Debate: The Resurrection of Jesus - (1 of 2) (Mike Licona vs Richard Carrier)

[CapsHockey100]

@skeptic1710 2/2 If an event is improbable, does that mean it needs 'extraordinary' evidence (not sure how extraordinary evidence would differ from regular evidence) or that it simply means that it would need the *right* evidence? Or something different altogether.

[CapsHockey100]

@skeptic1710 Do you mind if I ask a question then as I am doing some research and am interested in the question and your take on it.

1/2

"Historians deal with what probably happened in the past." Does that mean that they could never affirm an improbable event?

[CapsHockey100]

@skeptic1710 We'd love to have you back :)

[CapsHockey100]

@skeptic1710 Keener's book is worth checking out, but it is very big! I would recommend a Gary to you, Gary Habermas and his book In Defense of Miracles (he is the editor technically).

[CapsHockey100]

@skeptic1710 Thanks for the tip on Gary, I'll have to keep him in mind. Right now I am working on Craig Keener's 2 vol. set on Miracles (2011). I believe it is the largest book(s) on the topic. Keener is WELL known for his f.n and I just started the section on Hume. I never found Hume's arguments convincing and find it strange that so many do.

"Historians deal with what probably happened in the past." Does that mean that they could never affirm an improbable event?

[CapsHockey100]

@skeptic1710 Why do you think those two own Licona? Is it simply bc Licona is arguing for the supernatural?

[paularenas26]

Let’s put an end to all religion.

Cut and paste URL into browser address bar:

endallreligions.blogspot.com

[cyberdems]

@paularenas26 Let's put an end to spammers who deny the right to freedom of thought/choice and interpretation/belief about life - in other words just STFU plz, your anti-religious crusade is RELIGION in itself, incase you haven't already noticed that hypocritical irony by now. Yes, much of religion is destructive, but a man can drown from a teaspoon of water where water is also the essential building block of all of life. Believe what you want, but DO NOT tell me what I can/can't.

[Skavar4000]

A video description from a virtually closed mind. Learning to think critically will put an end to such blatant mischaracterizations in the future. Try it.

[XxzeppelinxX]

You would think the Jews would have presented evidence for a body-filled tomb? Still a mystery.

[AnsweringChristians1]

Richard Carrier is the Man.. A true historian. Its painfully obvious that Richard Carrier won this debate.

[MrRazNZ]

hacks me off that Licona both opened and closed the debate..

[nhbiker1961]

The best way to understand Jesus is very simple,, it is FICTION! There are no ZOMBIES!

[adstanra]

Carrier does a great Job. Not sure about his understanding of Mark and the empty tomb though. i always thought that Mark brought in the women ( who "told no one") to explain why no one (of importance) saw the empty tomb and why no one ever saw the bodily Jesus-hard to imagine Mark leaving all those appearances out if he knew about them...It seems to me that Mark was arguing for a bodily resurrection, but trying to explain why no one saw the tomb or bodily Jesus. who knows?

[mjt532]

There are good arguments for and against the resurrection. I could go either way. Which is why I ultimately have to bypass the resurrection debate, and instead consider the evidence for or against Christianity in general. Is the bible internally consistent? Is there evidence that bible prophecies have been fulfilled, or failed? Does Yahweh seem more loving or evil?... These answers are much easier to arrive at, in my opinion. My belief or non-belief in the resurrection is based on those answers.

[CapsHockey100]

@mjt532 Check out some of the work of Gary Habermas or listen to one of his debates on the resurrection. I think the other issues you cited are important too.

[mjt532]

@CapsHockey100 I've listened to a lot of debates, including Habermas. I agree, he presents the best case. Not too sure about his data; for example when he says 75% of scholars believe in the empty tomb, I think that's only based on 35 or so scholars. I'd be interested to find out who those scholars are, their theological backgrounds, etc.

[CapsHockey100]

@mjt532 I think a quick way to go is to look at Bart Ehrman who is a huge skeptic, yet he grants the ET

[CapsHockey100]

@CapsHockey100 Lol, Habs is the strongest I think too. But Craig and Licona are also very good

[mjt532]

@CapsHockey100 I think you're right about Ehrman. I really respect his work, but I'm not a fan of how he handles the resurrection. It seems he excludes the possibility of miracles right out, because they're theological issues, not historical ones. If I were a Christian, I don't think I'd be too impressed with that type of thinking.

[CapsHockey100]

@mjt532 I agree, even if one is a skeptic, rejecting miracles out of the gate is an unimpressive place to begin.

[mjt532]

@CapsHockey100 Now that I think about it, I don't think Ehrman grants the empty tomb. Look at video for "Is the Resurrection of Christ Provable?" At 1:31:50. Also see Biblical Evidence for the Resurrection:Bart Ehrman vs Mike Licona starting at 51:30--he doesn't mention the tomb here specifically, but he doesn't seem to grant much beyond the crucifixion and a handful of visions.

