead. Man you’d think people would actually figure it out by now if it were a lie. Christ dying for sins of man & rising again is the very fabric of our faith. You’ll have Christians line up to die worldwide then to deny He died & Rose again. It’s based on lies you say. According to who? You? Not a soul that’s ever walked the Earth that’s ever come close to disproving ANYTHING in the Bible. So who are you? You must be one of those smart dudes.. I’ll tell you this fact. You’ll die one day & leave this earth. When you die, the Bible will still be True. The Whole Truth. Bible doesn’t become True whether you believe it or not. It’s true regardless of ANY man. Cause all Men are appointed to live once before Judgment. I dare you to pick up that Bible & read it… coward. Or are you? Don’t be scared. One big reason people deny is they don’t want to answer to a high power. They don’t want the accountability of their actions on their hands. But no one is free from judgment. Not a soul.. A waste of life would mean having a Worldview like yours. That’s a waste of life. Life without God is a waste of time

[@angelamaryquitecontrary4609]

Well, I watched it and I disliked it intensely.

[@paulhayes5684]

​@@angelamaryquitecontrary4609That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But idk if you simply just jumped around and called it "watching the video"

[@angelamaryquitecontrary4609]

@@paulhayes5684 Oh dear, you really caught me out there! Yes, I just put on House of Pain and I Jumped Around until it was over. Then I went back - bitches be crazy! - to the job that requires me to speak and write fluently in three modern languages, and be able to read and understand Latin. The video to which you refer I found very basic, poorly argued, and travelled seamlessly from one logical fallacy to the next. Thin gruel, indeed.

[@mzavros]

Your "experts " are a full time doctor/hobbyist philosopher and a philosophy lecturer. Not a good start. Also, Paul specifically said he did not receive ANY info from men, nor did he know the alleged Jesus and his apostles. In fact he called those people false Xtians. Paul received his gospel from a celestial Jesus, much like the one in early Judaic mythos, without knowing him or his supposed life and death. Now how can all three of you get this wrong??? I wonder.

[@joshuavandernoord6912]

Where does he say this?

[@mzavros]

@@joshuavandernoord6912 "For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ gal. 1:11-12

[@joshuavandernoord6912]

mzavros carm.org/gospel-from-man-or-not

[@johnau8793]

Come? Repent to Holy Bible Rev.22:20 He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming soon." Amen. Come, LORD JESUS. THE GRACE OF THE LORD JESUS be with God's people.Amen." Prays Jesus Christ?

[@gnosticbooks207]

Before using the bible to prove the bible which is a incorrect method, you have to demonstrate a possibility for a god, and then determined which one is the right one.

[@gnosticbooks207]

@RetroMan creation is evidence that god created everything, you have no idea of what logical thinking is my friend Creation is not evidence that is your conclusion how do you back it up?

[@G8rfan61]

@RetroMan Then you would have to demonstrate that creation is possible. Have you ever personally witnessed any phenomenon (object, event, substance, entity, process, or being) that was created _ex nihilo_ - that is instantaneously pop into existence by the sole volition of a deity?

[@brightwellkunene8995]

@@G8rfan61 You exist, therefore creation worked.

[@Gumpmachine1]

Brightwell Kunene yeah not quite how scientific enquiry works.

[@G8rfan61]

@RetroMan Simple yes or no question: Have you ever personally witnessed any phenomenon (object, event, substance, entity, process, or being) that was created _ex nihilo_ - that is instantaneously popped into existence by the sole volition of a single deity?

[@OutRAjious]

The circular Stone would in all likelihood still be around in the field ?

[@blakemoon123]

Great talk. One thing - towards the end Calum Miller put forward what he considers to be a bad argument against the resurrection; ‘why didn’t Jesus appear to famous people outside the circle of his followers like Augustus Caesar?’ I don’t see why this is a bad question. I wish you had pressed him to explain why it’s a bad argument. Any ideas anybody?

[@ekpiyalichai]

This is awwwsmmm 🙏

[@gavinhurlimann2910]

Why are we counting? The first shall be last....

[@larrywaddell7332]

Because you get an extra star in your crown for being first.

