Licona claims that miracles happen based on credulity and the fact that people merely claim that a miracle occurs? That was a laughable assertion. I was taking him seriously until that point.
I'm sorry but this guy's arguments get weaker and weaker. I strongly disagree that resurrection is the most probable solution. I'd say that it'd much more likely that Jesus wasn't really dead in the first place, and was simply revived. They keep assuming that Jesus was dead, which I think is a flawed assumption because it's just more likely for revival from deep unconsciousness than resurrection.
I suspect that some of Ehrman's opening statement was edited out (6:42). For some reason he doesn't say "It depends what gospel you read" after he asked about the stone being rolled away from the tomb. @SEvangelicalSeminary, explain?
@CapsHockey100 I suppose. However black holes and gravity can be tested again and again and show the same results. If you have the equipment you can test it yourself. Biblical and philosophical evidence for God is of a different kind. You have to accept assumptions. And you can't test it. Not as far as I know.
@DrHowbeit Sure Biblical evidence can be tested since it is considered historical (whether it is or not is a different matter altogether). Both Ehrman and Licona agree on certain basic facts (Jesus died, etc.). So at the very least we have tests in those categories. As far as philosophical evidence goes, well that could be based on testable evidence (i.e. the Big Bang). Of course with atheism, one must accept assumptions as well. Which one has the better assumptions is the question.
@CapsHockey100 How can I test today that Jesus died? How can I test the linkage between the big bang and God? What are the assumptions necessary to think that there is no god?
@DrHowbeit Good questions, in the essence of fairness, how can atheism be tested empirically? What philosophical evidence is their for atheism? And what assumptions do theists make?
Briefly:
Jesus' death by crucifixion has been tested several times in crucifixion experiments in which volunteers are tied to wood beams. Also, the Journal of American Medicine wrote an article about Jesus' death as well.
@DrHowbeit The big bang and God link can be made deductively as is shown by the different models of the cosmological argument (Kalaam, etc.). This is a philosophic route.
Different atheists make different assumptions. I.e. some atheist assume that their position is one that we all start with and/or is the neutral position.
@DrHowbeit Your biggest mistake is that you think Atheism is a neutral claim. This was an argument in the 70s and there is a reason it doesn't exist anymore, it stinks. Even sites like infidel.org or commonsenseatheism discuss how such a view is inappropriate to hold. Atheism is certainly making claims. That you believe God doesn't exist, if you don't know if God exists or not, you should be an agnostic.
@DrHowbeit Now you are claiming to believe that God doesn't exist, why? The answer certainly cannot be bc you believe all the arguments for theism fail, bc that would only leave you with Agnosticism. The outspoken atheist Kai Nielsen recognizes this: "To show that an argument is invalid or unsound is not to show that the conclusion of the argument is false.... All the proofs of God’s existence may fail, but it still may be the case that God exists."
24:00 On waking up from a coma. Is that a miracle? Those things happen and can be explained medically. A miracle has got to be something that can't occur naturally. The claim that three persons woke from a coma on the same day is statistically unlikely, but still doesn't break the laws of nature. Think of all the times people don't wake up from a coma, let alone three on the same day. Statistically even the statistically unlikely is bound to happen on some very rare occasions.
@MrJoystickid Are you saying that as long as there is another possibility that a miracle will never be the most probable event? Similar to Ehrman saying that by definition a miracle can never be the most probable event.
If that is the case, how could any improbable event be considered the most probable event to have occurred in the past. I.e. a football team goes undefeated in a season. That is highly unlikely, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Thoughts?
I'm saying that there are no such things as miracles and there never has been. The dead don't rise from the grave, the blind don't just suddenly see again, people don't walk on water, people don't part sea's...you get the picture.
The analorgy you make is a bad one. Arsenal did it a few years back, they were unbeaten for more than a season. I've played for 4 teams that have gone unbeaten throughout an entire season too.
@MrJoystickid Ah you must be European, I meant American football! But you are factually mistaken on several things. 1) dead people have come back to life, there is a peer-reviewed journal on the very topic of NDE's easily googled. 2) There are cases of people who have been blind and their site has been restored, etc.
You don't believe thousand year old books? So you don't believe in any Roman or Greek History either? Oxford and Cambridge history professors would be upset!
Oh so we are going to pick apart my post in an attempt to make me look stupid.
When I say people don't come back from the dead I mean all of the bullshit in the bible. I am not talking about things aided by modern medicine either, biblical claims only. When on a video talking about religion you must presume people are talking about religion and not anything else you fucking prick.
Wankers like you always like to try get one up don't you.
@MrJoystickid So if its in the Bible you don't believe it? Why's that? If the simple reason is that its old, we can see that doesn't work. You can answer without trying to be a bully, after all you wouldn't have watched the video if you weren't at least a little bit interested.
In the cases of NDE's people aren't always coming back from the dead with the aide of science. In some cases they are and in some ways the are not.
@MrJoystickid At the very least you have to grant the Bible has tremendous transformative power in that in communicates that God loves people and has died for their sins. That while one is in their sin, God still loves them and has a plan for them. For example, former Korn singer... /watch?v=Kf5WYigZHME&sns=fb
The bible does some good for people but the reality is people don't need the bible to be good. Religion has served it's purpose and now humanity has survived it's infancy, it's time we all stopped believing there is a big man in the sky who made the entire universe with it's trillions of galaxies just for the ant's called humans who are full of their own self impotrance.
I mean c'mon the stories could be right out of Lord of the Rings It's utter rubbish!
@MrJoystickid It doesn't make sense to me that we should stop believing that we are made in the image of God and a Heavenly Father that loves us and start believing that I am more like an ant. If I am more like an ant, that seems to make me much more of an animal instead of a human who is created with a purpose. Its not about making bad people good but dead people living and those in Christ are new creations. Putting the past life of sin behind and living a new life in Christ.
Mate I've read the majority of the bible even the bad bits that show this got to be a petty little sod so don't come preaching the "good word" to me you're it's too late. I've done my research and have rid myself of the attempted brainwashing of my childhood. You should do the same instead of being so arrogant to think that you are "specially created"
Get real and grow up because it's all nonsense. We are both human we both have brains so use yours as I did.
@MrJoystickid How were brainwashed you as a child? I know people who would say they were brainwashed by secularism so that sword appears to cut both ways. In any event, I just spoke with one of my friends back home and he said something similar to you regarding the 'bad bits.' How can you look at these without the 'good bits' as placing them in context. Consider the following Rom. 5:6-8; Phil.2:3-4; famously Jn 3:16.
Why is thinking that you and I are specially created arrogant?
By the same token how can you only see the "good" without placing it in the context with the bad, thus proving that it was not a god that inspired the stories in the bible it was man who wrote them. Can you account for the time scale between the events and then stories being written??? "chinese whispers" Things being added to stories via a verbal tradition that didn't actually happen the way they were claimed to have or not actually happening at all.
@MrJoystickid "By the same token how can you only see the "good" without placing it in the context with the bad," That is a great question. Let me rephrase the question, given your skeptical stance, and considering we are as valuable as ants, how is it that you consider anything "bad" and not simply just a part of nature. Yet you seem to argue that the Bible contains 'bad' things. Their seems to be a moral feeling that is inescapable, no?
Quote as much bible as you want but you can't deny nor change the fact that the stories were written decades after the events supposedly took place! How can you trust them without emperical evidence? The truth is you can't and it's wishful thinking trusting that you can!
@MrJoystickid Okay, but this goes back to my original point though. If you are willing to trust ancient historical documents for say Alexander the Great, which are dated centuries after his life, why are decades are problem for the NT? Historians seem to agree that their time span is rather early compared to other ancient works.
Of course one could be wishfully thinking that the Bible or Christianity isnt true either, right? I mean thats just another sword that can cut both ways.
Avoid the question all you want, every christian does. It's no good trying to change the subject on to other historical figures or events since they are not what we are talking about. Stop deflecting the issue and answer the question!
Anything in history can be questioned, the scale of battles how heroic a leader was and so on but the only books that claim to be divinely inspired are those of religion and that's what we are talikng about here, is it not?
@MrJoystickid I didnt avoid the question. books, writings, etc. were not immediately available to people in the ancient world, or prior to the printing press for that matter. Thus we compare the NT with other texts from the time period. The result is that they are remarkably good! Even more is that we can locate oral creedal material from them which goes back even earlier. For example, some scholars date the creed in 1 Cor. 15:3 and following to within MONTHS of Jesus' death.
How can we trust stories of magic and miracles when no such thing actually exists in the modern world nor has it existed since the alledged events of the bible? These things just don't happen so it is fair to assume that they never did and that they were made up by people wanting to make this new religion sound more impressive! I really don't think you can argue with that opinion.
You have no real solid verifiable evidence apart from an old book.
@MrJoystickid In 2011 Craig Keener writes, "When many Western intellectuals still claim that miracles or any events most readily explained by supernatural causation cannot happen, simply as an unexamined premise, whereas hundreds of millions of people around the world claim to have witnessed just such events, some in indisputably dramatic ways, I believe that genuinely open-minded academicians should reexamine our presuppositions with an open mind."
If you lot are so confident that they did happen and are still happening where is the dedicated main stream tv channel for such things, where are the videos documenting miracles on Youtube?
There are none, the biggest miracle we are shown is Jesus on toast...Fucking awesome dude I'm a believer!
There is more evidence for UFO's than your absent non existent imaginary god!
@MrJoystickid Last time I checked, Im not a TV producer. I don't control what's on TV nor do I put vids up on YouTube. But I don't think your telling me you would believe a miracle on YT!!! You would laugh if I told you to look at a miracle on YT and call it a rubbish source. There are miracles accounts in the published academic book that I just referenced by Keener. NDE have a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to their topic. So we have these reports as well.
Someone who believes in miracles saying there's such things as miracles and having other people who believe in miracles afirm this is not evidence of miracles. Get Richard Dawkins,Sam Harris or anotherwho doesn't believe in this horse shit to review the miracle claim. If they say it must be a miracle then we have a starting point. Otherwise what you're saying is just white noise.
Because you have no physical evidence to be tested and verified so you fail.
