William Lane Craig Destroys Paulogia - Empty Tomb Part 2

[@plasmaballin]

If someone tried to use Tacitus's writings to prove that Tacitus's writings were accurate, it would indeed be worthy of a "Tacitus tells me so".

[@Paulogia]

so true!

[@simongiles9749]

It'd be like claiming that Fargo and Blair Witch Project were based on fact because the films tell you that they are.

[@sbushido5547]

@@simongiles9749 Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. You mean to tell me that Fargo *_isn't_* a documentary?

[@thecloneguyz]

That reminds me of flat earthers trying to use science to disprove the round earth

[@thecloneguyz]

I'm still waiting on a religious person to explain this to me- "Any likeness or representation of him that is not him is blasphemy" 'ANY' 'REPRESENTATION' So anything that you point to or claim that represents God to you is actually Blasphemous according to your own Bible scriptures! Like CHURCHES, CROSSES, BIBLES, STAINED GLASS WINDOWS, "HOLY BREAD" , HOLY WATER" ALL BLASPHEMOUS ACCORDING TO THEIR OWN SCRIPTURES!!!

[@OverlordShamala]

So... in the end. Craig's only proof for his arguments can indeed be summarized as: _"For the bible tells me so..."_

[@Paulogia]

That's how it seems to me too.

[@imjessietr29]

OverlordShamala considering how he doesn’t seem to have paid attention, like with the women issues, the Bible clearly doesn’t tell him so

[@cliveadams7629]

Did he ever have another argument?

[@robertmiller9735]

@@imjessietr29 Isn't it really "For my denomination's official interpretation tells me so"?

[@Dragonmaster0118]

And he doesn't even realize that is how it is

[@harrypothead42024]

Your arguments must have ring their Bells pretty good. I have never seen William Layne Craig answer anybody's counter argument, to his nonsense. You should take pride.

[@stevegeorge6880]

Having just started this, I am expecting more of the same ad hominem / genetic fallacies from Craig who always derides those in other people's work.

[@Amoth_oth_ras_shash]

and we where not 'disepointed' in that regard..sighs..so many resources wasted by the reality devorced behavior that sort of theism indoctrinates people into , the incredible health care you could have if all wealth put on tempels been used for medicine instead.

[@sandakureva]

"Lel what's with this millenial hipster? Am I right?" -Craig, probably.

[@CausalityLoop]

"Because a few people told different versions of a story several decades after it allegedly happened, we know it's not made up." - The foremost defender of the Christian faith

[@dodbell]

It is crazy int it....the only time I might say that it is an interesting arguement is in criminal activity and the statements of witnesses or suspects....suspects especially....if they all tell the EXACT same story of events then I might become suspicious. 4 people recalling an event - say, what happened at a party - will all recall it different. Inconsistencies in recall do reflect a natural experience.;...I'm explaining it badly but I think you will get what I mean

[@lil-al]

That would work in a court of law, i see it now...

[@Kip_Novak]

It's funny because Mormons use the exact same argument for Joseph Smith's 'First Vision'. Different conflicting accounts exist, but this is seen as proof of authenticity LOL

[@chaldavgc]

Sam Clayton Oh shit I’m a former LDS believer and this comment really made this click on another level. How the frick did “conflicting accounts” come to constitute any type of “evidence”??? On top of that The comparison mormons make to the Bible is even more awful. At least the Bible had different AUTHORS. But the same guy recounting his own experience in 4 DIFFERENT ways? The only way they can effectively convince people thats “faith-promoting” is by assertion that it is. And, whelp, they’re pretty good damn at convincing by assertion. Glad I escaped that hell logic.

[@QJ89]

With Superman, his powers were reigned in during the eighties, doing away with some of the more ridiculous stuff he had previously done. No such reverse conflation was ever given to Jesus, making what he did still dubious to this day.

[@cornlips7247]

Wow what a great video! I have really been enjoying this series so far. I can not wait for the next part.

[@huffpappy]

Agreed

[@EthelredHardrede-nz8yv]

@G Will "Dr. Craig has demonstrated that PauLudicrous doesn't know He did no such thing. "Any even reasonably intelligent and knowledgeable person who's seen Dr. Craig's response-video won't take PauLoaduhcrap's ASS-ertions all that seriously anymore; Any gullible person is the actual case. " I think it's highly unlikely that Dr. Craig will get into a "video-war" with PauLoser (" Just as he will never come near Sean Carrol again, and for same reasons. WLC came out badly. " Essentially, these are just butt-hurt, Oh you must a RightWingNut™ Christian, they are obsessed with butts. Kind of the Rev. Haggard, well butts and drugs. Oh I see you are at that age. The age of butts so you are definitely projecting. "After all, how can an atheist believe in a loving god when he hates himself? " You are projecting your own self hatred. "What they persistently fail to realize is that hating god " People, adults anyway, don't hate imaginary beings. ", who cry and scream with either the all-caps. "FREAKING FURY" or Exc!amat!on Po!nts!!!!!, Those tend to be Creationists. "1. God is a myth made up by sheep trying to control other sheep. " Well it is certainly possible that some of the Bible was written for that purpose. But not by sheep, you made that up. By shephards of the sheep that they wanted to sheer. "2. It doesn't matter that I'm 13, I'm still smarter than you. " I see no evidence that you are smart, you do seem to be 13, its that BUTT obsession. "3. I haven't told my parents that I'm an atheist yet, because I'm still 27 and don't want to be forced to move out for being a genius. So you are living with your parents and have no guts. "But, hey; don't let me disrupt the pseudo-intellectual circle-jerk here, Oh you are not interrupting, you are a prime example of what sort of person would think that WLC is doing well at this. " Keep "fighting" the "good" "fight". [of bullshit propaganda and frivolous litigation against Christianity/belief-in-god]" Well you not fighting a competent for belief in a long disproved religion. Even WLC does not believe in the Great Flood and I bet that you did not know that. The reason he tries to rewrite the Bible on that silly flood is that is so clearly false and just one of many silly stories in the Bible. Ethelred Hardrede