[CapsHockey100]

@mjt532 He grants everything that is needed. He grants the empty tomb saying, "As so I think we can say that after Jesus death, with some certainty, that he was buried, possibly by this fellow, Joseph of Arimathea, and that three days later he appeared not to have been in his tomb." In his debates and tries to be a little more slippery though. Ehrman also grants that the appearances that were reported were to be understood physically, not spiritually.

[indexfossil1967]

Easily bests him?interesting how people can watch the same debate and have vastly different opinions about the outcome.

[cmichaelp]

Carrier lost me when he said that "spiritual body" in 1 cor 15 must exclude physicality. I don't think he is really trying to understand,only confirm his prejudice.

[Oddhermit]

"...but there is scientific evidence for the existence of God..."

rofl

(1:35:46)

[BigVK19]

One wonders what else has been disagreed between these two? In Galatians it's clear that Peter (Cephas) cides with James against Paul.

3. 1 Cor. 15 Paul says Christ "appeared" to him. But according to Luke, appearance to Paul was a visionary type, not a literal body. Which makes Richard Carrier's point stronger.

In summary, we don't have Aramaic Jews' claims to the resurrection. We have anonymous Greek speaking testimonies of the resurrection and Mark's testimony Mark 16:9-20 is suspe

[CapsHockey100]

@BigVK19 Where does James side with Peter against Paul in Ga.? As far as I can tell, according to Ga. 1-2 Paul speaks with the pillars of the church (Peter, James, AND John) who affirm Paul's Gospel as their own. Paul repeats the same thing in 1 Cor. Thus, Aramaic Jews agree with Paul.

I also am curious as to your comment regarding Luke's account-I would disagree that it is necessarily visionary. Luke clearly mentions a physical body in his Gospel, that certainly makes Licona's point stronger.

[BigVK19]

@CapsHockey100 Re 1) Paul is clearly condemning Cephas for listening for some from James. Apparently James was the Judiazer whom Paul railed against. 2) if Paul say Jesus bodily, then are you not forced to admit that the 2nd coming of Jesus happened when Paul was on the road to Damascus?

[CapsHockey100]

@BigVK19 1) That is a later and separate discussion regarding Peter. The portion we are concerned with is the second half of ch. 1 and the first half of ch. 2. 2) Of course not, Paul even tells others that his experience was not part of the Second Coming.

[BigVK19]

Jesrael1986M, as a Christian who is turning skeptical, I'd say that Licona's facts are questionable. 1. There is no proof for Jewish Christians in the 1st and 2nd Century. NONE. All so called 'proof' for them comes from the Hellenized (Greek speaking) Church Fathers. WHY are there no Jewish Christians among the 500 who saw the bodily risen Christ?

2. Licona skips the fact that James and Paul were in conflict. Read Galatians where Paul argues against 'super Apostles" and Pillars' theology

[giska1000]

@BigVK19 First of all dont be a coward,and reply to Jesrael like i replied to you,dont just write his name,so that he cant see you replied to him,and second,hmmm...1.What the hell you just said,and are you idiot sir?

2.Again,what on earth you r talking about,is this a joke,or are you serious indeed?Explain these things please,because either you trolling us here,or you are indeed ...idk how to say but not insult you so i ll skip that comment..ok?

[BigVK19]

@giska1000 i'm not a frequent poster to youtube. And at that stage was voicing my frustration with Christianity being Greek speaking and not Aramaic Jewish. Which casts doubt on what the Gospelers claimed about Jesus. At this point, I would not argue with Licona's facts, but I would ask for consistency. All of Licona's facts (except the empty tomb) could be said about John the Baptist using Gospel records. I.e. John was killed and he died. John was buried. And was considered resurrectd

[giska1000]

@BigVK19 Christianity was actually preached in greek....Koine Greek is language of not only new testament, but language of almost all other earliest documents of church fathers ...now concedrning your criticism of liconas facts, what you mean by ,,cocnsistency,, why would you say he is not consistent?And what on earth you said about john the baptist?John was killed, his head was cut off, and he was buried, but where on earth did you saw anyone preaching johns resurrection my friend?

[giska1000]

@BigVK19 ...who on earth considered john the baptist to be anything beside an mere prophet of God at its best?There is absolutely no record for things you said, because my friend ...head, uncorrupted head of john the baptist was one of the greatest sacred objects till this day, and you can see it in prophets mosque (muslims keeping it) while his hand also uncorrupted, is till this day kept and right now is in montenegro in cetinje monastery ..so ....there were ppl from the very beginning of ...

[giska1000]

@BigVK19 ...john the baptists tdeath who kept some of his remains as one of the most sacred relics ...so, no one on earth would even consider him as being ,,resurrected,, person, since no one in that time even knew about such concept of bodily resurrection after death ...(they all believed that they ll be resurrected in last day, but it would be collective event, not individual event so...) ...