@MrJoystickid He then goes on to offer an example that is worth consideration. A person who was blind, regained their sight and witnesses were there to report it. He offers several such examples (from around the globe) of 'miracles' that have been seen by witnesses.
NDE also provide us with experiences which we could consider supernatural. Several medical docs have reported and documented such events.
All that to say, miracles do still appear to be equally reported today.
@MrJoystickid My point is that if you are going to accept ancient historical reports regarding other people, then the NT accounts should much more easily be accepted historically. Hence the Alexander the Great comparison. His accounts are far later, yet they certainly contain historical elements of Alexander the Great's life. How much more so should we give credibility to the NT that is written within the lifetime of eyewitnesses of the events?
Some of the stories may have been written within the lifetime of some eyewitnesses but how do you know they can be trusted? The core of the stories may well be true, there probably was a good guy called Jesus but the mythology surrounding him is very very likely to be utter bullshit. There is no god because if there were it would be totally unmistakable to everyone on the planet not just those who become influenced by christianity.
Most of the world is deluded and always has been. You ask a muslim what it thinks of judaism or christianity and I'm sure the answer won't be pleasent, it will be down right anti-semetic! The true believers have conflicting opinions on eachothers religions, this is not harmony of one god but proof that what you believe pretty much depends on where you come from.
Deny that if you will but it's the absolute truth.
Tthere is obviously something each is missing otherwise surely there would be one all encompasing belief system. Or none are true and were made up by men in ancient times as a way to try and explain the world they saw before them, this is the only answer to the fact that there are thousands of different types of religion and belief systems throughout the history of man.
The Dinosaurs didn't have a god and they were here millions of years before us!
@MrJoystickid That didn't work out to good for the dinosaurs did it!
How about, instead of saying that 'there is obviously something each is missing' we were to phrase the statement like this, 'there is one true God and many imposters.' Is that not at least a possibility?
Every worldview answers the following things:
-Origin
-Meaning
-Morality
-Life after death
Not all are consistent with every answer, but I can think of one that is.
Brilliant, no it's not a possibility becuase if I was a god (some say I am) I wouldn't let other religions surface, I would be the one and only!
Your religion is a fairly new one compared to say the Ancient Egyptians or the Ancient Greeks and what about the Mayan's? Your's is just one of thousands mate and it's clear you are a full creatard so this conversation is over you're far too deluded and brainwashed by bullshit to talk to anymore.
@MrJoystickid I guess that is the difference. You think you know better than God. Why is not possible that you are mistaken in what is best for the world? We cant even run our own countries, but we think we can run the universe better than God, this makes no sense to me.
We are evolved Apes from a long line of ever changing sub species of upright bi-peds evolving to adapt with a changing environment we now call planet Earth. You offend their evolutionary struggle and your own ancestory if you don't believe this. We are clever animals nothing more, maybe too clever.
Deal with it because the evidence is on my side not yours.
@MrJoystickid I don't see how evolution and Christianity would necessarily cancel each other out from your point of view. Surely there are many Christians who believe in both evolution and Christianity.
The question of evolution and christianitys compatability depends on how much of a creatard the religious person is. The fact remains that Adam and Eve along with their family lines don't make any sense and are quite obviously a frabrication of the minds of ancient people. So we are left with the evolutionary evidence and that points to us struggling to survive at certain points in our distant past and only one of several hominid species surviving.
That is what makes us special not being created by a god that I personaly don't see any evidence for and believe me I was brought up in the church of England. However we are not the only special one's on this little rock every species right down to single celled organisms are equally as special, why? Because we exist.
The point is we are just another branch of a massive family tree spanning millions of years and we are lucky to be here but we were not put here!
Answer the questions about the actual historicity of the bible and how you know it wasn't just man who wote it because we have the ability to be creative and make up fantastic stories to get our points across (lie) or this conversation is over.
@MrJoystickid Well I do address the issue above, I would further add that an interesting aspect about the Bible is that it has several different authors, writing over a very long time span, from authors of many different backgrounds and professions, from authors in very different geopraphical locations, and what is incredible is that they are all writing concerning God's plan for us despite their differences.
The bible has been translated re-translated and changed so many time that it is unclear who the actual authors really were, and since 90% of the people in the ancient world were illiterate it is unlikely that it was written by the people it is claimed to have been written by. It's very easy for me to write something and put someone elses name on it in an attempt to give it credibility.
Not to mention that the "NT" was probably first written in Greek.
@MrJoystickid This is a genuine point of NT textual criticism. However, the re-translations are not the issue, we do that with documents from international letters today. The issue is whether the copies were accurate. Given that we have more copies of the NT than ANY other ancient text is very impressive. We can compare these copies and see if there are any perversions. The more copies we have the more we can be assured that what the original said.
@MrJoystickid What different writings? Do you mean if the different copies said the same thing would we still be having this conversation? The fact that a scribe errs and misspells a word does not make a text worthless (espescially when we have thousands of copies to compare it with). Those types of mistakes happen even today with technology.
Your last 2 posts are totally erelavent. You rely on the bible to tell you what you are and why you're here. The what is simple, you're a human being decended from a very long line of bipedal hominids who came out of Africa. FACT!
The why, well there is no why to your existence you're simply alive you have no purpose you just exist and there is nothing wrong with that. To think otherwise and to create a special meaning is pure arrogance!
@MrJoystickid There is a meaning and purpose for your life, I'm am sorry you think that you are just on earth essentially eat, sleep, die. You are far more valuable than that. Its easy to think that we are just one ant among many, but God does have a plan for you and loves us (even when we don't care for ourselves). To be loved by God, is not arrogant, but to recognize that God loves us all equally and not based on anything that we have done.
@MrJoystickid Unless we have a series of different words altogether, they don't show anything. Ehrman has even AGREES that the best place to find the differences is in ones Bible. At the bottom of the page most Bible's cite if there are variations in the text. It was Bart Ehrman on the Infidel Guy show, on YT
@MrJoystickid Regarding authorship, most scholars, even the very skeptical ones, grant that Paul as the author of the core books used by Licona in this debate (Ehrman also agrees with them). We can also use other historical methods to determine who the authors were, the same as we do for other ancient texts.
@MrJoystickid However, I do appreciate the fact that you explained why you think the way you do about evolution and why you think we are special (along with the rest of living organisms, or as I would say, creation).
I was just thinking if we are all special bc we exist, do you give humans a special place over other animals or are we all on the same type of level?
Humans give themselves a special place because we have the ability to do so. All life is as amazing and important as eachother and if you can't see that then I think it's very sad.
Say for instance the Dinosaurs hadn't been wiped out 65 million years ago we probably would have existed because the gap we fill would never have been there. Dinosaurs might have eventually evolved larger brains and built cities who knows. We were just really really lucky, that's all.
@MrJoystickid Gor the Christians, God created everything according to Genesis 1 and it was good, very good. As far as seeing creation/the universe as important, were on the same page. However, I do believe people are built with an intrinsic value. You, me, everybody. It seems though on your model, both ants and humans have the same moral worth. Is that what you are saying? In the states, people not ants have certain inalienable rights bc they were endowed to us by our Creator.
Humans are'nt build we grow and are created through the act of sex between our parents, it's a very natural thing. Natural selection even goes on before you are concieved, what if the sperm that was you didn't fertilise the egg, you'd be someone else.
We are life so we are as important as any other life but because we have evolved large brains and created our own moral guide lines we have made oursleves the most important thing on the planet.
@MrJoystickid I was about to right a response, but I realized you never really answered my initial question. Do people and ants have the same moral worth? Is a humans life of the same value as an ants? I know you would say people are more important bc of natural sel. or something like that, but that isn't saying that a human is more valuable than an ant. For me, I think you are far more valuable than an ant my friend, that is my answer and I'm very serious about that.
This is a totally pointless point you're attempting to make me answer and I think I've already answered it. We make ourselves more important than an ant but in the grand scheme of things and the billions of years the universe has existed for and will exist for I AM no more important than an ant.
@MrJoystickid Are you saying that if someone took hostage an ant and another person took hostage my sister, then we should consider those of equal importance?!?! If you are no more important than an ant, why should we send the police after my sister before the ant? I disagree completely, the ant falls FAR short of importance regarding my sister. Both you and my sister are of unquestionably greater importance and value than an ant.
If you insist on needing a creator then you should worship the universe because it gave you life and allowed you to exist in it but it couldn't care less if you were an ant or an aardvark and it certainly doesn't give a shit if you're a human all full of your own self importance because you think you're somehow special.
@MrJoystickid Well, that is exactly why I don't worship the universe. I think people, you, me, everyone is more valuable than an ant or an aardvark. If it came down to you or the ant needing food and I had extra food, I am not going to randomly pick between you two. I am going to give my extra food to you everytime bc you are far more valuable than the ant.
So far this is the only place we could live and we can only live on the parts above water with a reasonably temperate climate. There are trillions of stars in the Milkey Way and billions if not trillions of galaxies in the known universe but you people think it was all made for us? This isn't a question I require you to answer it's just me being puzzled by your view of things.
Oh yeah this universe sure was made specially for us wasn't it! You should go to Mars.
@MrJoystickid No I don't think that the universe was made for US, it was made for and by God. That is an important distinction to make. If it was made for us, that sort of makes God our servant and would be arrogant, as you have said (that is actually an entitlement sinful view of people compared to God).
22:00 What kind of a comparison is this? His son DID NOT walk on water. A man holding a child over a pool of water can be demonstrated at request. That can't be said about Jesus walking on water with God as an external agent.
@mrSavedbyfaith Its one thing to say that you don't agree with the NT accounts of Jesus' R, but it is another to say that the NT teaches a spiritual R. But my question again is, if God exists, surely He can raise us physically cant He-if He so chooses? Another Question: Why do you disagree with the NT texts?
@mrSavedbyfaith Lol, well you certainly took Luke's account of Paul's experience seriously! :) I mean we should look at all of the evidence and even Paul himself says that he spoke with the original disciples who preach the same Gospel. So even if you only take Paul's letters seriously, and even disagree with him, he is still preaching the same message as the original disciples (Peter and John plus James, Jesus' brother) of bodily R.
@mrSavedbyfaith My point is, you focus on Paul, but he is not the only one claiming bodily R. All four Gospels say it was bodily, other NT texts equally say the same thing, the tomb was empty, etc. I mean when we start to add these things up a spiritual R is not what is being preached, at least not by the earliest followers and disciples of Jesus.
