Humbler 25 has spoken fondly of Dena Schlosser of Texas. Dena killed her one year old old baby, Melissa, as a “sacrifice to God”, amputating her arms with a knife. Police arrived to find her sitting calmly listening to hymns. She was covered in blood & holding a knife. Schlosser had heard God commanding her to remove her baby's arm & then her own. The attack was later described by authorities as a "religious frenzy”.
@TheDarvus Do you not understand what a quote mine is? Look it up and you'll be able to see why it's not evidence. You take things out of context and quote mine and you actually think you have something. You are truly more delusional than anyone realized.
@TheDarvus You have zero evidence that Josephus wrote the epistles and zero evidence that the gospels are a satire. All you have are your silly theories that only you believe and not a single historian goes alone with. You have failed on every level.
Demonstrative scientific evidence cannot be offered to prove that President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated in the Ford Theatre in Washington D.C. in 1865.
The problem we face is that demonstrative scientific evidence requires a hypothesis capable of being tested repeatedly in a laboratory by other scientists to verify the results.
The nature of historical events is that they can never be repeated and,
therefore, cannot be tested by scientific methods. The great error of skeptics is that they demand scientific proof about historical accounts about Jesus in the Gospels when such absolute proof about any historical event is impossible to obtain.
You go down to Barnes & Noble and buy what used to be called
a 'dime novel' (they cost $29.95 today!), and you take it home, wait till until everyone else has gone to sleep, prop yourself up on your pillows, and you read it alone in a darkened room with only a reading lamp for company.
Clues appear as you read on. In about the third chapter you've decided that the butler did it. Continuing on, the finger of guilt points more and more to the butler.
But then you reach the last chapter in which suddenly all previous evidence is upset and it wasn't the butler after all. It was the little old lady in tennis shoes who lives on the third floor." Einstein says science is like that.
Many people today respond to the claims of Christianity by saying, "I just don't whether or not I can believe the Bible."
An atheist declares confidently that he or she totally rejects the claims of the Bible and Christ regarding truth and salvation. However, the agnostic claims that based on the evidence he or she has seen thus far he or she cannot decide whether to believe or not.
To paraphrase Paul Little in his insightful book "Know Why You Believe," the question that confronts anyone who claims "they just don't know the truth about Jesus and the Bible" is to ask whether you are an "ordinary" agnostic or an "ornery" one.
The ordinary agnostic honestly declares that he or she has not seen enough evidence to convince him or her that God exists and that the Gospels are true.
However, he or she is willing to acknowledge that others may have seen enough evidence to convince them of this fact.
The writer G. Lowes Dickinson declared, "The mistake of agnosticism, it seems to me, has been that it is has said not merely, 'I do not know,' but 'I will not consider.' "
Writer Richard Downey revealed the fundamental problem with agnosticism as an approach to revealed truth:
"Agnosticism denies to the human mind a power of attaining knowledge which it does possess.... Agnosticism, as such, is a theory about knowledge and not about religion."
Possibly Francis Thompson best described the fundamental problem with the philosophical approach of agnosticism in that it can never arrive at a satisfactory conclusion that provides confidence that it has found the truth. Francis Thompson acknowledged that, "Agnosticism is the everlasting perhaps."
Many people today respond to the claims of Christianity by saying, "I just don't whether or not I can believe the Bible."
An atheist declares confidently that he or she totally rejects the claims of the Bible and Christ regarding truth and salvation. However, the agnostic claims that based on the evidence he or she has seen thus far he or she cannot decide whether to believe or not.
Many prophecies are "fulfilled" by the simple expedient of inventing and writing a fulfillment that never happened in fact. An example is Matthew 2:13-15, which has Jesus as a child being hauled off to Egypt to escape the "slaughter of the innocents". Neither the move to Egypt nor the slaughter ever took place. Matthew wrote this lie to be able to say "And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: "Out of Egypt I called my son." " No other gospel or history records this.
There is a huge step from noncontemporary historians saying a guy called Jesus had followers and Jesus was the son of god and did amazing magic tricks.
These so called Christian killed in the arena and persecuted were almost certainly not Christians, but Messianic Jews. Rome was at war with them for 100yrs. The Jesus story was invented by the Romans to reduce their power.
Josephus can be carbon dated as the dead sea scrolls were. They are well established historians quoted by many other sources. Kev3d, The gospels were actually written before Pauls vision. Shem tov is the first gospel written in Hebrew. The reason teh Pharoah tombs are empty is because they had treasure tombs and were stolen. Yahshua's tomb had no treasure, though the discples osuaries are found under mt. olivet with their bodies still inside; believe what you want, but you hve lousy "proofs"
Big deal, none of those guys said anything about Jesus being the son of God or Ascending to heaven, yada yada yada. Also, Jesus was an extremely common name, are they even talking about the same person?