[@rselwyn1000]

I am a follower of Jesus and believe God raised him from the dead because Jesus said he would rise again after being put to death and that His death was no ordinary death. His purpose was to give His life to pay the penalty for our sins that would have brought us death. We have the written eye witness accounts of this and His conversations with them. If however you limit God to just the natural realm, then yes people would have a problem accepting the resurrection and would not even accept the evidence for it. We have eye witness reports that attest Jesus was seen and appeared and spoke to people and laid out the Great Commission to tell the world about eternal life in Heaven being offered to those who would receive Jesus as their Savior and His Great sacrifice and redemptive act that allows those who believe and receive Him to have everlasting life in Heaven.

[@evanjobe9485]

I love the in depth look at this evidence.

[@davisgoodman6621]

You aren't citing evidence. You're doing textual criticism. You aren't verifying the sources (you didn't at all) you're just contrasting texts you assume to be reliable and magically conclude it is EVIDENCE ahhhhhhhhhhhhh!

[@davisgoodman6621]

@Have Mercy Quoting another irrelevant text from an verifiable book doesn't help.

[@davisgoodman6621]

@Have Mercy Well yeah if you think that crazy stuff people made up dozens of centuries ago...as truth...then yeah, your version of truth is "relevant". Why not.

[@davisgoodman6621]

@Have Mercy Good luck with your fairy tales, ancient superstitions and belief in a divine bearded man in the sky.

[@abcgamer2012]

In terms of evidentual history, when was the moment you knew for sure that Christianity was true or false and what did you do afterwards? I'm trying to find the truth in life (I grew up Christian) but now I'm really looking into it but it's hard. I want to believe but this is feeling like such an insurmountable task. Yet there are so many people, brilliant scholars and researchers, who are Christian solely because of the evidence but yet they don't directly point us to what their eyes saw that made them certain it was true. And yes, I see those links in the description and I will be checking them out but if there is anyone who can shoot me straight to the main point in terms of raw historical evidence (from non biased and trustworthy sources) then that would be greatly appreciated. I hope I'll get there some day very soon and if there really is a God and a hell then there has to be a 100% sure way of finding Him that He gave for us, even if it takes time and effort. And life itself even points to a higher Creator and it makes sense but again I need to see the raw evidence to be fully convinced because if there is no God then there's no reason or rhyme to life and to living. If there was no God then it doesn't matter what you do here, because once you die it's over. Nothing would happen afterwards and no one would remember anything, that means there wouldn't even be anything after death (like hell) so it wouldn't matter. And living for happiness or pleasure would also be in vain because you can't carry that over after death. Nothing would matter so then why continue on through all the evil and pain? But because we have this truth of reality in front of us then there must be truth and if there is truth then there is someone or something that is true which means everything else can't be true. Loads of people nowadays are into the whole “that's your truth but I have my own truth.” but that's not how life works. Since things are true, that means there is a truth and I wanna find it. Intelligence can't come from nothing like chance or evolution. Animals don't need the big idea brain storming thinking brains we have so why are we the way we are and not just like the animals around us? These big thinking brains aren't needed, in terms of evolution, for our survival. There are plenty of other animals out there that have less brain power and capability than us and they're not gone. There's so much everyday evidence that just screams a higher being in play. It's gonna take time but I just want the truth. Whatever it be. Christianity makes sense, but is it true? That is the question.

[@paulhayes5684]

Who knows, we might find raw evidence in the coming years. I'm struggling as well but I'm pushing forward. One thing you have to keep in mind is that the Bible is 2000 years old. Finding "raw" evidence is going to be difficult depending on what you call "raw" evidence. Considering how ancient the Bible is, the amount of accuracy is amazing, yes there are a few mix ups but remember that mankind wrote it.

[@abcgamer2012]

@@paulhayes5684 I see what you mean and I understand. The thing I don’t understand is, if it truest comes from the true one God, then why is there nothing truly solid to find? Why is it all whispers, somewhat accurate, probable? I mean we’re talking about the one true God who is trying to save everyone but only if they just believe… but why believe something that has no true definitive sources even if it was written by man because it was written through man by God. I hope that one day we really find out what’s going on whether it’s in the life or after death because I just feel like I lost something so great. It’s hard to move on after believing for so long (born into it).

[@susanwilson1073]

It says he was stabbed with a sword and blood and water came out.....not just stabbed but in a specific way.... He was dead...