Extra quest.: Why is a physsical R so offensive? If there is a God, which you seem to agree, surely then He has the power to physically resurrect.
@mrSavedbyfaith Well wait a second, you didn't say much about the points I raised. Even if we grant that Paul was "wrong" (which I don't, nor have you provided a text to show that he was wrong in regards to the rapture), that still doesn't negate Ga. 1-2 where Paul met with the "pillars" of the church. Peter, James, and John. Paul says they added nothing to his message in Ga. and in 1 Cor. 15 Paul says they are all preaching the same message - Bodily resurrection.
@mrSavedbyfaith Paul also confirmed his message with the earliest pillars of the Church (Peter, James, and John!) according to Ga. 1-2. So even if Paul was somehow mistaken (despite the fact he died for his faith, was himself a pharisee believing in physical resurrection, wrote about physical resurrection, persecuted Christians, etc.), he was preaching the same message as the earliest disciples! There is universal agreement in the texts that it was physical.
@mrSavedbyfaith Lol, well Paul could have made mistakes, he could have built a tent wrong or miscalculated a price on a tent. But to get the resurrection wrong, well that would be simply incredible given that it was so central to Christianity and that he was willing to die for it! Paul is not a likely character to base what he believed to be his eternity on flimsy evidence, in fact he thought the Christians were so wrong they should be persecuted, until he met Christ himself.
@mrSavedbyfaith Well Idk how saying the synoptics have discrepancies helps the idea that Jesus rose spiritually, bc there is no discrepancy any of the Gospels that Jesus raised physically. Again, the tomb wouldn't have been empty. See Romans 8 for example, spirit and flesh can be used to denote sanctified and sinful living respectively. I have studied NDEs. I like them alot, but those people all died again, Jesus did not. Neither did any of those people claim to be God...
@mrSavedbyfaith Right, but that does not mean he was a spirit being or anything like that. The Gospels all agree that it was a physical resurrection and Paul who writes in 1 Cor. 15 agrees with that message and that of the earliest disciples (Ga. 1-2). Also, why would the tomb be found empty if Jesus spiritually rose? We would expect a body to be there if everyone was seeing a spiritual body wouldn't we? Referring to decay Acts 13 certainly has something to say about that.
@mrSavedbyfaith Paul is very clear that the resurrection was bodily. 1 Cor. 15 is written against a spiritual resurrection and to confirm the physical resurrection. You could also see NT Wright's study on the Greek words anastasis and egiero which were 99.99% of the time referred to a physical bodily resurrection.
Bart Erhman starts his arguments by asserting a 'naturalistic' world view that presupposes their is no GOD but offers no proof that their is not a GOD... the denial of GOD is a positive statement about the the cosmos... so prove it... Bart Erhman is on a money maker... he is playing to the galley of militant athiests... and taking them for any peeny he can based on false philosophical assumption..
@suminvictus "the denial of GOD is a positive statement about the the cosmos"
Really? lol... the denial of anything is not a positive claim. Sorry. God existing is the positive claim. If you can give evidence, go, if not, don't be dishonest and try to escape the burden of proof.
Bart Erhman makes completely fallaious arguments he tries to argue that these stories were invented and re-evented BEFORE they were written down, but yet he argues we can not know, cos no one was writing at the time; so he says we can know the certainty of the ressurection without contemporary evidence yet asserts the stories were made up, without providing any contemporary evidence... the gospels do have discrepencies, but their basic elements are in agreement... christ died and rose again
"God did it" is still the worst ever argument. This "God" is not natural but supernatural, nothing supernatural can be tested, falsified or quantified in the natural world. By elevating their whole premise above that of the opposing view there can only be one 'outcome' to any 'debate'. Physicist can still experiment to show particles existing, they cannot experiment with "God" or the supernatural.
Even if a person believes in something to the point of dying for the belief dosen't make it true.
The people in the audience sound like homers. Bart destroyed this guy. I honestly don't know why he debates these guys. They are embarrassing to say the least.
@spaceboy1250 What points did Bart say that make you think he "destroyed" this guy? I watched the debate and he agreed with the 4 facts that Licona presents.
TO EVERYONE WHO HAS A STAKE IN THIS.... IF YOU "NEED" 100% PROOF, "HARD" EVIDENCE, AND ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER, IN ORDER TO BELIEVE CHRISTIANITY, I BELIEVE YOU WILL FOREVER BE FRUSTRATED AND NOT BE ABLE TO BE A CHRISTAIN, OR ANY OTHER RELIGION. YOU HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR THE TIME PERIOD, LACK OF VIDEO CAMERAS, AND PUT SOME FAITH (EVEN MINOR) INTO THE TRADITIONS & BELIEFS THAT DEVELOPED IMMEDIATELY AFTER JESUS DEATH, ESP BY THOSE WHO WERE STILL ALIVE THAT INFLUENCED THE CHURCH.
@4islam3 Sorry friend but you are unlikely to convince anyone watching this video that the speculations your faith makes with regards to reality are in any way more convincing than Christianity's. Conversely, historically Islam is an indefensible account of the nature of the Universe and is considered by historians as well as critics as no more than a "boring plagiarism of the worst parts of Christianity and Judaism". Nice day.
@esiosan I am not trying to convince anybody of anything. I am inviting people to read the Quran, read good commentaries and do their own reseach. People have brains, they can think for themselves, but they should be given the opportunity to learn and discover the truth for themselves.
Islam is not a new religion, it is the religion of all the Prophets. Quran was sent to confirm the old scriptures and to correct what was lost and corrupted. Islam is: 1God, 1 religion, 1 book, 1 nation.
@esiosan We do not have muslim scholars who debate each other about the death of god, nor the authenticity of the Quran nor the contradiction in the Quran or wether the Quran is the words of God Almighty. This is a problem in other religions but not Islam. Please think, does God die? Millions of Christians have left Christianity, the churches have been deserted and God abandoned. This is not the case for Muslims. We are the only ones on the straight path of God, Allah, the Most High.
@4islam3 Hello, thanks for your reply. I have 2 questions for you:
You said Muslim scholars do not question Islam, here is my question:
1) Are Muslim scholars, clerics or yourself free to put into question the virility of Islam's claims without being considered apostates by fellow Muslims?
/watch?v=-28Hs34U0Fg This video proves Islam is not up for debate. Fear of violence render Muslim scholars unable to question Islam publicly.
@esiosan The Quran is not debated by muslims because we know that this book is from God and that no human being is capable of writing like the Quran. The Quran is recited, studied day in and day out all over the world and all you hear is praise and thanks to Allah for this miracle. What about the millions who convert to Islam every year? They found in the Quran what the other corrupted scriptures couldn't give them. (cont.)
@esiosan You ask me if I were indoctrinated as a child is a lack of respect. Allah's first word to humanity was READ! Allah also commands us to study the Quran and think for ourselves.Why did God give us brains in the first place? Allah has put a challenge in the Quran and the challenge is on to this day: Say: "If the mankind and the jinns were together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one another." [Qur'an 17:88] (cont)
@4islam3 "the mankind and the jinns were together to..."
I'm sorry, but this isn't proof of anything. If mankind and the leprechauns were together to produce the like of this 'Lord of the Rings' they could not produce thereof. This is in the same form as the quranic quote, and is as patently false as the quranic quote. It's circular reasoning, ie, The quran must be true. How do I know? The quran tells me. 'A' cannot be used to prove 'A'.
@Exmech2 You're joking right? Are you saying that Steven Spielberg, for example, cannot reproduce Lord of the rings? I don't think so.
The Quran is the word of God and the final revelation to humanity. The Quran confirms the original Torah and the Gospel and corrects what has been lost or corrupted.
You could watch the videos of Dr Nouman Ali Khan: the divine speech, part 1 and part 2. Also visit the website of Harun Yahya an invitation to the truth.
@4islam3 You're joking, right? Are you saying that Steven Speilberg for example, cannot reproduce quran? I don't think so.
The quran is the third version of a very bad fairy tale, and corrects nothing. There is no real reason to believe in the quran or the bible. You've drunk the Kool Aid.
Ali and Yahya are both idiots whose blatant lack of education is obvious to anyone with an IQ greater than 100.
@Exmech2 Go ahead and ask Spielberg or others to produce a verse in Arabic like the Quran. The challenge is on for 1400 years. Noboby can! It's a FACT whether you agree or not, like it or not.
@4islam3 Why does it have to be in Arabic? Why not in Hebrew? After all, you point out that the quran supposedly "corrects" the bible and torah, which weren't written in arabic. You speak as if the language in the quran could never been used again. Idiocy at best, blatant dishonesty at worst. The quran is no more "miraculous" than any of Shakespeares plays. Go ahead, "reproduce" any of those, in Middle English. If you actually believe that the mere existence of a poorly written fairy tale...
@Exmech2 Go ahead do it in greek or hebrew or even choose your language. The fact that the Bible and the Torah were not written in Arabic does not make any difference. God's message is the same in any language.
"And among His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the variations in your languages and your colours: verily in that are Signs for those who know."
@4islam3 Psst... we know how the "heavens", the "earth", and languages came to be. No magic gods were needed. One would have thought that a god would know about gravity, eh? One would have thought a god would have understood planetary mechanics.
@Exmech2 2. E. Marshall Johnson: Professor and Chairman of the Department of Anatomy and Developmental Biology, and Director of the Daniel Baugh Institute, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
3. T.V.N. Persaud: Professor of Anatomy, Pediatrics and Child Health in University of Manitoba Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Author and editor of over 20 books, and has published over 181 scientific papers. (cont.)
@Exmech2 4. Joe Leigh Simpson: Professor and Chairman of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.
5. Gerald C. Goeringer:Professor and coordinator of Medical Embryology in the Department of Cell Biology, School of Medicine, Georgetown University, Washington DC, USA.
6. Alfred Kroener: Professor of the Department of Geosciences, University of Mainz, Germany.
@Exmech2 As long as you haven't properly studied the Quran you will have no real arguments against it. Here's a list of scientists who dedicated years learning Arabic in order to study the Quran. Guess what happened to some of them? They converted to Islam. Why? What did they find?