Actually I know exactly what Im saying. Im not afraid of the big bad tyrant in the sky. There is no evidence for God, the Bible is a series of poorly written fairy tales and prayer doesnt work. All religions are bunk.
kev3d - go read "Who Moved The Stone" by Frank Morison - an atheist seeking historical evidence of the resurrection because without the resurrection you would be right that Christianity would be bunk. Thats what he wanted to prove as a ascientist. However, in seeking secular proof, what he found was so remarkable it made him a Christian. Dare you read it? When you know God is real will your lack of fear of the "tyrant in the sky" remain?
If I can find it, I will read it. BUT it should be noted why would Romans guard a tomb of someone they didn't care about. Romans did not set Rebels free, and Romans did not Crucify theives. Most Egyptian tombs have been found empty as well, I don't suppose any Pharaohs woke up.
To Further the point, isn't it interesting that None of the Gospels were written until after Paul had his hallucination. No one thought it was important to mention the bodies of the Saints rising up and being "seen by many" at the time. The Gospels dont even agree on things like Jesus' last words or How many people went to the tomb.
How is this video a presentation of evidence for the existence of the Jesus of the N.T.? This video talks about particular documents which make mention of a man who existed. How is it that this man who was mentioned was the Jesus of the N.T.?
that passage in josephus was put into his writings in the 3-4 century AD, well after his actual writings on in the 1st century AD. How do we know this? because the first christian apologetics never refer to it. It also sounds completely out of place in his writings. He is talking about jewish uprisings, then all of a sudden a passage, one single passage, about jesus the savior and son of god? The fact is that Josephus, a devout jew, would of NEVER referred to jesus as the son of god.
Exactly, that is why various parts of his writing is called interpolations - added to later. The quotes I gave did not mention Jesus divinity, but that he existed.
There is simply no evidence that Jospehus mentioned him in his texts before the orgin of the interpolation. Most modern historians will agree that the evidence of a quote about jesus prior to it is unlikely. Just look at how he treats other jewish prophets of the time in his writings. Not very nice.
A friend of mine said I should ask you how do we konw your Great great grandparents ever existed....he calls it making history self centred and subjective.
Well Josephus never interviewed or saw Jesus so your analogy isn't so accurate. I know my great great grandparents existed because I exist. I'm not sure what their names are or who they were since they were probably slaves.
I'm sorry ignore my last post. If someone interviewed the relative of a World war Vet would it be evidence? If there was no other physical evidence supporting their existence then the evidence would be considered weak. Basically there would need to be documentation and artifacts (clothing, metals) supporting the claim.
@TheDarvus LOL
Humbler25 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Humbler 25 has spoken fondly of Dena Schlosser of Texas. Dena killed her one year old old baby, Melissa, as a “sacrifice to God”, amputating her arms with a knife. Police arrived to find her sitting calmly listening to hymns. She was covered in blood & holding a knife. Schlosser had heard God commanding her to remove her baby's arm & then her own. The attack was later described by authorities as a "religious frenzy”.
JESUSsmokesCRACK 8 months ago
@TheDarvus Do you not understand what a quote mine is? Look it up and you'll be able to see why it's not evidence. You take things out of context and quote mine and you actually think you have something. You are truly more delusional than anyone realized.
Humbler25 11 months ago
@TheDarvus Why are things taken out of context and quote mined not evidence? Do I even have to answer that? It should be pretty obvious.
Humbler25 11 months ago
@TheDarvus uh... if you call that evidence than that just confirms that you don't have any. You lose!
Humbler25 11 months ago
@TheDarvus your silly theory refutes itself... zero evidence to support it.
Humbler25 11 months ago
@TheDarvus You have zero evidence that Josephus wrote the epistles and zero evidence that the gospels are a satire. All you have are your silly theories that only you believe and not a single historian goes alone with. You have failed on every level.
