Excavating The Empty Tomb (beyond a reasonable doubt) part 11b

[Huttate1]

A very powerful series. Thank you for making the effort.

[MrLittletomdj]

Captain check the port side!!!!

It's a sub!

[TruthSurge]

@MrLittletomdj thanks for the sub! heheheh

[zaxxxon]

@TruthSurge very interesting argument you bring forth in this series. Looking forward to the next instalments

[TruthSurge]

@zaxxxon 12a and 12b are out there already. thanks!

[jdh501]

Excellent video series. Great shoutout for Randel Helms too. He's an underrated author. I've always liked his books.

[TruthSurge]

@jdh501 thanks!

[Studi037]

...this has been a great series!

[TruthSurge]

@Studi037 thanks! i'm working on the next one. just finished the voice over. now i gotta put some pics/animation and music. that can be a 3 day affair.

[Studi037]

@TruthSurge Looking forward to it!

[baxtar2012]

Jesus's disciples turned on him. Moses's people turned on him after he rescued them from bondage, performed miracles, destroyed an army, fed them for 40 years in the desert. Those people seem like they weren't saving unless those stories aren't true.

[TruthSurge]

@baxtar2012 aren't saving? not sure what you were trying to say.

[whybag]

@TruthSurge Aren't *worth* saving.

[TruthSurge]

@whybag right. they were a stubborn and stiff-necked people for sure!

[MardasMan]

Regarding the misinterpretations of old testament prophecies you only quickly mentioned, ProfMTH has a great series about this called "Jesus was not the messiah".

/view_play_list?p=2529F79EEAF4­B995

Please link it here, because it perfectly supports the argument you only briefly mention about the misapplied prophecies. I suppose, he is already your source about this topic ;).

[TruthSurge]

@MardasMan Then you supposed incorrectly. :) I'm not subbed to him and I've watched about 1 video by him. So, no idea what his vids contain. My info comes from the book I mention in 11B and my own personal scourings of info here and there. I don't mind putting a link to his series in the descriptions of these two vids. thanks for the tip!

[TruthSurge]

@MardasMan can't figure out the link :( can you please post the entire thing or msg it to me?

thanks.

[ZephZhang]

Some of this artwork is stunning. The scene of jesus in the garden on the ground is amazing. Where did you get it, or did you make it? BTW: Still loving the series, but one question remains on my mind "Mommy! Why are all the other kids scared of me?!"

[TruthSurge]

@ZephZhang most of the images are just ones I found on google searches. Since I'm not making a dime off this, I'm not worried about someone later going HEY, that's my painting! you can't use it! Fair use says I can. :)

that last part you wrote. is that about the scary girl pic I put in? yeah, I had to wake my viewers up with something shocking. hehe

[ZephZhang]

@TruthSurge No, the last part was in reference to a funny mini-video you made. It was a total non-sequiture.

[TruthSurge]

@ZephZhang oh, it was "daddy, why do da animals run from me, daddy???" hahahhahaha you got it so wrong I didn't even recognize it! hhehehe

[ZephZhang]

@TruthSurge begintrollmode Ooo! Big expert. Just because you made the video you think you know it better than I do! /endtrollmode

[TruthSurge]

@ZephZhang y u trollin me, main?

[ZephZhang]

@TruthSurge Yes. I have this little shed-like structure next to your channel, and everyone who goes by have to pay me. I call it my Troll Booth.

[TruthSurge]

@ZephZhang hehe

[TruthSurge]

@ZephZhang as long as I get a cut

[Jaybird196]

What is meant by the expression grieved/angered to death (dependent on translation)? Does it mean he feels like his anger will kill him, or that he will keep his anger until he dies, or something else?

[TruthSurge]

@Jaybird196 If you read chapter 4 (all of it up to that verse) Jonah is basically depressed and wanting to die. That's where the "to death" is coming from. Basically, you could say he was so angry he could die or another way per Young's translation is that he is displeased to do good. I guess another way of saying it is he's in no mood to do anything good because his plant died and the punchline is that job should be more concerned about Nineveh than he is about the plant. etc.

[Jaybird196]

@TruthSurge Ah, thank you. Did you mean Jonah when you typed job (i.e. Job. I do realize it is late, at least where I am, anyway ;) ) ? In any case, I get what you mean. He supposedly should be more concerned with a greater number than himself. Thanks again, and I love this series.