1. Keith L. Moore: Professor Emeritus, Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, University of Toronto. (cont.)
@Exmech2 12. Tejatat Tejasen: Chairman of the Department of Anatomy and is the former Dean of the faculty of Medicine, University of Chiang Mai, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
13. Dr. Maurice Bucaille: Born in 1920, former chief of the Surgical Clinic, University of Paris, has for a long time deeply interested in the correspondences between the teachings of the Holy Scriptures and modern secular knowledge.
@Exmech2 I have given you a list of 12 famous scientists who studied the Quran. Do your own research about them and see what they say. Be honest with yourself. This is general knowledge after all. Bye.
@4islam3 LMAO! I'm sorry, but anyone versed in biology knows well that the creation myths put forth by the torah, bible, and quran are just that... myths. No, you're the one that needs to be honest, but I realize you can't. One cannot honestly defend a mythology as reality. Of the alleged "scientists" you mentioned, most aren't. Would you like me to send you a VERY LONG list of scientists that know the quran is bullshit? I'd be happy to.
@Exmech2 You do not want to study the Quran, nor hear muslim scholars, nor hear what the scientists say. Everybody is an idiot and everything is BS. You are not interested in the evidence. You have chosen to live without God, that's your choice, but don't say there is no evidence. You will make a terrible judge. You'll lock/ kill everybody without studying their cases.
"Indeed your Lord will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning the matters in which they used to differ".
@4islam3 A sad representation of humanity you are. There is no evidence of your delusions. Your gullibility does not do you justice. Your quran says "shooting stars are thrown by allah to strike down djinn". We know what shooting stars are, and they have nothing to do with djinn. The rest is just as silly as that. A nefarious ideology indeed is islam since you can only defend it by being dishonest, or outright lying. Come... tell me the earth was created in 6 days, I will only laugh at you!
@4islam3 is eveidence of some sort of uber magic man, than you are far too stupid to enter into a reasonable discussion. On a side note, we know what "shooting stars", and they have nothing to do with Djinn or allah. An omniscient being wouldn't make that mistake. But an inept, uneducated, dark ages charlatan would.
@Exmech2 I understand your frustration with this issue. Many people were frustrated like you throughout the previous centuries and still are to this day. Calling people names and insulting them only shows the kind of person you are. You have demonstrated a serious lack of knowledge about Islam and I bet you have never read the Quran. Now calm down and think.
It is simple: produce a verse in Arabic like the Quran. Call all your scholars, writers, poets, scientists etc... We are waiting.
@4islam3 It is truly wonderful to see the last of the mythologies fall to such pitiful "challenges". The fact that you don't see why your "challenge" is preposterous, let alone unacceptable as empirical evidence, is telling. I might create a million "sura" that meet the criteria. But of course you will "move the goalpost" and claim they are not. Demading that this "challenge" is "proof" of the veracity of a medieval fairy tale is dishonest and beyond reproach.
@Exmech2 Further, there is no "frustration". There is absolutely no logical reason to think the quran, bible, or torah are literally true. The amount of evidence against all of these is insurmountable. The Earth was not formed in 6 days. Humans evolved, and were not created. Shooting stars aren't missiles to hit djinn. A number of graves have been exhumed, no poisonous scorpions could go on. If you want to show the veracity of the quran, show evidence not irrelevant challenges.
@esiosan And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Qur'an) to Our slave (Muhammad Peace be upon him ), then produce a surah (chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allah, if you are truthful. [Qur'an 2:23]
And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.
@esiosan The reality of Islam is that it is the fastest growing religion in the world with +1.6 billion muslims. The reality of Islam is that scientists are converting to Islam because they found in the Quran scientific facts that science has only discovered recently. The reality of Islam is the Quran, the last revelation to humanity that men have not corrupted or lost. The reality of Islam is logic and justice.
The problem is all the Gospels were based on Paul's letters. Mark's Gospel is based on Paul, and then the other 3 gospels derive from Mark's. Paul's letters never meant to be a historical account but mythology, and Paul himself admits nothing of what he talks about, doesn't happen on Earth but in some other realm.
People waking up from coma after prayer is miracle? Millions of prayers have been said for god to heal people, and the vast majority resulted in nothing. The minority that did seem to be answered are simply coincidences, and it only SEEM uncanny to the people that experience such coincidences. I seriously have trouble believing that Licona is a professional historian.
It's like watching Shaq dunk on a 5 foot tall cerebral palsy kid wearing a hockey helmet and one of them orthopedic shoes with the heel way bigger on one than the other. I love how this spastic thinks people have no clue what a red herring is. It speaks volumes about the guy that he thinks other should need it explained.
Hey guys look at bart ehrman`s face when licona used the example of him holding his son`s hand over water and he assist his son to walk on water at 22:10 LMFAO bart was like you just made every 1 in this room dumber from your listening to you say that.. braaaa braaa lol..
@bernlin200 but you can't simply reject the Gospels as false right off the bat because they contain miracles in it. That is allowing your subjective thinking to interfere with the reliability of the Gospels.
23:14 - Incorrect use of the word "miracle", which are events that defy the laws of nature. Four people coming out of comas in the same room on the same day does NOT defy the laws of nature, it is merely a highly unlikely occurrence. Licona is really being disingenuous at this point, because he should know that not only has prayer been shown to be ineffective (confirmation bias being the culprit for why that is usually rejected), but that these events say NOTHING about a particular God
@FollowingChrist44 No, I'm afraid your opinion is faulty. Ehrman's entire argument concerns the historicity of Jesus. Licona wants to derive more information from the 3 basic facts that nearly-universally agreed on by scholars, but the derivation comes strictly from his theological bent, not from historical inferences. Ehrman's argument relies strictly on historical methods: Licona's claim of "red herring" is essentially a complaint that Ehrman won't use theology like Licona does.
@bernlin2000 Ehrman's argument 100% takes God out of the equation, when the Gospels themselves refer to God. He doesn't leave any room for God as the explanation for the reappearance of Christ to the Apostles, which is unfair. And Licona was right, it is a red-herring because if Christ ressurrected from the dead, then all his other arguments about "contadictions" in the Gospels are essentially useless. I agree with you, miracles "defy the laws of nature,"
Licona is starting to ramble!
Marzattacz 5 days ago
Licona claims that miracles happen based on credulity and the fact that people merely claim that a miracle occurs? That was a laughable assertion. I was taking him seriously until that point.
Austrolibertarian 2 weeks ago
I'm sorry but this guy's arguments get weaker and weaker. I strongly disagree that resurrection is the most probable solution. I'd say that it'd much more likely that Jesus wasn't really dead in the first place, and was simply revived. They keep assuming that Jesus was dead, which I think is a flawed assumption because it's just more likely for revival from deep unconsciousness than resurrection.
crucisnh 2 weeks ago
I suspect that some of Ehrman's opening statement was edited out (6:42). For some reason he doesn't say "It depends what gospel you read" after he asked about the stone being rolled away from the tomb. @SEvangelicalSeminary, explain?
ehylander 3 months ago
26:00 Why compare proof of God to proof of black holes? Black holes can be observed, just like gravity can be observed.
DrHowbeit 4 months ago
@DrHowbeit Technically, isn't it the effects of each that we observe?
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100 I suppose. However black holes and gravity can be tested again and again and show the same results. If you have the equipment you can test it yourself. Biblical and philosophical evidence for God is of a different kind. You have to accept assumptions. And you can't test it. Not as far as I know.
DrHowbeit 3 weeks ago
@DrHowbeit Sure Biblical evidence can be tested since it is considered historical (whether it is or not is a different matter altogether). Both Ehrman and Licona agree on certain basic facts (Jesus died, etc.). So at the very least we have tests in those categories. As far as philosophical evidence goes, well that could be based on testable evidence (i.e. the Big Bang). Of course with atheism, one must accept assumptions as well. Which one has the better assumptions is the question.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100 How can I test today that Jesus died? How can I test the linkage between the big bang and God? What are the assumptions necessary to think that there is no god?
DrHowbeit 3 weeks ago
@DrHowbeit Good questions, in the essence of fairness, how can atheism be tested empirically? What philosophical evidence is their for atheism? And what assumptions do theists make?
Briefly:
Jesus' death by crucifixion has been tested several times in crucifixion experiments in which volunteers are tied to wood beams. Also, the Journal of American Medicine wrote an article about Jesus' death as well.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@DrHowbeit The big bang and God link can be made deductively as is shown by the different models of the cosmological argument (Kalaam, etc.). This is a philosophic route.
Different atheists make different assumptions. I.e. some atheist assume that their position is one that we all start with and/or is the neutral position.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100 1. I don't believe unicorns exist. Tell me how I'm supposed to show that by doing tests?
2. Sure people can be crucified and die on the cross. That's not evidence for Jesus. It's evidence for crucifixion.
3.Yes, cosmological arguments are philosophical, i.e. theoretical. That's what I said.
4. Atheism isn't neutral. You have to define God before you can n-o-t believe in God. Do you believe in &%#+Y?
DrHowbeit 2 weeks ago
@DrHowbeit Your biggest mistake is that you think Atheism is a neutral claim. This was an argument in the 70s and there is a reason it doesn't exist anymore, it stinks. Even sites like infidel.org or commonsenseatheism discuss how such a view is inappropriate to hold. Atheism is certainly making claims. That you believe God doesn't exist, if you don't know if God exists or not, you should be an agnostic.
CapsHockey100 2 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100 I literally wrote that atheism is not neutral.
DrHowbeit 2 weeks ago
@DrHowbeit Now you are claiming to believe that God doesn't exist, why? The answer certainly cannot be bc you believe all the arguments for theism fail, bc that would only leave you with Agnosticism. The outspoken atheist Kai Nielsen recognizes this: "To show that an argument is invalid or unsound is not to show that the conclusion of the argument is false.... All the proofs of God’s existence may fail, but it still may be the case that God exists."
CapsHockey100 2 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100 I never said that God doesn't exist. Who are you responding to?