[@seanjohnson2396]

This was great but I couldn't tell them apart AT ALL 😂

[@donaldjacobson4184]

I am a psychiatrist. There is no psychiatric explanation for the experiences of the witnesses of the resurrected Jesus. You did a great job explaining things. I am retired with over 30 years of clinical practice experience in the area of severe mental illness

[@frankvandermerwe1487]

Here's an explanation: They weren't telling the truth.

[@donaldjacobson4184]

@@frankvandermerwe1487 Lol And they worked their whole lives for a Lan intentional lie and then died for it. A lie that allowed them to perform miracles in the name of God? Try again

[@frankvandermerwe1487]

@@donaldjacobson4184 Your entire argument is a fallacy. 1) We can't even verify that this was a legitimate event. All we have is text written by people saying this event occurred. Extraordinary claims, require the same level of evidence. A book with words doesn't meet the criteria. 2) People have died and fought for what they believe in throughout history - this is does not mean that what they believed in was legitimate or real. Edit: I must apologize, i see now my comment made it out to be they intentionally lied. I don't doubt they were convinced in their they saw Jesus.

[@ishikamathew2976]

You should check Jordan Peterson out

[@frankvandermerwe1487]

@@ishikamathew2976 Lol

[@Ten80pete]

I'm sorry, did he say, "It would take quite a lot to get people to believe in a resurrection that sincerely."? I mean, I know a LOT of Christians who have come to believe in a resurrection, and I would venture to guess that most of them believe it pretty darn sincerely. You can get anyone to believe almost anything, especially if they want to, or if you begin telling them at a young enough age. Please don't use any argument that relies on how incredulous people are when you, yourself have come to believe in the exact thing you're doubting others would believe in.

[@EvangelicalEddie]

Looking forward to watching this tonight!👍

[@rafaeliacsity5315]

54:16 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 is the Gospel by which we are Saved, tells us in 1 Corinthians 15:2 and Paul said it himself that he was never taught it by man, nor received it of man, but by Revelation of Jesus Christ (Galatians 1:12-13). We are saved by what Jesus did for us: His Bloody Death for our sins, Burial and Resurrection and by putting our complete faith and trust on it, to believe that Jesus did it for you and what He did alone saves you, none of your good works. 02:03:19 Peter isn't the Rock, that is Jesus, Himself, according with Matthew 21:42-46. God Bless.

[@OutRAjious]

Listening at Easter time …

[@jethrobodine5422]

Well done! Strong support for Christian resurrection doctrine by two scholars of history, ... wait, ... by two archaeologists, ... uh, ... that is to say rather, by two cultural anthropologists, ... well, ok, one guy is a medical doctor and the other is a lecturer in philosophy of, ... wait for it ... religion. Completely objective scholars who are properly credentialed to speak competently on the subject matter.

[@LindeeLove]

Cameron, you need to be a man and support your family by getting a legitimate job, and just make this KZbin thing a hobby.

[@CapturingChristianity]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facepalm

[@generalkenobi6792]

The irony.

[@HermaeusMoron]

🤡🤡🤡

[@mbforwood6926]

What is the name of the guests books please? Have googled on Amazon and can’t seem to find it at the moment.

[@KeithBujack]

That's one of the most ridiculous things that I have heard when someone is evaluating the historical claims of the resurrection. "One must take into consideration whether or not a good god would raise Jesus from the dead." Man, talk like that is forced upon someone with an evidence bag filled with 2nd and 3rd hand accounts! All of which were made by unknown anonymous people, except for Saul, who probably had a nervous breakdown (from murdering Stephan) whilst en route to bind and possibly kill more people who he believed were distorting Judaism. Keep that in mind. Paul was the kind of guy who had no problem with killing people who believed differently than him. What do you think of a character like that? Trustworthy? A good kind gentle soul?

[@jtcen1215]

Zeus is true. I know he's the true king of the gods. I read about him in a book once.

[@RestlessMonarch]

Zeus is a fallen angel or demon.

[@toddgeffken1915]

Im sure you did not listen to even a fraction of this interview to make such a goofy statement! There is a whole whole lot of very interesting and very well studied evidence here, not even close to just someone basing their proof on a single book! Also, Zeus was just a fallen angel worshiped as a god, Jesus is God, The Creator of the lower case gods!