[TruthSurge]

@Jaybird196  yes, jonah, not job. JO JO. slip up.

[ONESPECIES]

If Youtube as we know it, eventually dies in the future, because of bad lawmaking, at least it was the medium that hosted this video and the series. Good thing I was gone. Now I got to watch 2 of them back to back!

[TruthSurge]

@ONESPECIES haha thanks man! I like doing these. Gives me a chance to try and explain what I believe to others.

[Xgya2000]

I saw an excavating the empty tomb, and was all :)

Then heard it was the last one and went :(

Great video as always. I'll be waiting for your next series

[TruthSurge]

@Xgya2000 may be a while.  I have to get it written better. thanks!

[Justme8237]

just brilliant! thank you for this series!

[TruthSurge]

@Justme8237 thanks!

[DeletedDelusion]

Very interesting.

[TruthSurge]

@DeletedDelusion thanks

[ozmoroid]

This continues to be a classic series. Very well done.

[TruthSurge]

@ozmoroid thanks!

[eat666shit]

excellent work there too, the whole series certainly deserves far more views .

[TruthSurge]

@eat666shit thank ya!

[TruthSurge]

@FelidaTheG33k thank ya! I try. The next one will by about the verses that were never part of the original writings. Sort of an abbreviated "Misquoting Jesus" without any of the history.

[perichoresis7]

A well made video with interesting points. But I disagree with you when it comes to the authors' motives for using the OT in their writings. Since the four Gospels were written between 60 and 95 AD, they clearly had time to write a quality literary work. But the use of the OT was for the purpose of connecting this new revelation in Jesus to the Jewish Scriptures in order to demonstrate that Jesus truly was the ultimate, final revelation and embodiment of God's purposes spoken of in the OT.

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 "Since the four Gospels were written between 60 and 95 AD"

Those dates are debated by tons of people, scholars and laymen alike. I personally say it's more like 72 CE to even 130CE. Mark being first, Luke being last then Acts.

Well, we must disagree I guess. I believe the first phases of Christianity involved the BASIC idea that god was revealing his son VIA the pages of the OT. So, this is where they would find out details about God's son as there was...

[perichoresis7]

@TruthSurge I'm not sure where you're getting the info on Luke being last; in my research it seems widely accepted that John was last and can be dated from the early 90s to the 120s. Also, I don't believe the authors were the ones connecting Jesus to the OT in all cases; Jesus was clearly the one who connected himself to the OT (Luke 4:16-21). The authors were merely recording the event. Pieces were added by the authors, but only for greater emphasis, not because it was all fiction.

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 Go research Luke Josephus on google and see what you find. But we cannot make any progress.  You believe Jesus actually lived and these guys recorded what they heard/saw. That idea couldn't be further from the truth. Watch this series from the START. Go watch my Jesus Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah series from 2A. Watch my Dating The New Testament series (4 vids). Those will answer a lot of questions and generate others.

[perichoresis7]

@TruthSurge Will do. But I will say that Josephus lacked the historical/linguistic knowledge to accurately date the Gospel of Luke.

[perichoresis7]

@perichoresis7 Nevermind. haha  You're referring to the connection. Apologies.

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 No, no. The author of Luke (who we don't even know) USED Josephus' works to give his gospel the effect (Effect) of plausibility. Historical verisimilitude (yeah, big word). IOW, he used Josephus' works to make sure his history jived with Josephus' version. ONLY could the author do that if he was writing AFTER the publication of Josphus' works, namely his last one - Antiquities of the Jews. Watch my Dating the NT vids. should help.

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 and, since we know EXACTLY when Josephus' last work was published (95 CE) we know "Luke" could not have written his gospel ANY earlier than 95 CE but more likely 10, 20 years later and sure enough the theology in Luke matches a 2nd century theology, not a late 1st century theology.

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 ... no physical Jesus on the landscape to write about. It's why you see a complete absence of the gospel details in the earlier writings and some contemporary epistles as well AND an amazingly contradictory set of 4 gospels that only can be accounted for if Jesus was being revealed to mankind NOT in person but via the OT passages. It was a literary affair, not oral and not physical. Paul even says this much but it's hard to believe it w/gospel story stuck in our

[perichoresis7]

@TruthSurge I would beg to differ on the over-generalization of it all being a "literary affair". Much of it was oral to start out. Those who witnessed the events of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection transmitted them orally. The authors of the NT books were members of Christian communities that arose out of those oral traditions being transmitted. And if it never happen, we have here the greatest trickery ever to be organized by man in history. Something happened 2000 yrs. ago.