DrHowbeit 2 weeks ago
24:00 On waking up from a coma. Is that a miracle? Those things happen and can be explained medically. A miracle has got to be something that can't occur naturally. The claim that three persons woke from a coma on the same day is statistically unlikely, but still doesn't break the laws of nature. Think of all the times people don't wake up from a coma, let alone three on the same day. Statistically even the statistically unlikely is bound to happen on some very rare occasions.
DrHowbeit 4 months ago
@DrHowbeit
Exactly I even bet there is an equation for the probability. It might be 1 in a million but even that slim a probability means it's not a miracle.
MrJoystickid 1 month ago
@MrJoystickid Are you saying that as long as there is another possibility that a miracle will never be the most probable event? Similar to Ehrman saying that by definition a miracle can never be the most probable event.
If that is the case, how could any improbable event be considered the most probable event to have occurred in the past. I.e. a football team goes undefeated in a season. That is highly unlikely, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Thoughts?
CapsHockey100 1 month ago
@CapsHockey100
I'm saying that there are no such things as miracles and there never has been. The dead don't rise from the grave, the blind don't just suddenly see again, people don't walk on water, people don't part sea's...you get the picture.
The analorgy you make is a bad one. Arsenal did it a few years back, they were unbeaten for more than a season. I've played for 4 teams that have gone unbeaten throughout an entire season too.
I don't believe thousand year old books.
MrJoystickid 1 month ago
@MrJoystickid Ah you must be European, I meant American football! But you are factually mistaken on several things. 1) dead people have come back to life, there is a peer-reviewed journal on the very topic of NDE's easily googled. 2) There are cases of people who have been blind and their site has been restored, etc.
You don't believe thousand year old books? So you don't believe in any Roman or Greek History either? Oxford and Cambridge history professors would be upset!
CapsHockey100 1 month ago
@CapsHockey100
Oh so we are going to pick apart my post in an attempt to make me look stupid.
When I say people don't come back from the dead I mean all of the bullshit in the bible. I am not talking about things aided by modern medicine either, biblical claims only. When on a video talking about religion you must presume people are talking about religion and not anything else you fucking prick.
Wankers like you always like to try get one up don't you.
Bellend!
MrJoystickid 1 month ago
@MrJoystickid So if its in the Bible you don't believe it? Why's that? If the simple reason is that its old, we can see that doesn't work. You can answer without trying to be a bully, after all you wouldn't have watched the video if you weren't at least a little bit interested.
In the cases of NDE's people aren't always coming back from the dead with the aide of science. In some cases they are and in some ways the are not.
CapsHockey100 1 month ago
@MrJoystickid At the very least you have to grant the Bible has tremendous transformative power in that in communicates that God loves people and has died for their sins. That while one is in their sin, God still loves them and has a plan for them. For example, former Korn singer... /watch?v=Kf5WYigZHME&sns=fb
CapsHockey100 1 month ago
@CapsHockey100
The bible does some good for people but the reality is people don't need the bible to be good. Religion has served it's purpose and now humanity has survived it's infancy, it's time we all stopped believing there is a big man in the sky who made the entire universe with it's trillions of galaxies just for the ant's called humans who are full of their own self impotrance.
I mean c'mon the stories could be right out of Lord of the Rings It's utter rubbish!
MrJoystickid 1 month ago
@MrJoystickid It doesn't make sense to me that we should stop believing that we are made in the image of God and a Heavenly Father that loves us and start believing that I am more like an ant. If I am more like an ant, that seems to make me much more of an animal instead of a human who is created with a purpose. Its not about making bad people good but dead people living and those in Christ are new creations. Putting the past life of sin behind and living a new life in Christ.
CapsHockey100 4 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid Given the LOR comment, is it simply bc their are miraculous accounts in the Bible that you do not believe or trust in the Bible?
CapsHockey100 4 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
Mate I've read the majority of the bible even the bad bits that show this got to be a petty little sod so don't come preaching the "good word" to me you're it's too late. I've done my research and have rid myself of the attempted brainwashing of my childhood. You should do the same instead of being so arrogant to think that you are "specially created"
Get real and grow up because it's all nonsense. We are both human we both have brains so use yours as I did.
MrJoystickid 4 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid How were brainwashed you as a child? I know people who would say they were brainwashed by secularism so that sword appears to cut both ways. In any event, I just spoke with one of my friends back home and he said something similar to you regarding the 'bad bits.' How can you look at these without the 'good bits' as placing them in context. Consider the following Rom. 5:6-8; Phil.2:3-4; famously Jn 3:16.
Why is thinking that you and I are specially created arrogant?
CapsHockey100 4 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
By the same token how can you only see the "good" without placing it in the context with the bad, thus proving that it was not a god that inspired the stories in the bible it was man who wrote them. Can you account for the time scale between the events and then stories being written??? "chinese whispers" Things being added to stories via a verbal tradition that didn't actually happen the way they were claimed to have or not actually happening at all.
MrJoystickid 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrJoystickid "By the same token how can you only see the "good" without placing it in the context with the bad," That is a great question. Let me rephrase the question, given your skeptical stance, and considering we are as valuable as ants, how is it that you consider anything "bad" and not simply just a part of nature. Yet you seem to argue that the Bible contains 'bad' things. Their seems to be a moral feeling that is inescapable, no?
CapsHockey100 4 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
Quote as much bible as you want but you can't deny nor change the fact that the stories were written decades after the events supposedly took place! How can you trust them without emperical evidence? The truth is you can't and it's wishful thinking trusting that you can!
MrJoystickid 4 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid Okay, but this goes back to my original point though. If you are willing to trust ancient historical documents for say Alexander the Great, which are dated centuries after his life, why are decades are problem for the NT? Historians seem to agree that their time span is rather early compared to other ancient works.
Of course one could be wishfully thinking that the Bible or Christianity isnt true either, right? I mean thats just another sword that can cut both ways.
CapsHockey100 4 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
Avoid the question all you want, every christian does. It's no good trying to change the subject on to other historical figures or events since they are not what we are talking about. Stop deflecting the issue and answer the question!
Anything in history can be questioned, the scale of battles how heroic a leader was and so on but the only books that claim to be divinely inspired are those of religion and that's what we are talikng about here, is it not?
MrJoystickid 4 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid I didnt avoid the question. books, writings, etc. were not immediately available to people in the ancient world, or prior to the printing press for that matter. Thus we compare the NT with other texts from the time period. The result is that they are remarkably good! Even more is that we can locate oral creedal material from them which goes back even earlier. For example, some scholars date the creed in 1 Cor. 15:3 and following to within MONTHS of Jesus' death.
CapsHockey100 4 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
How can we trust stories of magic and miracles when no such thing actually exists in the modern world nor has it existed since the alledged events of the bible? These things just don't happen so it is fair to assume that they never did and that they were made up by people wanting to make this new religion sound more impressive! I really don't think you can argue with that opinion.
You have no real solid verifiable evidence apart from an old book.
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid In 2011 Craig Keener writes, "When many Western intellectuals still claim that miracles or any events most readily explained by supernatural causation cannot happen, simply as an unexamined premise, whereas hundreds of millions of people around the world claim to have witnessed just such events, some in indisputably dramatic ways, I believe that genuinely open-minded academicians should reexamine our presuppositions with an open mind."
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
Where then are these miracles?????
If you lot are so confident that they did happen and are still happening where is the dedicated main stream tv channel for such things, where are the videos documenting miracles on Youtube?
There are none, the biggest miracle we are shown is Jesus on toast...Fucking awesome dude I'm a believer!
There is more evidence for UFO's than your absent non existent imaginary god!
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid Last time I checked, Im not a TV producer. I don't control what's on TV nor do I put vids up on YouTube. But I don't think your telling me you would believe a miracle on YT!!! You would laugh if I told you to look at a miracle on YT and call it a rubbish source. There are miracles accounts in the published academic book that I just referenced by Keener. NDE have a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to their topic. So we have these reports as well.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
Someone who believes in miracles saying there's such things as miracles and having other people who believe in miracles afirm this is not evidence of miracles. Get Richard Dawkins,Sam Harris or anotherwho doesn't believe in this horse shit to review the miracle claim. If they say it must be a miracle then we have a starting point. Otherwise what you're saying is just white noise.
Because you have no physical evidence to be tested and verified so you fail.
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid He then goes on to offer an example that is worth consideration. A person who was blind, regained their sight and witnesses were there to report it. He offers several such examples (from around the globe) of 'miracles' that have been seen by witnesses.
NDE also provide us with experiences which we could consider supernatural. Several medical docs have reported and documented such events.
All that to say, miracles do still appear to be equally reported today.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid My point is that if you are going to accept ancient historical reports regarding other people, then the NT accounts should much more easily be accepted historically. Hence the Alexander the Great comparison. His accounts are far later, yet they certainly contain historical elements of Alexander the Great's life. How much more so should we give credibility to the NT that is written within the lifetime of eyewitnesses of the events?
CapsHockey100 4 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
Some of the stories may have been written within the lifetime of some eyewitnesses but how do you know they can be trusted? The core of the stories may well be true, there probably was a good guy called Jesus but the mythology surrounding him is very very likely to be utter bullshit. There is no god because if there were it would be totally unmistakable to everyone on the planet not just those who become influenced by christianity.
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid Well to be fair, most of the world does think there is a God, not just those who are influenced by Christianity.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
Most of the world is deluded and always has been. You ask a muslim what it thinks of judaism or christianity and I'm sure the answer won't be pleasent, it will be down right anti-semetic! The true believers have conflicting opinions on eachothers religions, this is not harmony of one god but proof that what you believe pretty much depends on where you come from.
Deny that if you will but it's the absolute truth.
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid The fact that people don't get along = there is no God?
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
Tthere is obviously something each is missing otherwise surely there would be one all encompasing belief system. Or none are true and were made up by men in ancient times as a way to try and explain the world they saw before them, this is the only answer to the fact that there are thousands of different types of religion and belief systems throughout the history of man.
The Dinosaurs didn't have a god and they were here millions of years before us!
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid That didn't work out to good for the dinosaurs did it!
How about, instead of saying that 'there is obviously something each is missing' we were to phrase the statement like this, 'there is one true God and many imposters.' Is that not at least a possibility?
Every worldview answers the following things:
-Origin
-Meaning
-Morality
-Life after death
Not all are consistent with every answer, but I can think of one that is.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
Brilliant, no it's not a possibility becuase if I was a god (some say I am) I wouldn't let other religions surface, I would be the one and only!