Humbler25 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
For example, some people ask the question: Can you establish scientifically
to an absolute standard of demonstrated proof that Jesus rose from
the dead, et cetera? This question reveals a misunderstanding of the proper evaluation of historical evidence.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
Demonstrative scientific evidence cannot be offered to prove that President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated in the Ford Theatre in Washington D.C. in 1865.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
The problem we face is that demonstrative scientific evidence requires a hypothesis capable of being tested repeatedly in a laboratory by other scientists to verify the results.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
The nature of historical events is that they can never be repeated and,
therefore, cannot be tested by scientific methods. The great error of skeptics is that they demand scientific proof about historical accounts about Jesus in the Gospels when such absolute proof about any historical event is impossible to obtain.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
Albert Einstein put his finger squarely upon the inadequacies of science
when he said, "Science is like reading a mystery novel.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
You go down to Barnes & Noble and buy what used to be called
a 'dime novel' (they cost $29.95 today!), and you take it home, wait till until everyone else has gone to sleep, prop yourself up on your pillows, and you read it alone in a darkened room with only a reading lamp for company.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
In the first chapter are two or three murders, and the whole story soon
focuses on one theme: whodunit?
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
Clues appear as you read on. In about the third chapter you've decided that the butler did it. Continuing on, the finger of guilt points more and more to the butler.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
But then you reach the last chapter in which suddenly all previous evidence is upset and it wasn't the butler after all. It was the little old lady in tennis shoes who lives on the third floor." Einstein says science is like that.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
"It is always struggling from hypothesis to synthesis, from clue to clue,
sometimes running up a blind alley or following a false trail, never
seeming to get much closer to the ultimate answer."
This is not a criticism of science, because science was never designed to
answer "Why does the universe exist? The scope of science is intentionally,deliberately limited to certain avenues of inquiry.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
The scope of science is intentionally, deliberately limited to certain
avenues of inquiry.
The documents of the Bible answers the "why" question---and, more importantly, the "who" question.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
The Bible gives answers addressed to faith, not an irrational "leap of blind faith" but a reasoned faith.
The more science learns about the fundamental nature of this earth and
the universe, the more science seems to agree with the Bible.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
For example, some people ask the question: Can you establish scientifically
to an absolute standard of demonstrated proof that Jesus rose from
the dead, et cetera?
This question reveals a misunderstanding of the proper evaluation of
historical evidence.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Many people today respond to the claims of Christianity by saying, "I just don't whether or not I can believe the Bible."
An atheist declares confidently that he or she totally rejects the claims of the Bible and Christ regarding truth and salvation. However, the agnostic claims that based on the evidence he or she has seen thus far he or she cannot decide whether to believe or not.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
To paraphrase Paul Little in his insightful book "Know Why You Believe," the question that confronts anyone who claims "they just don't know the truth about Jesus and the Bible" is to ask whether you are an "ordinary" agnostic or an "ornery" one.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
The ordinary agnostic honestly declares that he or she has not seen enough evidence to convince him or her that God exists and that the Gospels are true.
However, he or she is willing to acknowledge that others may have seen enough evidence to convince them of this fact.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
In other words, the ordinary agnostic says, "I don't know, but you may know."
However, the ornery agnostic says, "I don't know, and you can't know either."
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
[Paul Little, Know Why You Believe (Downer's Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1967)].
The writer G. Lowes Dickinson declared, "The mistake of agnosticism, it seems to me, has been that it is has said not merely, 'I do not know,' but 'I will not consider.' "
[G. Lowes Dickinson, Religion (1905)]
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
Writer Richard Downey revealed the fundamental problem with agnosticism as an approach to revealed truth:
"Agnosticism denies to the human mind a power of attaining knowledge which it does possess.... Agnosticism, as such, is a theory about knowledge and not about religion."
7 minutes ago ·
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
Possibly Francis Thompson best described the fundamental problem with the philosophical approach of agnosticism in that it can never arrive at a satisfactory conclusion that provides confidence that it has found the truth. Francis Thompson acknowledged that, "Agnosticism is the everlasting perhaps."
[Francis Thompson, Paganism Old and New (1910)].
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
Many people today respond to the claims of Christianity by saying, "I just don't whether or not I can believe the Bible."
An atheist declares confidently that he or she totally rejects the claims of the Bible and Christ regarding truth and salvation. However, the agnostic claims that based on the evidence he or she has seen thus far he or she cannot decide whether to believe or not.
JamelleFunk770717 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Imaginefree69 1 year ago
There is a huge step from noncontemporary historians saying a guy called Jesus had followers and Jesus was the son of god and did amazing magic tricks.
TheDogCalledBaxter 2 years ago
These so called Christian killed in the arena and persecuted were almost certainly not Christians, but Messianic Jews. Rome was at war with them for 100yrs. The Jesus story was invented by the Romans to reduce their power.
LouisPlume 2 years ago
Josephus can be carbon dated as the dead sea scrolls were. They are well established historians quoted by many other sources. Kev3d, The gospels were actually written before Pauls vision. Shem tov is the first gospel written in Hebrew. The reason teh Pharoah tombs are empty is because they had treasure tombs and were stolen. Yahshua's tomb had no treasure, though the discples osuaries are found under mt. olivet with their bodies still inside; believe what you want, but you hve lousy "proofs"
hagiospaulos 3 years ago
jesus isnt orginal or unique his story i mean
tariqziyad 4 years ago
@tariqziyad ummmmm, ya He is.