[@cornlips7247]

Hahahahahahaha I only read half of the first paragraph and was laughing so hard I could not continue. .

[@NotCapitalist]

10:24 I really appreciate Paul's ability to simply admit when he is mistaken or misspoke, correct the mistake, and move on (and also to acknowledge when his interlocutor makes a good point). For something that *shouldn't* be a big deal remarkably few people do it *coughCraigcoughcough*

[@acronen]

I'm glad you made Craig bounce around like a Canadian South Park character. That's all he has reduced himself to, a cartoon. And a dishonest one at that.

[@Bill_Garthright]

They look and sound like Beavis and Butthead to me. Admittedly, I haven't seen that much of either of them.

[@acronen]

@@Bill_Garthright Beavis and Butthead had deeper conversations with more honesty than this mess of a duo.

[@tompaine4044]

+1 for the slightly smug smile on Craig's face

[@BigJayKaner]

@@Bill_Garthright They need TP for their bungholes...

[@SlowDay1651]

He's easily my favorite apologist. Favorite meaning I hate him the most.

[@Enragedguy24]

Ravi and his apologetics went down around 2003/4, when we discovered tiktaalik, and creationism lost in court. Lenox and his apologetics became obsolete when people caught on to the fact that no matter the question he always had the same answers which always avoided the question. His eloquent semiotic sleight of hand was seen through and he faded into obscurity. Craig is the last of the big three who remains. And in no small part is his fading relevance undermined by your work Paul, way to be man, way to be. All that Craig has is an eloquent circumvention of revealing his biases when discussing evidence. You and POZ seem to be the only people with enough patience to dissect this new spin on the Gish Gallop. It's almost a shame I had to go through it by myself when falling from faith given how well you guys have been doing it.

[@Paulogia]

Thanks for the kind words. I'm so glad we all found our way out.

[@tonybanks1035]

Enragedguy24 This whole chanel is quite self deluded I can see.

[@toddws2683]

@@tonybanks1035 what are you trying to imply?

[@tonybanks1035]

Todd Ws That whenever a theist looses an argument, anti theists get over excited and re write the whole history. No, Lennox didn't become obsolete. Also he wrecked Hitchens and Krauss and did pretty good against Dawkins. Same with WLC, he got wrecked by Carroll, but wrecked Hitchens and had a modest victory against Harris. Stop being dogmatic or team supporters. It only brings subjectivity and delusions.

[@toddws2683]

banks , debates can be won by the person who uses their techniques the best, it can appear the one holding the least evidential position has won, debates are more for entertainment

[@johnjordan3314]

Since I've begun studying this whole "existence of God" thing for about the past year now, I am struck that the big shots on the Theist side like WLC and others, have no better arguments or explanations for the existence of God than the regular church pastor or the typical street preacher. I can see why Matt Dillahunty says he doesn't even prep for these debates because nothing new can be thrown at him. Still like any gish gallop - picking it apart to really show that nothing is there takes a lot of work and I'm very grateful that Paulogia does such a thorough and thoughtful job of it.

[@SadisticSenpai61]

Honestly, that's why picking them apart in this kind of format is much more constructive than live debates in my opinion.

[@johnjordan3314]

Tensai55 totally agree.

[@SadisticSenpai61]

@@johnjordan3314 That said, I'm now going to watch Hugo and Jake debate Kent Hovind AKA the broken record. I don't think it will be constructive, but it should be amusing. Unfortunately, their jokes are going to be toned down cuz Kent thinks he needs a live studio audience of brainwashed high schoolers. Normally, I watch debates with some kind of alcohol, but my sore throat would not like me if I did that, so I'll pretend my apple juice is wine or something.

[@shinobi-no-bueno]

It also seems odd, that if they were truly such arbiters of infinite wisdom that they should be focusing so much time and energy on... some guy who used to be a Mennonite

[@Diggnuts]

Indiana Jones and the Empty Tomb Of Jebus! This cadaver belongs in a museum!