[@japexican007]

Lol good one, tell me another played out atheistic response that no one takes seriously

[@essemmanessel7362]

Todd Geffken :D

[@YOSUP315]

@Streetsdisciple001 God is perfectly loving, but he's also perfectly just. Christ's sacrifice on the cross is the greatest intersection of his perfect love with his perfect justice known to man. And Christ's teachings and resurrection justify faith that we are saved through his sacrifice. If you don't have that faith, especially now you know the gospel, then you're not able to accept God's forgiveness--heck you're not even sorry.

[@kenbarber6592]

“Oh, sorry, you startl...startled me.” Cringeworthy. But press on, the introduction does not do justice to the subject matter that follows.

[@kenbarber6592]

It is because I cared about the whole video that I shared my criticism.

[@cjgino311]

Need to get this discussion on Joe Rogan. I think too many people these days have been brainwashed into thinking Jesus is a lie.

[@skybrotha1042]

Um…..isn’t it the other way around?

[@AP-Design]

You need more subs, my guy. And I need that mug.

[@CapturingChristianity]

Here you go! teespring.com/stores/capturing-christianity

[@georgemakary5127]

You could always look at the Sanhedrin transcripts. They spoke about a man named Jesus who did magic and sorcery and lead the people of Israel astray that’s a non-Christian a non-Christian source.

[@mattpowell3543]

What I have learned is that critics do not care about evidence. I can give them genetic evidence to prove Biblical Creation is true and they will just ignore it or even worse get mad. You would think that maybe an old Christian would be stoked to find evidence to get their faith back, but it seems that their heart grows cold and there is no light left in it.

[@G8rfan61]

I certainly care about evidence. What piece of evidence do you think best substantiates the claim that Jesus resurrected from death? I would like the opportunity to show you that I will not ignore any presentation that you suggest substatiates this claim.

[@enmanuelsan]

Two experts IN TOTALLY UNRELATED FIELDS lol seriusly dude where does all that confidence comes from ? If I had such obvious flaws in my arguments I woulnt be so confident .Also Paulogia and Godless engineer already debunked you

[@SarumChoirmaster]

Note to one of the comments of the scholar - Jesus said that HE has the power and authority to lay down his life and to raise his body. Thus God the Son raised his own fleshly body.

[@paulhayes5684]

Not exactly

[@affinity1746]

Very good video. It’s really convincing. Thank you for posting this

[@nasasjanitor994]

@@vejeke Paulogia, seriously dude?

[@johns6704]

Paulogia isn't really making any arguments just highlighting concessions, ripping a few things out of context, and then ignoring everything else.

[@charlesgugins381]

This Dr. Max is out in left field. You need to know what Jesus said about his resurrection and why God had to resurrect Jesus and what it means. Remember this is a supernatural event so all your theories about whether it is possible are meaningless.

[@gowdsake7103]

If we just take that, Jesus as god or the son of god so therefore any supposed death is fake !

[@neola1712]

Jesus instead of giving any evidence they have they talking ab “can’t talk ab that without talking ab what type of person that makes god likes to raise him from the death” it’s like a phd protect her thesis by “before give you the number let me tell you why you should believe that I’m right” 😭

[@Ichthus77Apologetics]

Can you do a follow up or add onto the end of this somehow doing the probability thing you do at the end of the 100+ arguments for God’s existence? (In answer to Hume on miracles.)

[@enmanuelsan]

Debunked by Paulogia (again) kzbin.info/www/bejne/gJjFi2yjaZd4jKM

[@BraxtonHunter]

Second

[@GabrielEddy]

Just wait until they find out that Jesus died from a stab wound from a rogue lance! 😂 αλλος δε λαβων λογχην ενυξεν αυτου την πλευραν και εξηλθεν υδωρ και αιμα “But another took his lance and pierced his side, and out came water and blood.” (Matthew 27:49) Found in manuscripts א B C L U Γ vg slav etc. 🤫

[@Kacecool518]

That's how they made sure crucifixion victims were truly dead before taking them down. Water and blood coming out of Jesus' pierced side is pleural effusion due to hypovolaemic shock.

[@panemetcaseum3102]

Thanks Cameron

[@les2997]

Hume: Miracles don't happen; therefore, they don't happen. This sounds like a circular argument.