How is He not?
FallingByTheWayside 2 years ago
There are not reliable proofs that those book extracts are real and not falsifications!!
Dreamland666 4 years ago
Big deal, none of those guys said anything about Jesus being the son of God or Ascending to heaven, yada yada yada. Also, Jesus was an extremely common name, are they even talking about the same person?
kev3d 4 years ago
may god forgive you, for you do not know what you're saying.
purple2eyes 4 years ago
Actually I know exactly what Im saying. Im not afraid of the big bad tyrant in the sky. There is no evidence for God, the Bible is a series of poorly written fairy tales and prayer doesnt work. All religions are bunk.
kev3d 4 years ago
Some of the fairy tales are fairly well written...
michaeljpatrick 4 years ago
way to plagerize ur lord and savior
ampattic 2 years ago
kev3d - go read "Who Moved The Stone" by Frank Morison - an atheist seeking historical evidence of the resurrection because without the resurrection you would be right that Christianity would be bunk. Thats what he wanted to prove as a ascientist. However, in seeking secular proof, what he found was so remarkable it made him a Christian. Dare you read it? When you know God is real will your lack of fear of the "tyrant in the sky" remain?
homecountyservicing 4 years ago
If I can find it, I will read it. BUT it should be noted why would Romans guard a tomb of someone they didn't care about. Romans did not set Rebels free, and Romans did not Crucify theives. Most Egyptian tombs have been found empty as well, I don't suppose any Pharaohs woke up.
kev3d 4 years ago
To Further the point, isn't it interesting that None of the Gospels were written until after Paul had his hallucination. No one thought it was important to mention the bodies of the Saints rising up and being "seen by many" at the time. The Gospels dont even agree on things like Jesus' last words or How many people went to the tomb.
kev3d 4 years ago
unbiased facts (literal sources).. thank u for this video
jaisonmpaul 5 years ago
How is this video a presentation of evidence for the existence of the Jesus of the N.T.? This video talks about particular documents which make mention of a man who existed. How is it that this man who was mentioned was the Jesus of the N.T.?
tothboy01 5 years ago
God is Real...nuff said
ledzeppelin118 5 years ago
642. Proof by assumption
nawitus 5 years ago
"The Flying Spaghetti Monster is real.... nuff said."
LedZ, just saying a thing's so doesn't MAKE it so, or we'd have found WMD in Iraq. :-P
Learn what "proof" is before you next try to dress up faith as logic or evidence.
sethness1 5 years ago
that passage in josephus was put into his writings in the 3-4 century AD, well after his actual writings on in the 1st century AD. How do we know this? because the first christian apologetics never refer to it. It also sounds completely out of place in his writings. He is talking about jewish uprisings, then all of a sudden a passage, one single passage, about jesus the savior and son of god? The fact is that Josephus, a devout jew, would of NEVER referred to jesus as the son of god.
leetmeatgolem 5 years ago
Exactly, that is why various parts of his writing is called interpolations - added to later. The quotes I gave did not mention Jesus divinity, but that he existed.
kiwiauthor 5 years ago
There is simply no evidence that Jospehus mentioned him in his texts before the orgin of the interpolation. Most modern historians will agree that the evidence of a quote about jesus prior to it is unlikely. Just look at how he treats other jewish prophets of the time in his writings. Not very nice.
leetmeatgolem 5 years ago
Interesting comment, Leetmeat. Thanks for sharing it.
Could you name some books or websites that expand on what you've said?
sethness1 5 years ago
All of those people mentioned weren't even born when Jesus was supposed to be around. How is this evidence?
KT45 5 years ago
So if someone today interviews relatives of a World War Veteran then that is not evidence? Have you heard of second-hand evidence?
kiwiauthor 5 years ago
A friend of mine said I should ask you how do we konw your Great great grandparents ever existed....he calls it making history self centred and subjective.
kiwiauthor 5 years ago
Well Josephus never interviewed or saw Jesus so your analogy isn't so accurate. I know my great great grandparents existed because I exist. I'm not sure what their names are or who they were since they were probably slaves.
KT45 5 years ago
I'm sorry ignore my last post. If someone interviewed the relative of a World war Vet would it be evidence? If there was no other physical evidence supporting their existence then the evidence would be considered weak. Basically there would need to be documentation and artifacts (clothing, metals) supporting the claim.
KT45 5 years ago