[@KneedleKnees]

I'd much rather have had Indiana Jones and the Empty Tomb over Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

[@GuitarDog_atx]

@@KneedleKnees Thanks to the Crystal Skull movie, I now know that if there's a nuclear blast, all I have to do is hide in the fridge. And after the explosion, take a shower - and I'll be just fine.

[@tctheunbeliever]

WLC is probably one of the "top men" working on it.

[@Diggnuts]

WLC already has permanent resting melted face as if he looked directly into the arc of the covenant, so yeah.. Checks out.

[@incredulouspasta3304]

"Augustus rose from the dead, this I know, for Suetonius tells me so" The meter needs some work, but I think it could catch on.

[@ParanormalEncyclopedia]

Julius ascended to Olympus to join his father the god Apollo. Not only does Augustus tell us so we call the event haileys commet.

[@alchemicalheathen]

Even as an atheist, I used to respect WLC (albeit without delving too much into his material), but watching him recently and breaking down his arguments shows me how disingenuous he is. I'd love to see a live discussion with you two to address very specific points (since I realize it takes an immense amount of research on your end).

[@SlowDay1651]

Just watch the debates between Craig and the late great Christopher Hitchens ... the idiotic leaps of logic are so laughable he's exposed for the totally unwarranted arrogant little shit head he is.

[@bradywomack9751]

If we had won WWII as well as WLK 'won' this argument we'd all be speaking German now. I see now why he won't debate professional debaters and I prophesize he won't debate anyone after this.

[@klobiforpresident2254]

You're forgetting the true enemy, the one who lost both world wars: Bulgaria.

[@tonybanks1035]

Brady Womack This whole channel is quite self deluded.

[@rembrandt972ify]

@@klobiforpresident2254 Those bastards!!

[@notwhatiwasraised2b]

WL Craig

[@WillBravoNotEvil]

tony banks Ungrounded assertions are the rhetorical equivalent of having said nothing at all.

[@wheat3226]

The real truth...Paulogia destroys Billy Craig. And didn't you miss a "fails to appreciate" at 17:02?

[@laurajarrell6187]

Paulogia, This was good, too. WLC, like all of them, just contradicts himself, even from one or two sentences ago! I guess it is how they've trained their brains to compartmentalize. And I love that more than one apologist is finding you a big, bad threat! They're right, your in depth research, calm delivery and ability to 'stay on course', beats theirs every time. So congrats, Paulogia the thorn👏💝✌!

[@nobs4898]

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. www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/cchjqz/a_logical_argument_which_demonstrates_the/

[@JimmyTuxTv]

if Satan can appear as an angel of light 2 Cor 11:14, bet he could pull off a good deceptive Jesus vision too... described as a vision of light?

[@stevewarren4813]

Craig's dishonesty, as always, is gobsmacking.

[@notwhatiwasraised2b]

might he believe what he's saying?

[@lil-al]

@Alec Wood He doesn't believe it. He has had his arguments debunked to his face, in writing, on line, everywhere, so many times, he knows he is shilling BS. He simply doesn't care. He likes the money.

[@DebatingWombat]

@@lil-al You forget that Craig has that ultimate trump card “The witness of the Holy Spirit in his heart” that defeats any and all evidence he might encounter as merely “contingent” (i.e. temporary) and thus bound to eventually be overturned in a way that will definitely vindicate Craig’s beliefs. You see, it’s literally impossible that Craig “I’m a professional philosopher” Craig can be wrong according to this line of “reasoning”.

[@CJ-sw8lc]

Maybe he doesn't accept the debunking because he has good reasons not to?

[@oldnsleepysmitty5503]

Creepy fucking christians

[@sigslaughter2709]

As a kid of 11-13 years old i was VERY religious. I was a born again baptist. I was told and taught many things i later found to be false. Many of which were very damaging to my young mind. I stayed up on many occasions at night crying. Crying because i truly believed that many of my friends and family would suffer until the end of time in hell because they didnt believe. I was taught that faith is an act of will. That if your faith is strong enough no evidence no matter how surmounted or strong would falter your beliefs. I was literally taught at a young age to deny evidence that opposed my beliefs. I went to several churches in this time where critical and analytical thinking were not only not encouraged but were infact condemned by the leaders i looked up to at that time. I was told that i was born broken. I was born into sin. And that i needed to beg forgiveness for the crime of simply existing. I was taught that genesis was historical fact. That the Noahakian flood fable was a true historical event. That dinosaurs and man lived together and that dinosaurs were even on Noah's ark. I was told that evolution is a lie. That man was created in it's current form roughly 6000 years ago(different churches had different opinions on this the range i hears frequently was that the earth is between 6000-10000 years old) I was on many occasions threatened with eternal hellfire on my undying soul for simply acting out like any kid that age does. There is so SO much more that i could write here. Is christianity dangerous? That's the wrong question. How dangerous is christianity is a far more appropriate question. Christianity is a horrible cult of indoctrination, reality denialism, and down right child abuse. The mental scars from what i endured during my time as a christian will always be with me. They are my metaphorical cross to bear. And i write this in vein knowing that the ones who really need to hear this will never see it. Do not raise your kids in any church. It is intelectually damaging child abuse. Instead teach them about the world. Open their minds to any and all possibilities. But don't put your beliefs onto them.