[@TyrellWellickEcorp]

Les Pretty much all humes arguments fail miserably

[@folkie099]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/aJm0cpxmqpqFqZI

[@mattsmith1440]

I don't really think you need to make an argument against miracles at all. My attitude is as follows: if you believe a miracle occurred, and wish I do too, provide some convincing evidence. Stories in a book about people claiming to have witnessed a miracle are, for me, entirely insufficient.

[@les2997]

@@mattsmith1440 Would you consider the origin of life from non-life a miracle? It happened once and it never happened again. The entire food industry relies on the assumption that this is not possible. The origin of the Universe from nothing looks to me like another miraculous event.

[@brightwellkunene8995]

@@mattsmith1440 Miracles address personal situations at least those recorded in the Bible, and once addressed the personal situation may no longer exist e.g. a blind man gaining site will not be able to prove he was initially blind especially to people who never knew him when he was blind (you). Perhaps you want evidence delivered where it is foolish to require any. The absence of evidence itself does not prove that the miracle on an activity never happened.

[@medleysa]

Btw, Christianity is true.

[@G8rfan61]

Are you meaning that Christianity as an established religion is true (I have yet to hear anyone challenge this claim) or that the claims presented *_within_* Christianity are true?

[@AsixA6]

BTW, Christianity is true garbage.

[@tsdobbi]

I made it about 25 minutes before I was bored to death, but I'm here, I resurrected. I mean its true, I'm giving you a first hand account.

[@japexican007]

Tim any evidence for your claim or was this point just to show how much of an idiot you are and how seriously someone should take you and that would be not very

[@paulhayes5684]

So clever 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@thisslightlysweetlife3402]

Was Paul grieving, or the 500?

[@rodneysettle8106]

How many actual historians( not religious historians) believe this event took place? What is the evidence that a person can be or has been brought back to life after being dead for 3 days?

[@JoshuaTCoe]

Rodney Settle Even respected atheist/agnostic scholars who study these issues agree that, historically, Christ’s early followers had experiences which they thought were appearances of the risen Jesus. The debate, therefore, at the highest level of scholarship, is now about explaining these experiences. Were they hallucination? Did Jesus actually rise from the dead as He predicted? Or is there some other explanation? This is the question the debate has shifted to. Questions of did Jesus exist, was He crucified, and did His followers see Him after His death have now been answered unequivocally yes, yes, and yes. Explaining the data is the issue now.

[@ballasog]

@@JoshuaTCoe What we do, know, though, is that a dead guy didn't come back to life.

[@JoshuaTCoe]

@@ballasog What we do know, is that Jesus is the Christ and He's Risen. What we do know is that thousands of people have testified to seeing hell, heaven, angels, demons, and Jesus Christ Himself. What we do know is there are 28 million evidenced near death experiences that PROVE life after death exists. What we know is that objective morality exists and if objective morality exists God must exist. What we know is that our universe is so finely tuned for life that to believe there is no designer is absurd probability-wise. What we do know is that everything that begins to exist has a cause and the universe began to exist. What we do know is that Jesus existed, died by crucifixion under the reign of Pontius Pilate, and His early followers had experiences they believe were appearances of the risen Jesus. What we know is that every naturalistic materialist explanation of the historical facts, facts which are agreed upon by virtually all scholars, fall flat on there absurd face. What we do know is that these early followers died for their testimony. What we do know is that liars make poor martyrs. What we do know is that hallucinations don't happen in groups. What we do know is that corroborating eye-witness testimony is evidence in the US court of law and that's precisely what we have here. What we do know is that approximately 75% of scholars who study these issue agree the tomb was empty. What we do know is that atheists can't account for their conflicting BELIEFS in the value & dignity of man and that men are just globs of stardust. What we do know is that despite the wealth of evidence and the many compelling reasons to believe, the Atheist community denies what they know to be the truth because they hate the truth. What we do know is that, "Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish." What we do know is that a pithy bon mot doesn't prove your point, it demonstrates your lack of a compelling argument. What we do know is that Jesus is coming whether you like it or not. What we do know is that you need to repent, wake up, and stop playing around because eternity is on the line. That's what we know if you really want to be technical.

[@JoshuaTCoe]

@Dirk Knight Historical evidence isn't "made up" just because you don't like it.

[@bobbyfischersays1262]

@@JoshuaTCoe straight fire. Great read