[BigVK19]

@giska1000 I'm simply quoting Gospel "facts".  Read Matt. 16:13-15, Mark 6:14, Mark 8:28-30, Luke 9:19. Apologists want to have it both ways. On the one hand arguing that for the Jewish people, resurrection meant bodily resurrection, yet, to maintain this position they must ignore their very Gospels. If Jesus rose from the dead, then so did John the Baptist. Same argument support John's resurrection as those of Jesus

[Jesrael1986M]

To non-christians here :

1. Which of Licona's facts do you deny, and why?

2. Can you name any event in ancient history that is better attested than these facts - in terms of quantity and quality of independent early sources? I'm curious.

[mjt532]

Best argument I've heard against the resurrection.

[acdelong]

I appreciate the upload, but I've listened to it twice now and Licona is swinging like a sugar-crashing little kid, Carrier man handles him in this debate.

[1empathy]

It's like debating whether the ring was really destroyed in the fires of mordor. The bible is a fairytale, it is historically and scientifically inaccurate and reads exactly like you would expect of a book cobbled together to perpetuate a lie.

[Keenanville09]

hm, the description says that richard get demolished here...i suppose im in for a first, lets c how it goes.

[jimmo42]

Mark and John corroborated by a archeaology???? ...facepalm....

We only have locations of about 20 or so locations, no events. Most of the locations are either probable or just possible. Of the few that are considered "confirmed", they have no more value than the Illiad and Odyssey describing real places.

[jimmo42]

Is there a written transcript somewhere? Less than 20 minute into this my hand is getting tired from writing down all of the things Licona is getting wrong. At the very least he is a poor historian, at worst he is being intentionally deceitful.

[bayouboyy]

Licona conceded the instant he mentioned the shroud of Turin. Introducing well known hoaxes as evidence immediately shows that Licona isn't interested in an honest debate. At that point the moderator should of interrupted Licona, stopped the debate, and the audience should of openly ridiculed Licona off the stage.

Licona comes off as a super sleazy douchebag in this debate and at this time, I can safely say if I ever met him, I would publicly ridicule him as a dishonest charlatan.

[mytrirat]

Richard Carrier is a genius. Licona is a moron.

[TheBbg83]

To insult someone as a tactic to undermine their position is nothing more then the tactic of a fool.

[bloodties1]

ummmm....Carrier actually owned this debate... Carrier: "Here's the facts." Licona: "Nuh-uh"...and repeat.

[SpookyAction123]

@exposedatheists "Mike Licona easily bests Richard Carrier in this debate"

Ha, yeah right! After watching the whole debate only a biased Christian could make that claim.

Licona was simply outclassed by Carrier's superior knowledge on the topic at hand.

Besides, any grown man arguing strongly for the 'supernatural' is always gonna' look the fool anyway.

[Ricardius1710]

Thanks for posting this debate! Awesome!

[Ricardius1710]

I don't like the word hallucinations, I would go with the word visions. Large groups of people have visions, even today. Groups of people have claimed to see the virgin Mary in latin America. People also mistake individuals for others and even have false memories of things, especially when people are mentally distraught. An example, when my Grandfather died, my aunt had a vision of him the next night. She was in a dream type state when this happened, but it took her quite a while to figure this

[Ricardius1710]

Christian apologists just love to cite the late skeptic turned deist Anthony Flew. There's evidence that Anthony Flew was suffering from dementia and Alzheimers and probably didn't even write the last piece that came out in his name. lol!

[Ricardius1710]

Carrier's example of the comparisons of the Crossing the Rubicon and the resurrection is very effective in showing the differences of the historical evidence of the two events. Wow! Awesome!

[Ricardius1710]

So far, Licona's main tactic; we can trust the bible and what it says about the resurrection. The resurrection is true because it's the best explanation and the bible says it happened. The resurrection is true because it's true. wtf? lol!

[Ricardius1710]

The bodily resurrection is the least probable theory out of many. It can only be believed based on blind faith. If a person follows historical methodology, there is no way that he would be able to choose the supernatural bodily resurrection. That's a job for a theologian not a historian. I suggest read some of Carriers books. I haven't seen this debate yet, but debates aren't the best way to really learn about a given topic. It only caters to people that already have their minds made up.

[OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@R1710 : Regular debates, where one side can instantly address the arguments of the other side ARE in fact a great way to learn the weaknesses and strengths of a particular argument. The problem with these "debates", however, is precisely the inability to address each argument instantly, which makes logical fallacies and other fraudulent arguments harder to spot for a gullible audience and which is the reason Christian debaters prefer this format. In a regular debate, they don't stand a chance.

[lifeandphilosophy]

idk...I still don't think Licona should do debates.

[rws91]

i went into this predicting that licona would win the debate. by 32 minutes in, i am convinced that he will

[Ricardius1710]

@rws91 You must be pretty biased if that's the case. I'm sure your mind was made up before listening to one word of the debate.

[dwhite1up]

No evidence for "aliens and spacecraft".  Come on you two! The Bible is one of the best accounts for them. Too bad the book of Enoch was left out of it. Resurrection or not... God is the only answer, not Jesus. Even Jesus mentioned that.

[skepticnyc]

pretty good debate