[@cornlips7247]

This sounds very familiar. I started attending a baptist church and youth groups with my aunt and uncle around the same age. It is one of the darkest times in my life. They masked their indoctrination and mental abuse with bonfires and the kinds of trips children that age love. When I think about the pain I went through for years after struggling to break free from those beliefs it blows my mind and still makes me afraid occasionally.

[@freightshayker]

@SIG Slaughter What was the declaration made over you as you were water-baptized ?

[@jonsnor4313]

Sorry, even in less intense environment telling that a kid is damaging, like the hellfire image thats among homophobia the worst the catholic church does independent how religious the area is. Not counting the abuse not reported in still many areas. Its harming even i you are not too religious, not to mention i the environment is that extreme, good youovercame it, and that abusive.

[@freightshayker]

@@jonsnor4313 You wonder why you're drawn to channels like this ? ... because you were not properly born-again. Man of God, full water submersion and the phrase: "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins" ... per Acts 2: v38 and Acts 19: v1 thru v7 and other script

[@Graeme_Lastname]

I pretty much understand you. My sunday school didn't want me there and I didn't wanna be there. I must have been a rotten kid, they kicked me out. ;)

[@ShannonQ]

FIRST

[@birdjo6234]

But how?

[@tfive24]

U have inside information.

[@Vandalia1998]

For someone claiming to be a New Testament Expert, Graig doesn’t now much about the culture of the people and time of the thing he is an expert of

[@rickskeptical]

Yah know what!! I absolutely think he knows. He cannot let "true light" shine on the verbal contortions he uses to make his point. Like Alec Wood responding to Steve Warren"s comment, I used to think his thinking was "skewed" by his need to continue to believe. I now truly believe him to simply be a liar.

[@lil-al]

@@rickskeptical A liar with a need to make even more money from the faithful.

[@wesbaumguardner8829]

Christians see history through an entirely different lens than non-Christians. They have this thing called context which is just made up gobledygook they were taught in Sunday school. They think that slavery in Roman times was not a bad thing and was simply like having a live-in servant which was more akin to a family member than chattel property. Their perceptions of history are entirely warped by what Christianity teaches them. When I have attempted to explain historical fact based on actual historical sources that directly conflict with what is stated in the bible or taught at church, they simply ignore it or cannot understand it for some reason. It is like we are talking past each other. They have severe cognitive dissonance.

[@ianmacfarlane1241]

Missed a "fails to appreciate" at the (17:00) mark. WLC gets exponentially more aggravating every time I see or hear him - a pompous, condescending snob. I imagine that, had Jesus existed, he'd have detested WLC as he goes against everything that Jesus supposedly stood for.

[@Roedygr]

If today you found an empty tomb, the last explanation you would consider is the corpse rising from the dead.

[@austy_whasty7941]

One dislike? WLC must’ve been waiting

[@MartinJames389]

The "gospels" are not "early sources" at all. They're very late ones. The only material which could be called an "early source" is the ravings of that charlatan, Shaul of Tarsus.

[@namapalsu2364]

Which of ancient writings before AD 100 that is earlier than the gospel (beside Paul's epistles)? Do tell us.

[@brianstevens3858]

@@namapalsu2364 Paul the Apostle, =Saint Paul =Jewish name Saul of Tarsus

[@namapalsu2364]

@@brianstevens3858 I did say "beside Paul's epistles."

[@pauligrossinoz]

@Nama Palsu - and you are still defeated here - you cannot escape the hammer-blow of the harsh reality that *the gospels are **_not_** "early sources".* And they _certainly_ are not eyewitness testimonies of the resurrection of Jesus.

[@namapalsu2364]

@@pauligrossinoz Defeated? But I haven't read anyone saying that before AD 100 there are other earlier sources (beside the other New Testament books, such as Paul's epistles). And no one watched the process of resurrection. No one. Yet, if a guy"s dead and then he walked the earth breathing and eating, the only possible explanation is a resurrection. ... or maybe you're proposing Edo Tensei (google it up)?

[@Sondergirl1610]

Im sorry I'm sorry ... They called it the *Reasonable faith* podcast ?? Wow , the oxymoron of the century people 👏👏

[@steveaustin4118]

When talking of how gods legend and power grows I always think of the scene in Conan the barbarian with Conan and Subtotai at the fire

[@Lady8D]

Yay! Paulogia! As an aside, I always find it funny when Pureflix ads pop up before your videos

[@andrewfrennier3494]

In his “Germania”, Tacitus discusses other Gods including Hercules as if they were true. Do these apologists accept all of his writings, or are they hypocritically cherry picking? We know

[@Randerson2409]

I find it fascinating that they consider it prejudiced against their position for you to point out that their source is the Bible. Almost as if they are, in fact, aware of the massive contradictions present in the bible, and thus don't like people being reminded that this seriously flawed book filled with legends is the only thing they have to uphold their position

[@shizanketsuga8696]

WLC is a walking, talking argument from authority. He seems to always be absolutely confident that he is correct and the other person does not understand what they are talking about, even when the evidence only gets him to a stalemate or actually hurts his position. I wonder how many people he has already helped deconvert.