Your religion is a fairly new one compared to say the Ancient Egyptians or the Ancient Greeks and what about the Mayan's? Your's is just one of thousands mate and it's clear you are a full creatard so this conversation is over you're far too deluded and brainwashed by bullshit to talk to anymore.
See you in hell.
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid I guess that is the difference. You think you know better than God. Why is not possible that you are mistaken in what is best for the world? We cant even run our own countries, but we think we can run the universe better than God, this makes no sense to me.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
That's not even a logical argument you div, there is no god running anything mate and if you think there is then you are a poor deluded fool.
Please don't bother me again, run along now.
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
We are evolved Apes from a long line of ever changing sub species of upright bi-peds evolving to adapt with a changing environment we now call planet Earth. You offend their evolutionary struggle and your own ancestory if you don't believe this. We are clever animals nothing more, maybe too clever.
Deal with it because the evidence is on my side not yours.
MrJoystickid 4 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid I don't see how evolution and Christianity would necessarily cancel each other out from your point of view. Surely there are many Christians who believe in both evolution and Christianity.
CapsHockey100 4 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
The question of evolution and christianitys compatability depends on how much of a creatard the religious person is. The fact remains that Adam and Eve along with their family lines don't make any sense and are quite obviously a frabrication of the minds of ancient people. So we are left with the evolutionary evidence and that points to us struggling to survive at certain points in our distant past and only one of several hominid species surviving.
MrJoystickid 4 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
That is what makes us special not being created by a god that I personaly don't see any evidence for and believe me I was brought up in the church of England. However we are not the only special one's on this little rock every species right down to single celled organisms are equally as special, why? Because we exist.
The point is we are just another branch of a massive family tree spanning millions of years and we are lucky to be here but we were not put here!
MrJoystickid 4 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
Answer the questions about the actual historicity of the bible and how you know it wasn't just man who wote it because we have the ability to be creative and make up fantastic stories to get our points across (lie) or this conversation is over.
MrJoystickid 4 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid Well I do address the issue above, I would further add that an interesting aspect about the Bible is that it has several different authors, writing over a very long time span, from authors of many different backgrounds and professions, from authors in very different geopraphical locations, and what is incredible is that they are all writing concerning God's plan for us despite their differences.
CapsHockey100 4 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
The bible has been translated re-translated and changed so many time that it is unclear who the actual authors really were, and since 90% of the people in the ancient world were illiterate it is unlikely that it was written by the people it is claimed to have been written by. It's very easy for me to write something and put someone elses name on it in an attempt to give it credibility.
Not to mention that the "NT" was probably first written in Greek.
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid This is a genuine point of NT textual criticism. However, the re-translations are not the issue, we do that with documents from international letters today. The issue is whether the copies were accurate. Given that we have more copies of the NT than ANY other ancient text is very impressive. We can compare these copies and see if there are any perversions. The more copies we have the more we can be assured that what the original said.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
If all the different writings told the same stories do you really think we would be having this comment conversation??
I don't think we would!
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid What different writings? Do you mean if the different copies said the same thing would we still be having this conversation? The fact that a scribe errs and misspells a word does not make a text worthless (espescially when we have thousands of copies to compare it with). Those types of mistakes happen even today with technology.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
Your last 2 posts are totally erelavent. You rely on the bible to tell you what you are and why you're here. The what is simple, you're a human being decended from a very long line of bipedal hominids who came out of Africa. FACT!
The why, well there is no why to your existence you're simply alive you have no purpose you just exist and there is nothing wrong with that. To think otherwise and to create a special meaning is pure arrogance!
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid There is a meaning and purpose for your life, I'm am sorry you think that you are just on earth essentially eat, sleep, die. You are far more valuable than that. Its easy to think that we are just one ant among many, but God does have a plan for you and loves us (even when we don't care for ourselves). To be loved by God, is not arrogant, but to recognize that God loves us all equally and not based on anything that we have done.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid Unless we have a series of different words altogether, they don't show anything. Ehrman has even AGREES that the best place to find the differences is in ones Bible. At the bottom of the page most Bible's cite if there are variations in the text. It was Bart Ehrman on the Infidel Guy show, on YT
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid Regarding authorship, most scholars, even the very skeptical ones, grant that Paul as the author of the core books used by Licona in this debate (Ehrman also agrees with them). We can also use other historical methods to determine who the authors were, the same as we do for other ancient texts.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
This is neither here nor there, I say this was written by this guy someone else agrees some other guy or gal says otherwise.
It really proves nothing at all because you can't really prove who wrote what and who changed what to suit which story.
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid However, I do appreciate the fact that you explained why you think the way you do about evolution and why you think we are special (along with the rest of living organisms, or as I would say, creation).
I was just thinking if we are all special bc we exist, do you give humans a special place over other animals or are we all on the same type of level?
CapsHockey100 4 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
Humans give themselves a special place because we have the ability to do so. All life is as amazing and important as eachother and if you can't see that then I think it's very sad.
Say for instance the Dinosaurs hadn't been wiped out 65 million years ago we probably would have existed because the gap we fill would never have been there. Dinosaurs might have eventually evolved larger brains and built cities who knows. We were just really really lucky, that's all.
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid Gor the Christians, God created everything according to Genesis 1 and it was good, very good. As far as seeing creation/the universe as important, were on the same page. However, I do believe people are built with an intrinsic value. You, me, everybody. It seems though on your model, both ants and humans have the same moral worth. Is that what you are saying? In the states, people not ants have certain inalienable rights bc they were endowed to us by our Creator.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
Humans are'nt build we grow and are created through the act of sex between our parents, it's a very natural thing. Natural selection even goes on before you are concieved, what if the sperm that was you didn't fertilise the egg, you'd be someone else.
We are life so we are as important as any other life but because we have evolved large brains and created our own moral guide lines we have made oursleves the most important thing on the planet.
That's it mate.
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid I was about to right a response, but I realized you never really answered my initial question. Do people and ants have the same moral worth? Is a humans life of the same value as an ants? I know you would say people are more important bc of natural sel. or something like that, but that isn't saying that a human is more valuable than an ant. For me, I think you are far more valuable than an ant my friend, that is my answer and I'm very serious about that.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
This is a totally pointless point you're attempting to make me answer and I think I've already answered it. We make ourselves more important than an ant but in the grand scheme of things and the billions of years the universe has existed for and will exist for I AM no more important than an ant.
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid Are you saying that if someone took hostage an ant and another person took hostage my sister, then we should consider those of equal importance?!?! If you are no more important than an ant, why should we send the police after my sister before the ant? I disagree completely, the ant falls FAR short of importance regarding my sister. Both you and my sister are of unquestionably greater importance and value than an ant.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
If you insist on needing a creator then you should worship the universe because it gave you life and allowed you to exist in it but it couldn't care less if you were an ant or an aardvark and it certainly doesn't give a shit if you're a human all full of your own self importance because you think you're somehow special.
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid Well, that is exactly why I don't worship the universe. I think people, you, me, everyone is more valuable than an ant or an aardvark. If it came down to you or the ant needing food and I had extra food, I am not going to randomly pick between you two. I am going to give my extra food to you everytime bc you are far more valuable than the ant.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
@CapsHockey100
So far this is the only place we could live and we can only live on the parts above water with a reasonably temperate climate. There are trillions of stars in the Milkey Way and billions if not trillions of galaxies in the known universe but you people think it was all made for us? This isn't a question I require you to answer it's just me being puzzled by your view of things.
Oh yeah this universe sure was made specially for us wasn't it! You should go to Mars.
MrJoystickid 3 weeks ago
@MrJoystickid No I don't think that the universe was made for US, it was made for and by God. That is an important distinction to make. If it was made for us, that sort of makes God our servant and would be arrogant, as you have said (that is actually an entitlement sinful view of people compared to God).
I couldn't go to Mars, red is not my color.
CapsHockey100 3 weeks ago
22:00 What kind of a comparison is this? His son DID NOT walk on water. A man holding a child over a pool of water can be demonstrated at request. That can't be said about Jesus walking on water with God as an external agent.
DrHowbeit 4 months ago
@mrSavedbyfaith Its one thing to say that you don't agree with the NT accounts of Jesus' R, but it is another to say that the NT teaches a spiritual R. But my question again is, if God exists, surely He can raise us physically cant He-if He so chooses? Another Question: Why do you disagree with the NT texts?
CapsHockey100 4 months ago
@mrSavedbyfaith Lol, well you certainly took Luke's account of Paul's experience seriously! :) I mean we should look at all of the evidence and even Paul himself says that he spoke with the original disciples who preach the same Gospel. So even if you only take Paul's letters seriously, and even disagree with him, he is still preaching the same message as the original disciples (Peter and John plus James, Jesus' brother) of bodily R.
CapsHockey100 4 months ago
@mrSavedbyfaith Paul is still a good source nonetheless though so focusing on him is not a bad thing. I just wanted to be clear :)
CapsHockey100 4 months ago
@mrSavedbyfaith My point is, you focus on Paul, but he is not the only one claiming bodily R. All four Gospels say it was bodily, other NT texts equally say the same thing, the tomb was empty, etc. I mean when we start to add these things up a spiritual R is not what is being preached, at least not by the earliest followers and disciples of Jesus.
Extra quest.: Why is a physsical R so offensive? If there is a God, which you seem to agree, surely then He has the power to physically resurrect.
CapsHockey100 4 months ago
@mrSavedbyfaith Well wait a second, you didn't say much about the points I raised. Even if we grant that Paul was "wrong" (which I don't, nor have you provided a text to show that he was wrong in regards to the rapture), that still doesn't negate Ga. 1-2 where Paul met with the "pillars" of the church. Peter, James, and John. Paul says they added nothing to his message in Ga. and in 1 Cor. 15 Paul says they are all preaching the same message - Bodily resurrection.
CapsHockey100 4 months ago
@mrSavedbyfaith Paul also confirmed his message with the earliest pillars of the Church (Peter, James, and John!) according to Ga. 1-2. So even if Paul was somehow mistaken (despite the fact he died for his faith, was himself a pharisee believing in physical resurrection, wrote about physical resurrection, persecuted Christians, etc.), he was preaching the same message as the earliest disciples! There is universal agreement in the texts that it was physical.