[@timeshark8727]

Can you really call it a conversation when its one person calmly breaking down arguments using reason and evidence while the other person spends most of their time hurling around personal attacks, poisoning the well, shifting the goals, and changing topics? Its amazing how bad Craig sounds/looks to anyone outside of his echo chamber.

[@1970Phoenix]

Isn't it interesting that instead of rebutting the specific claims made by Paul, Dr Craig instead goes for the (in my opinion) arrogant position of just asserting that Paul "doesn't understand".

[@SunsetHoney615]

Craig is not a philosopher or even a name among serious biblical scholarship - he’s just another pastor trying to act all intellectual.

[@CharlesHuckelbery]

Thanks for sharing your video with us and keep up your great work

[@chet666]

William Lane Craig is to apologetics what shag is to carpets.

[@ed.z.]

You mean opulent? Or, just over the top dishonest?

[@jhill4874]

I hear people say Craig is so well educated that he can't be wrong. Well, his education allows him to use fancy words and obfuscate the discussion. He IS an expert at moving the goalposts.

[@Dragoderian]

I love listening to Paul's episodes, but anything with Craig is always just so... Ugh. He just makes me cringe with his dishonest, disingenuous approach to any 'non-scholarly' criticism.

[@nobs4898]

The resurrection is a legend that grew over time. Watch how experiencing the Risen Jesus evolves in chronological order. Scholarly consensus dating places the documents as follows: Paul c. 50 CE - is the only firsthand report. He says the Risen Jesus "appeared" ὤφθη (1 Cor 15:5-8) and was experienced through "visions" and "revelations" - 2 Cor 12:1. The appearance to Paul was a vision/revelation *from heaven* - Gal. 1:12-16, Acts 26:19 (not a physical encounter with a revived corpse) and he makes no distinction between what he "saw" and what the others "saw" in 1 Cor 15:5-8. This shows that early Christians accepted visions as Resurrection "appearances." Paul nowhere gives any evidence of the Risen Christ being experienced in a more "physical" way which means you have to necessarily read in the *assumption* that the appearances were physical, from a later source that Paul nowhere corroborates. He had a chance to mention the empty tomb in 1 Cor 15 when it would have greatly helped his argument but doesn't. Paul's order of appearances: Peter, the twelve, the 500, James, all the apostles, Paul. No location is mentioned. Mark c. 70 CE - introduces the empty tomb but has no appearance report. Predicts Jesus will be "seen" in Galilee. The original ends at 16:8 where the women leave and tell no one. Mark's order of appearances: Not applicable. Matthew c. 80 CE - has the women tell the disciples, contradicting Mark's ending, has some women grab Jesus' feet, then has an appearance in Galilee which "some doubt" - Mt. 28:17. Matthew also adds a descending angel, great earthquake, and a zombie apocalypse to spice things up. If these things actually happened then it's hard to believe the other gospel authors left them out, let alone any other contemporary source from the time period. Matthew's order of appearances: Two women, eleven disciples. The appearance to the women takes place near the tomb in Jerusalem while the appearance to the disciples happens on a mountain in Galilee. Luke 85-95 CE - has the women immediately tell the disciples, contradicting Mark. Jesus appears in Jerusalem, not Galilee, contradicting Matthew's depiction and Mark's prediction. He appears to two people on the Emmaus Road who don't recognize him at first. Jesus then vanishes and suddenly appears to the disciples. This time Jesus is "not a spirit" but a "flesh and bone" body that gets inspected, eats fish, then floats to heaven while all the disciples watch - conspicuously missing from all the earlier reports. Acts adds the otherwise unattested claim that Jesus appeared over a period of 40 days. Luke's order of appearances: Two on the Emmaus Road, Peter, rest of the eleven disciples. All appearances happen in Jerusalem. John 90-110 CE - Jesus can now walk through walls and has the Doubting Thomas story where Jesus gets poked. Jesus is also basically God in this gospel which represents another astonishing development. John's order of appearances: Mary Magdalene, eleven disciples, the disciples again plus Thomas, then to seven disciples. In John 20 the appearances happen in Jerusalem and in John 21 they happen near the Sea of Galilee on a fishing trip. As you can see, these reports are inconsistent with one another and represent growth that's better explained as legendary accretion rather than actual history. If these were actual historical reports that were based on eyewitness testimony then we would expect more consistency than we actually get. None of the resurrection reports in the gospels even match Paul's appearance chronology in 1 Cor 15:5-8 and the later sources have amazing stories that are drastically different from and nowhere even mentioned in the earliest reports. The story evolves from Paul's spiritual/mystical Christ all the way up to literally touching a resurrected corpse that flies to heaven! So upon critically examining the evidence we can see the clear linear development that Christianity started with spiritual visionary experiences and evolved to the ever-changing physical encounters in the gospels (which are not firsthand reports). www.reddit.com/r/DebateAChristian/comments/6hj39c/the_resurrection_is_a_legend_that_grew_over_time/

[@kylelloyd4437]

My new favorite channel 😍

[@ericsbuds]

same! so glad I found him finally!

[@blackice9088]

WLC is doing so much projection here, it's obvious that one who doesn't understand is himself...

[@macguffinmuffin1156]

In Life of Brian it took minutes to create a legend.

[@Sforeczka]

I really enjoy your videos. I learn a lot from them, and I wish I could up my patreon contribution. Craig could give good lessons on pretentiousness, btw. Remember, keep the good Mennonite things: singing, eating homemade soup and bread, and sleeping under lovely quilts. Ditch the rest.

[@terminatah500]

Jesus loves me this I know, for the bible tells me so. Those are the words of a song I use to sing in Sunday school..smh

[@leonsdenin]

Now that you have been destroyed, uprooted and dumped, what will you do Paul?? Do you have a plan B?? Will you still serve Ham and Egg??

[@visforvegan8]

WLC is beating that strawman mercilessly. Brutal, just brutal.

[@umachan9286]

So basically it all boils down to, "but muh holey book!" as the reason why WLC believes. And THIS is the man that a lot of apologists hold up as being the smart one.

[@DRayL_]

9:36-9:43 Paulogia,...did you enhance the "not",.......or is his voice really that annoying? O_o I think it is amazing that people like Craig fight so hard to defend what is ultimately an act of extreme immorality anyway.

[@DRayL_]

@John Wood Ha! Probably so!

[@txfreethinker]

Paul, just wanted to let you know parts 2 and 3 of this playlist are out of order. #3 is first and #2 is after it. I'm just letting you know because it caused me to have trouble finding part #2 after watching part 1. Anyway, good job on part 1 and 2 and I'm looking forward to watching the rest!

[@Gnashadelphia]

What an absolute disingenuous human being this WLC fella is. Wow.

[@debunkingthefundamentalist]

Yeah I saw part I and same conclusion. WLC is the epitome of logical fallacy smart guy or not. I tell this to my own subs in videos regarding apologists including Craig, Strobel and the rest. Here is the problem with the witnessed resurrection and empty tomb and the apologist. First and Christ in a go cart they need to stop with this constant "witnessed" resurrection. We have no texts prior to Mark which was at best 30 years after Yeshua died. We have no idea who wrote all the gospels. And they also keep pointing to the Holy Sepulchre as "the tomb of Christ"-----we don't know that, have any evidence of that--at all. It's a theory of an empty tomb established by Eusebius and the bishop of jerusalem with Constantine's mother who declared this the tomb of Christ. It is not archeological fact. What these apologists do is take something and try to twist and mold it as evidence when it is not. Cheers, DCF

[@huffpappy]

This reminds me of the David and Goliath story. Paul, a mere lay person destroys the arguments of a man highly educated in theology with nothing more than the stone of logic. Bravo!

[@eylasilverthorn7219]

I'm a new viewer to your channel and a fellow former Christian. I had no idea that the gospels weren't independent sources, which was indeed something I believed. I've learnt a lot of things like this about Christianity that I was never told as a believer. It's staggering just how much blind faith glosses over.

[@gbickell]

William Lane Craig - bringing sophistry to new levels

[@thesacredlobo]

I don't even get why Craig cares about the resurrection. After all, he admitted in public one time that even if he went back in time and saw that the resurrection didn't happen. That he would still believe Jesus was his lord and savior anyway. This is because Craig doesn't believe in the Bible because of reason, but because he has had a spiritual awakening. Though, I suppose admitting that he doesn't believe in the Bible because of reason would quickly undermine the name of his ministry.

[@EdwardHowton]

Round two of the knock-down drag-out fight between a former video producer (or something, I forget exactly, sorry Paul) and an overgrown manchild who never learned to think! After the last round, WLC was left bleeding and unconscious on the mat, the audience filtered out, the janitor mopped the floor and cleaned the ring of WLC's sweat, blood, and tears (in ascending order of quantity), then shut the lights and went home for a while. Now that Craig is awake again, because he thinks a title bout can only end if he wins and he never actually left the ring while he was in his little coma, everybody is reluctantly filtering back into the stadium and throwing bricks at his dumb ass while he rehearsed his "yo momma" comebacks and gets his "no u" stretches out of the way Paul? Just bring a shotgun and put him out of our misery. No need for the -kids- boxing gloves with this asshat.

[@Paulogia]

Tell us how you really feel, Edward.

[@EdwardHowton]

I would but I make an effort to be less flowery in my language just for you, Paul! A small one. And I'm not very good at it.

[@larryscarr1929]

Hey Paul.. Hope you got all the craig off your shoe, ya squished it up good again😋

[@Bill_Bo]

How does essentially a beggar, which is what Jesus was, score a single body tomb with a giant rock blocking the only entrance back in those days? I vaguely know that the story is some rich guy liked Jesus so he paid for the tomb. That part always bothered me as a Christian, because everybody just hand waves over it like sure, of course. And do they normally huff the body in there and put the rock in front BEFORE the women have come to spice the body?