CapsHockey100 4 months ago
@mrSavedbyfaith Lol, well Paul could have made mistakes, he could have built a tent wrong or miscalculated a price on a tent. But to get the resurrection wrong, well that would be simply incredible given that it was so central to Christianity and that he was willing to die for it! Paul is not a likely character to base what he believed to be his eternity on flimsy evidence, in fact he thought the Christians were so wrong they should be persecuted, until he met Christ himself.
CapsHockey100 4 months ago
@mrSavedbyfaith Well Idk how saying the synoptics have discrepancies helps the idea that Jesus rose spiritually, bc there is no discrepancy any of the Gospels that Jesus raised physically. Again, the tomb wouldn't have been empty. See Romans 8 for example, spirit and flesh can be used to denote sanctified and sinful living respectively. I have studied NDEs. I like them alot, but those people all died again, Jesus did not. Neither did any of those people claim to be God...
CapsHockey100 4 months ago
@mrSavedbyfaith Right, but that does not mean he was a spirit being or anything like that. The Gospels all agree that it was a physical resurrection and Paul who writes in 1 Cor. 15 agrees with that message and that of the earliest disciples (Ga. 1-2). Also, why would the tomb be found empty if Jesus spiritually rose? We would expect a body to be there if everyone was seeing a spiritual body wouldn't we? Referring to decay Acts 13 certainly has something to say about that.
CapsHockey100 4 months ago
@mrSavedbyfaith Paul is very clear that the resurrection was bodily. 1 Cor. 15 is written against a spiritual resurrection and to confirm the physical resurrection. You could also see NT Wright's study on the Greek words anastasis and egiero which were 99.99% of the time referred to a physical bodily resurrection.
CapsHockey100 4 months ago
Licona was a joke.
smithjustinn 5 months ago
Comparing the Holocaust with the existence of Jesus?
How ingeniousness was that?
AakeTraak 5 months ago
Bart Erhman starts his arguments by asserting a 'naturalistic' world view that presupposes their is no GOD but offers no proof that their is not a GOD... the denial of GOD is a positive statement about the the cosmos... so prove it... Bart Erhman is on a money maker... he is playing to the galley of militant athiests... and taking them for any peeny he can based on false philosophical assumption..
suminvictus 6 months ago
@suminvictus "the denial of GOD is a positive statement about the the cosmos"
Really? lol... the denial of anything is not a positive claim. Sorry. God existing is the positive claim. If you can give evidence, go, if not, don't be dishonest and try to escape the burden of proof.
AR333 5 months ago
Bart Erhman makes completely fallaious arguments he tries to argue that these stories were invented and re-evented BEFORE they were written down, but yet he argues we can not know, cos no one was writing at the time; so he says we can know the certainty of the ressurection without contemporary evidence yet asserts the stories were made up, without providing any contemporary evidence... the gospels do have discrepencies, but their basic elements are in agreement... christ died and rose again
suminvictus 6 months ago
"God did it" is still the worst ever argument. This "God" is not natural but supernatural, nothing supernatural can be tested, falsified or quantified in the natural world. By elevating their whole premise above that of the opposing view there can only be one 'outcome' to any 'debate'. Physicist can still experiment to show particles existing, they cannot experiment with "God" or the supernatural.
Even if a person believes in something to the point of dying for the belief dosen't make it true.
inphuriated 6 months ago in playlist Ehrman licona debate
The "external agent" remark in favor of the walking on water. I don't think he thought that one through before making it.
AR333 6 months ago
I love that Mr. Lincona throws out a Red Herring that is itself a red Herring hahaha brilliant Ehrman wins by a crucifixion.
TheAlternaBarbie 7 months ago
The people in the audience sound like homers. Bart destroyed this guy. I honestly don't know why he debates these guys. They are embarrassing to say the least.
spaceboy1250 7 months ago
@spaceboy1250 What points did Bart say that make you think he "destroyed" this guy? I watched the debate and he agreed with the 4 facts that Licona presents.
CapsHockey100 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please study about Islam you will agree with that
Neayass7786 8 months ago
TO EVERYONE WHO HAS A STAKE IN THIS.... IF YOU "NEED" 100% PROOF, "HARD" EVIDENCE, AND ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER, IN ORDER TO BELIEVE CHRISTIANITY, I BELIEVE YOU WILL FOREVER BE FRUSTRATED AND NOT BE ABLE TO BE A CHRISTAIN, OR ANY OTHER RELIGION. YOU HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR THE TIME PERIOD, LACK OF VIDEO CAMERAS, AND PUT SOME FAITH (EVEN MINOR) INTO THE TRADITIONS & BELIEFS THAT DEVELOPED IMMEDIATELY AFTER JESUS DEATH, ESP BY THOSE WHO WERE STILL ALIVE THAT INFLUENCED THE CHURCH.
severnkenpo 8 months ago
@severnkenpo I am catholic but I think it is more likely that there is not God. I only go to church because of my family's tradition faith
MamaMario13 7 months ago 2
@MamaMario13 Friend, don't be deceived, please. Jesus is the Son of the living God who died for your sins and rose again three days later.
73geneva 6 months ago
22:05 Ehrman is like WTF LOL
canreader 8 months ago
Red Herring? WTF?
broadcastdeez 8 months ago 2
Great example from Licona of holding his son to walk over water. It gives a great view on how easily Jesus would have walked over water.
JHMR01 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Harold Camping was RIGHT about May 21, click on my channel to see...
youneekk 9 months ago
Please read a good English translation of the Holy Quran and see what Allah says about Jesus.
4islam3 9 months ago in playlist Christian
@4islam3 Sorry friend but you are unlikely to convince anyone watching this video that the speculations your faith makes with regards to reality are in any way more convincing than Christianity's. Conversely, historically Islam is an indefensible account of the nature of the Universe and is considered by historians as well as critics as no more than a "boring plagiarism of the worst parts of Christianity and Judaism". Nice day.
esiosan 9 months ago
@esiosan I am not trying to convince anybody of anything. I am inviting people to read the Quran, read good commentaries and do their own reseach. People have brains, they can think for themselves, but they should be given the opportunity to learn and discover the truth for themselves.
Islam is not a new religion, it is the religion of all the Prophets. Quran was sent to confirm the old scriptures and to correct what was lost and corrupted. Islam is: 1God, 1 religion, 1 book, 1 nation.
4islam3 8 months ago
@esiosan We do not have muslim scholars who debate each other about the death of god, nor the authenticity of the Quran nor the contradiction in the Quran or wether the Quran is the words of God Almighty. This is a problem in other religions but not Islam. Please think, does God die? Millions of Christians have left Christianity, the churches have been deserted and God abandoned. This is not the case for Muslims. We are the only ones on the straight path of God, Allah, the Most High.
4islam3 8 months ago
@4islam3 Hello, thanks for your reply. I have 2 questions for you:
You said Muslim scholars do not question Islam, here is my question:
1) Are Muslim scholars, clerics or yourself free to put into question the virility of Islam's claims without being considered apostates by fellow Muslims?
/watch?v=-28Hs34U0Fg This video proves Islam is not up for debate. Fear of violence render Muslim scholars unable to question Islam publicly.
2) Were you indoctrinated as a child?
esiosan 8 months ago
@esiosan The Quran is not debated by muslims because we know that this book is from God and that no human being is capable of writing like the Quran. The Quran is recited, studied day in and day out all over the world and all you hear is praise and thanks to Allah for this miracle. What about the millions who convert to Islam every year? They found in the Quran what the other corrupted scriptures couldn't give them. (cont.)
4islam3 8 months ago
@esiosan You ask me if I were indoctrinated as a child is a lack of respect. Allah's first word to humanity was READ! Allah also commands us to study the Quran and think for ourselves.Why did God give us brains in the first place? Allah has put a challenge in the Quran and the challenge is on to this day: Say: "If the mankind and the jinns were together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one another." [Qur'an 17:88] (cont)
4islam3 8 months ago
@4islam3 "the mankind and the jinns were together to..."
I'm sorry, but this isn't proof of anything. If mankind and the leprechauns were together to produce the like of this 'Lord of the Rings' they could not produce thereof. This is in the same form as the quranic quote, and is as patently false as the quranic quote. It's circular reasoning, ie, The quran must be true. How do I know? The quran tells me. 'A' cannot be used to prove 'A'.
Exmech2 8 months ago
@Exmech2 You're joking right? Are you saying that Steven Spielberg, for example, cannot reproduce Lord of the rings? I don't think so.
The Quran is the word of God and the final revelation to humanity. The Quran confirms the original Torah and the Gospel and corrects what has been lost or corrupted.
You could watch the videos of Dr Nouman Ali Khan: the divine speech, part 1 and part 2. Also visit the website of Harun Yahya an invitation to the truth.
4islam3 8 months ago
@4islam3 You're joking, right? Are you saying that Steven Speilberg for example, cannot reproduce quran? I don't think so.
The quran is the third version of a very bad fairy tale, and corrects nothing. There is no real reason to believe in the quran or the bible. You've drunk the Kool Aid.
Ali and Yahya are both idiots whose blatant lack of education is obvious to anyone with an IQ greater than 100.
lrn2reason
Exmech2 8 months ago
@Exmech2 Go ahead and ask Spielberg or others to produce a verse in Arabic like the Quran. The challenge is on for 1400 years. Noboby can! It's a FACT whether you agree or not, like it or not.
4islam3 8 months ago
@4islam3 Why does it have to be in Arabic? Why not in Hebrew? After all, you point out that the quran supposedly "corrects" the bible and torah, which weren't written in arabic. You speak as if the language in the quran could never been used again. Idiocy at best, blatant dishonesty at worst. The quran is no more "miraculous" than any of Shakespeares plays. Go ahead, "reproduce" any of those, in Middle English. If you actually believe that the mere existence of a poorly written fairy tale...
Exmech2 8 months ago
@Exmech2 Go ahead do it in greek or hebrew or even choose your language. The fact that the Bible and the Torah were not written in Arabic does not make any difference. God's message is the same in any language.
"And among His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the variations in your languages and your colours: verily in that are Signs for those who know."