[@pansepot1490]

Very probably the whole story of the tomb is a later invention, based on burial practices of the time of course but still presumably an invention to “fill the gaps” of the Jesus story. People have noted that: 1. when Jesus was arrested his followers ran for their lives (it’s even in the gospels) so none of them could know and report what happened to him in any detail, a part from learning later that he had been executed. 2. apparently it was common practice of the Romans to leave the bodies to rot on the cross and later throw the remains in a mass grave. Probably that’s the real reason Jesus body went missing.

[@dancinswords]

I've heard the "women's testimony" argument many times, but I've never heard such a good counterargument

[@Marconius6]

I always like when the apocryphal gospels are brought up... Like yes, all the ones before this arbitrary line the Church drew centuries later are totally 100% true and divinely inspired, but all the ones after are just made up fiction. Sure guys.

[@JayMaverick]

WLC is like Kent Hovind in a suit.

[@NieroshaiTheSable]

At least WLC isn't desperately trying to convince us the earth had a dome of WAWWWTERS. Although, it can easily be argued that WLC's philosophical angle is more dangerous because the Bible's flat earth/firmament sections are often called metaphors by believers but very few people learn how to see through bad philosophy.

[@Anglomachian]

But Paul. You don’t understand bruh. It says so in the Bible. How do I know? 🎶The bible tells me so🎶

[@eugengolubic2186]

Hi, I'm a Christian and I've been watching some of your videos. They are great because they are a challenge and make think and study my position more; to be more open-minded and a have an option of "maybe it's false after all". I'm not there yet, but you are one of the rare YT channels that were close in doing this. If God exists, He is truth, so no matter what, we shouldn't be afraid of the truth.

[@kookulas]

I was a Christian for fifteen years and often used the phrase “truth is not afraid of a fight.” While a lot of content like this opened the door for me to leave, the breaking point for me was spending five years as a pastor and being confronted with believers who didn’t care about the Bible, but seemed as sincere in their faith as me. After a while, I felt forced to admit I couldn’t believe the Holy Spirit was real because I knew these sincere people well, but they weren’t growing and would fight me on really clear principles. That was my breaking point, but I’m much happier now.

[@DBCisco]

"Paul's Letters" are not mentioned by anyone until Marcion. There is no evidence whatsoever that the author was writing in the first century. Further, Acts was most likely written circa 200 AD as Acts and Luke were addressed to Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch circa 200 AD. The Christian "Paul" never existed.

[@JimCampbell777]

It appears that it is Craig who doesn't UNDERSTAND. Paul threw back a number of examples--not just one or two--of woman and their role/prominence in the early church. I sat there with my mouth open...how humiliating to this supposed glib PHD...of,of nothing. Wow...so he can DEBATE ... as though DEBATE is what's important and not truth. How repulsive his attitude. And if I WAS GOD, I wouldn't want that type of person around me...let a lone for eternity. If his arguments can be broken so easily...surely a god would grow tire very quickly.

[@hisxmark]

Touching a dead body would render a person "unclean". Women were already unclean for part of the month and didn't have to worry about taking part in religious rituals as men did. But there is just as much "evidence" for the empty tomb and the RESURRECTION(!!!) of Jesus as there is for the birth of Kal-El on the planet Krypton.

[@rickskeptical]

Good job! Continue to shed light on the empty tomb that is William Craig's headbasket.

[@kratosGOW]

The weird thing about the analogy between Jesus and Superman is that the POWERS of Superman grew over time but it’s Jesus’s CLAIMS of divineness that grew over time. Jesus is just lame.

[@ed.z.]

Paulogia, your familiarity with the fact, make you unimpeachable. Whereas these men of “the word” seem deceptive. And purposely so.

[@c.guydubois8270]

"faster than a speeding bullet , more powerful than a locomotive, able leap the tallest building in a single bound look up in the sky ! It's a bird, it's a plane..It's Superman!!!"

[@paulagwhyte1720]

I hate when people try to say that Richard Dawkins is strident. He is anything but. He is very soft spoken and polite. If anyone is strident, it's Craig. Ugh, his voice and manner of speaking is terrible. He has the worst voice that comes through his vacuum nose. I know, that's a personal attack but he's also so bad at personal attacks himself. And he's condescending and arrogant to go along with it. It's hard to not do it back. And I'm sorry but when you are arguing myth and fairy tales, you can't win the debate. You just can't. Apologetics is the worst topic to argue. You are trying to prove something that is impossible. Your topic is untruth. You cannot make faith and illogic fact no matter how much belief you have, you just can't. You can't make rumour, stories and faith into TRUTH. You can't no matter how hard you try. You can brainwash people for a long time, but the truth eventually comes through.

[@mzavros]

Poor Paul, you keep getting "destroyed"! 🤣🤣🤣

[@stewartmilkins5045]

i'm assuming sarcasm..

[@soriac2357]

Somehow Paul being "destroyed" reminds me of all the poor folks 4000 years ago who all "drowned" in a gigantic flood, but all failed to notice and continue their lives as if nothing actually happened :-)

[@mzavros]

@@stewartmilkins5045 yeah we need a sarcasm font, maybe?

[@leslieviljoen]

Just keep saying "the FACT of the empty tomb" and nobody will notice that it's just as much fact as Sathya Sai Baba walking through walls - and that's being very generous.

[@weldabar]

@Paulogia you previously said that you're a nobody. Yet you seem to understand this material better than Mr. Craig.

[@brentkrohn3786]

Your patience with Craig is commendable. He's so brainwashed and annoying it's hard to believe anyone can take him serious.

[@MrDalisclock]

Paul, you have a lot more patience then I would responding to WLC. Keep doing what you're doing

[@Uldihaa]

They don't seem to understand that historians do note when they only have one source, do they? Sima Qian is the only source of most of what we know about Qin Shi Huang, and a lot of modern historians side-eye some of the more colorful bits (like his mother having an affair with a guy pretending to be a eunuch and having several children with him). Historians asterisk and qualify the HECK out of single-source history.

[@myopenmind527]

Craig’s beliefs wouldn’t last two minutes if he stepped outside his belief and looked at it the way he looks at the worlds other religions. I mean it’s clear that Joseph Smith can attest to much better evidence for Mormonism. Eye witnesses. Contemporaneous accounts. Scriptures. Not to mention the physical evidence, now sadly lost. Craig just wants to believe.

[@CorndogMaker]

I don't understand trying to show there is an empty tomb. Why does empty tomb = litch?

[@singingphysics9416]

Craig is so annoying. Well done on not getting angry

[@KneedleKnees]

PureFlix - the antidote for atheism. Thanks KZbin algorithm, I'm cured of my disbelief now!

[@ariellalima7229]

"WLC destroys Paulogia"? I see what you did there, Paul! Very smart!

[@blackice9088]

The reason nobody has found the tomb of Jesus, is because it doesn't exist. It has been proven quite clearly that Jesus himself did not exist.

[@Thornspyre81]

Craig's number one tactic (besides obfuscation) is to try and undermine his opponents credibility at EVERY chance.

[@BradReddekopp]

At about 11:50, Craig repeats his error from the previous video of equating claims of ordinary events to claims of extraordinary events. If someone tells me that someone did something that humans are widely known to do, I'm likely to consider the story unless I have a good reason not to. However, if someone tells me that someone did something that humans have never been demonstrated to do, I'm going to be much more skeptical. He can't expect to be taken seriously when he doesn't seem to understand the difference between ordinary and extraordinary claims and the level of evidence that each requires.

[@jmaniak1]

Why did the women leave their home to go to the tomb? Before they left they knew there was an immovable stone in front of it and no way to go in. Of course when the writer fabricated the story he knew he would make up a solution.

[@Cellidor]

What I've learned so far from Craig: Hearsay becomes fact if it's written down in different ways by different people. Fascinating!

[@CalumCarlyle]

Jesus Christ! What part of “Scotland” does that narrator come from? (8:40) so offensive. They should either hire a real Scottish actor or just let the actor use his own accent.

[@harrycooper5231]

Dang WLC is deceitful. Strange that someone who claims to have the facts on their side would need to stoop to deciet.

[@kevincorvus3298]

I'm guessing WLC is starting to regret ever responding to you in the first place. Nicely done sir. 👍

[@Paulogia]

Heh. I hope so.

[@soriac2357]

We'll see. If Craig will create more and longer videos in the future, with nothing more than repeating his lies over and over again, then yepp, it's a telltale sign that it got to him. See for example Hovind vs AronRa :-)

[@torontocitizen6802]

Craig is the most disingenuous apologist. And he knows it. He’s in it for the money.

[@martinmillar7998]

Christian god needs craig to defend him. He also picks lousy writers to pass on his most important message.

[@Richardj410]

Yep, I wonder if Craig will respond to your respond. He keeps running around the facts with stories that will convince many but are actually confusing and don't go anywhere. Thanks for the work on this subject.

[@Richardj410]

@@fred_derf Hi Derf we used to do that in high school spelling names backwards. thanks for reminding me.

[@fred_derf]

@@Richardj410 It comes from a time when I was writing computer software and needing to enter names into forms to test the functionality, look at the layout of the keyboard and you should be able to figure out why I used it.

[@Tokengesture]

Listening to Craig whining about “ the bible tells me so” he seemed so desperate….. like he knows the gig is up

[@kristianmurphy4833]

Hey pualogia can you please do a video on Mike winger's video on slavery? He made some points I think you should look at. I want to know what to say next time I talk to a Christian next.

[@frogstamper]

William Craig Lanes pomposity know's no bounds...

[@pvthitch]

If Jesus was so smart, why didn't he invent pants?

[@michaelsommers2356]

In the ancient world, only barbarians wore trousers.

[@willis2920]

I love KZbin's algorithms, add for Hebrew bible before video. Keep fighting the good fight Paul

[@_a.z]

A cave was empty.. Therefore the cause and creator of the universe had been in there?

[@PurpleKnightmare]

Schools apologists about the subject they are apologizing for. Epic.