Surah 30. Ar-Rum Verse 22
4islam3 8 months ago
@4islam3 Psst... we know how the "heavens", the "earth", and languages came to be. No magic gods were needed. One would have thought that a god would know about gravity, eh? One would have thought a god would have understood planetary mechanics.
Exmech2 8 months ago
Comment removed
4islam3 8 months ago
@Exmech2 2. E. Marshall Johnson: Professor and Chairman of the Department of Anatomy and Developmental Biology, and Director of the Daniel Baugh Institute, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
3. T.V.N. Persaud: Professor of Anatomy, Pediatrics and Child Health in University of Manitoba Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Author and editor of over 20 books, and has published over 181 scientific papers. (cont.)
4islam3 8 months ago
@Exmech2 4. Joe Leigh Simpson: Professor and Chairman of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.
5. Gerald C. Goeringer:Professor and coordinator of Medical Embryology in the Department of Cell Biology, School of Medicine, Georgetown University, Washington DC, USA.
6. Alfred Kroener: Professor of the Department of Geosciences, University of Mainz, Germany.
4islam3 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Exmech2 As long as you haven't properly studied the Quran you will have no real arguments against it. Here's a list of scientists who dedicated years learning Arabic in order to study the Quran. Guess what happened to some of them? They converted to Islam. Why? What did they find?
1. Keith L. Moore: Professor Emeritus, Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, University of Toronto. (cont.)
4islam3 8 months ago
@Exmech2 7. Yoshihide Kozai: Director of the Tokyo Observatory, Tokyo, Japan.
8.Professor Armstrong:Professor Armstrong works for NASA and is also Professor of Astronomy, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA.
9. William Hay: Professor of Oceanogprahy, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
10. Durja Rao: Professor of Marine Geology teaching at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
11. Professor Saveda: Professor of Marine Geology, Japan.
4islam3 8 months ago
@Exmech2 12. Tejatat Tejasen: Chairman of the Department of Anatomy and is the former Dean of the faculty of Medicine, University of Chiang Mai, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
13. Dr. Maurice Bucaille: Born in 1920, former chief of the Surgical Clinic, University of Paris, has for a long time deeply interested in the correspondences between the teachings of the Holy Scriptures and modern secular knowledge.
4islam3 8 months ago
@Exmech2 I have given you a list of 12 famous scientists who studied the Quran. Do your own research about them and see what they say. Be honest with yourself. This is general knowledge after all. Bye.
4islam3 8 months ago
@4islam3 LMAO! I'm sorry, but anyone versed in biology knows well that the creation myths put forth by the torah, bible, and quran are just that... myths. No, you're the one that needs to be honest, but I realize you can't. One cannot honestly defend a mythology as reality. Of the alleged "scientists" you mentioned, most aren't. Would you like me to send you a VERY LONG list of scientists that know the quran is bullshit? I'd be happy to.
Exmech2 8 months ago
@Exmech2 You do not want to study the Quran, nor hear muslim scholars, nor hear what the scientists say. Everybody is an idiot and everything is BS. You are not interested in the evidence. You have chosen to live without God, that's your choice, but don't say there is no evidence. You will make a terrible judge. You'll lock/ kill everybody without studying their cases.
"Indeed your Lord will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection concerning the matters in which they used to differ".
4islam3 8 months ago
@4islam3 A sad representation of humanity you are. There is no evidence of your delusions. Your gullibility does not do you justice. Your quran says "shooting stars are thrown by allah to strike down djinn". We know what shooting stars are, and they have nothing to do with djinn. The rest is just as silly as that. A nefarious ideology indeed is islam since you can only defend it by being dishonest, or outright lying. Come... tell me the earth was created in 6 days, I will only laugh at you!
Exmech2 8 months ago
@Exmech2
He who laughs last, laughs best.
4islam3 8 months ago
@4islam3 is eveidence of some sort of uber magic man, than you are far too stupid to enter into a reasonable discussion. On a side note, we know what "shooting stars", and they have nothing to do with Djinn or allah. An omniscient being wouldn't make that mistake. But an inept, uneducated, dark ages charlatan would.
Exmech2 8 months ago
@Exmech2 I understand your frustration with this issue. Many people were frustrated like you throughout the previous centuries and still are to this day. Calling people names and insulting them only shows the kind of person you are. You have demonstrated a serious lack of knowledge about Islam and I bet you have never read the Quran. Now calm down and think.
It is simple: produce a verse in Arabic like the Quran. Call all your scholars, writers, poets, scientists etc... We are waiting.
4islam3 8 months ago
@4islam3 It is truly wonderful to see the last of the mythologies fall to such pitiful "challenges". The fact that you don't see why your "challenge" is preposterous, let alone unacceptable as empirical evidence, is telling. I might create a million "sura" that meet the criteria. But of course you will "move the goalpost" and claim they are not. Demading that this "challenge" is "proof" of the veracity of a medieval fairy tale is dishonest and beyond reproach.
Exmech2 8 months ago
@Exmech2 Further, there is no "frustration". There is absolutely no logical reason to think the quran, bible, or torah are literally true. The amount of evidence against all of these is insurmountable. The Earth was not formed in 6 days. Humans evolved, and were not created. Shooting stars aren't missiles to hit djinn. A number of graves have been exhumed, no poisonous scorpions could go on. If you want to show the veracity of the quran, show evidence not irrelevant challenges.
Exmech2 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@esiosan And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Qur'an) to Our slave (Muhammad Peace be upon him ), then produce a surah (chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allah, if you are truthful. [Qur'an 2:23]
4islam3 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@esiosan Quran 004:157
And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.
4islam3 8 months ago
@esiosan Watch the videos of Dr. Nouman Ali Khan. Here's one of them:
Is the Qur'an Miraculous? Muslim and Christian Dialogue About The Quran on TheDeenShow
4islam3 8 months ago
Comment removed
4islam3 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@esiosan The reality of Islam is that it is the fastest growing religion in the world with +1.6 billion muslims. The reality of Islam is that scientists are converting to Islam because they found in the Quran scientific facts that science has only discovered recently. The reality of Islam is the Quran, the last revelation to humanity that men have not corrupted or lost. The reality of Islam is logic and justice.
4islam3 8 months ago
It is sad and hilarious at the same time that Christians often meet to discuss the death of their God.
This is blasphemy against God Almighty who doesn't die. May Allah, the Most High guide you to the truth.
4islam3 9 months ago in playlist Christian
Michael Licona .....poor guy not even able to make a single sensible argument. Embarrassing ..we need to check your Phd certificate mate....
doczak69 9 months ago
Michael Licona .....poor guy not even able to make a single sensible argument. Embarassing ..we need to check your Phd certificate mate....
doczak69 9 months ago
The problem is all the Gospels were based on Paul's letters. Mark's Gospel is based on Paul, and then the other 3 gospels derive from Mark's. Paul's letters never meant to be a historical account but mythology, and Paul himself admits nothing of what he talks about, doesn't happen on Earth but in some other realm.
cirogalli 9 months ago in playlist Ehrman licona debate
That 'red herring used to distract foxhounds' thing is a myth. Look it up.
This guy seems to be fond of spreading myths as though they were the truth.
EIiott 9 months ago in playlist Ehrman licona debate
LOL 22:05 !
look at his face! "the hell is the guy talking about"
nubbs 10 months ago
If God raised Jesus from the dead then how come Jesus is God. Licona is contradicting himself all over the place.
Sakib241 10 months ago
If Licona is a scholar, I'm Superman.
Sakib241 10 months ago
@Sakib241 AGREED
KOZOG1 10 months ago
People waking up from coma after prayer is miracle? Millions of prayers have been said for god to heal people, and the vast majority resulted in nothing. The minority that did seem to be answered are simply coincidences, and it only SEEM uncanny to the people that experience such coincidences. I seriously have trouble believing that Licona is a professional historian.
shutmoonshyflower 11 months ago
It's like watching Shaq dunk on a 5 foot tall cerebral palsy kid wearing a hockey helmet and one of them orthopedic shoes with the heel way bigger on one than the other. I love how this spastic thinks people have no clue what a red herring is. It speaks volumes about the guy that he thinks other should need it explained.
myjizzureye 11 months ago
Hey guys look at bart ehrman`s face when licona used the example of him holding his son`s hand over water and he assist his son to walk on water at 22:10 LMFAO bart was like you just made every 1 in this room dumber from your listening to you say that.. braaaa braaa lol..
TheZaidabdullah 11 months ago
Jesus must be embarrassed of Licona's argumentation.
whateverfastman 11 months ago
Sigh... Lincona fails so hard. He's lying to himself when he says that what he cares most about is truth.
moyga 1 year ago
@bernlin200 but you can't simply reject the Gospels as false right off the bat because they contain miracles in it. That is allowing your subjective thinking to interfere with the reliability of the Gospels.
FollowingChrist44 1 year ago
23:14 - Incorrect use of the word "miracle", which are events that defy the laws of nature. Four people coming out of comas in the same room on the same day does NOT defy the laws of nature, it is merely a highly unlikely occurrence. Licona is really being disingenuous at this point, because he should know that not only has prayer been shown to be ineffective (confirmation bias being the culprit for why that is usually rejected), but that these events say NOTHING about a particular God
bernlin2000 1 year ago
IMO Licona won this debate when he called out Ehrman on red-herring.
FollowingChrist44 1 year ago
@FollowingChrist44 No, I'm afraid your opinion is faulty. Ehrman's entire argument concerns the historicity of Jesus. Licona wants to derive more information from the 3 basic facts that nearly-universally agreed on by scholars, but the derivation comes strictly from his theological bent, not from historical inferences. Ehrman's argument relies strictly on historical methods: Licona's claim of "red herring" is essentially a complaint that Ehrman won't use theology like Licona does.
bernlin2000 1 year ago
@bernlin2000 Ehrman's argument 100% takes God out of the equation, when the Gospels themselves refer to God. He doesn't leave any room for God as the explanation for the reappearance of Christ to the Apostles, which is unfair. And Licona was right, it is a red-herring because if Christ ressurrected from the dead, then all his other arguments about "contadictions" in the Gospels are essentially useless. I agree with you, miracles "defy the laws of nature,"
FollowingChrist44 1 year ago