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 "Much of it was oral to start out. "  no, it wasn't. Mark's gospel can be shown to be pretty much all based on previous literary scenes from the Odyssey, Iliad and OT passages. Again, you might be interested in watching this series from vid 1.

Nothing happened 2000 years ago. You simply haven't allowed yourself to see/read/hear the real facts - facts that your Christian friends don't know.

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 brains.

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 thanks, too!

[yeshuahfullofit]

@TruthSurge mmm, atheist porno. garlgrlrgh.  ; )

[TruthSurge]

@yeshuahfullofit Where?

[yeshuahfullofit]

@TruthSurge C'mon! I thought you'd get the "Homer" allusion. ; )

[TruthSurge]

@yeshuahfullofit guess not. :(  spell it out for me! I'm gettin old. hehe

[yeshuahfullofit]

@TruthSurge I've had xians tell me that atheist videos are just like watching porno for us - I guess to compare how much we enjoy them (?) Homer Simpson's line on doughnuts -mmm, doughnuts. (slobbery drool). Your linking of Mark's story to Homer's. The unifier is "Homer". I guess it wasn't as clever as I thought it was. Sure sounds lame in an explanation. Pay it no mind.

[TruthSurge]

@yeshuahfullofit ah. I see the problem now. I've never watched the Simpsons. DOH! hahahhaha so, it prob was good but it was lost on my ignorance of that show. Pay ME no mind. :)

[TempleOfInanna2]

As I have said before, one word will change the entire meaning of a sentence or phrase. If your using a translation that already has scribal errors, contradictions, and intentional re-do's, then your new story is going to be even more confusing.

[TruthSurge]

@TempleOfInanna2 that's true and this vid shows a great example. The Gentile Christians like Mark and Matthew couldn't read Hebrew and so when their Greek version (LXX) told them Jonas was deeply grieved, what did they know? hahah boy, that's embarrassing right there, I don't care WHO you are.

[2eelShmeal]

Excellent work.

Ok Surge, one question:

When was it first suggested there was a Jesus, by whom and what was the intention... did it have to do with getting pagans and Jews on board this new religion?

[TruthSurge]

@2eelShmeal I don't think there is a direct answer to those. Since the Pauline epistles are considered the earliest writings by a Christian we have (most date them to mid 50s), we have that but then it becomes more spongy and nebulous before that. There are certainly inputs that hint at a messiah on earth idea. Lots of greek philosophy bleeding over into Judaism (see Philo of Alexandria). But when did Jesus get called Jesus? When did the Jewish god suddenly become a father?

[TruthSurge]

@2eelShmeal So, I guess, in short, I don't know. :) I think it was a very convoluted and mishmash affair. Even Paul is griping about "other" gospels floating around and people abandoning HIS version and going with another version. There certainly was no ground zero. But if Paul is our earliest example that has made it to us via many copies, what came just before him our in addition to... only the threads of ideas from the later prophets and apocryphal stuff and grk philosoph

[TruthSurge]

@2eelShmeal philosophy et al can be shown as inputs that certainly fed INTO this new idea. Exactly when it happened and clicked in someone's mind that God was revealing his son via OT scriptures... I'm not sure. Probably early first century until maybe 30s or 40s? I'm not, admittedly, very versed in the Jewish apocryphal works and in those probably lie SOME more direct inputs into this son of god idea.

[2eelShmeal]

@TruthSurge What we DO know is that at some point someone or a group of people decided it was USEFUL. LULZ

All they had to do was go back and spin a slightly different web using a lot of the old silk to give it that "authentic" appeal as something the people already are familiar with and can relate to. Interesting stuff Surge. Thanks for the uploads.

[TruthSurge]

@2eelShmeal that's part of it, too. Weave a story that includes pieces of OLDER stories people already knew and you latch onto that mythos and ride that puppy to the bank! well, I doubt mark made any denari off of his gospel but you know.

[GeeKayKayGee]

And 'lo in the garden told of as Gethsemane, well known pathological liar Jesus Forked Tongue (also known as 'Clown Shoes') came to realize that his great web of tall tales and lies had come to thoroughly ensnare him and a great cross of crucifixion was near at hand. And 'lo Jesus did spake unto them saying, "My gawd, my gawd, what have I done for I am so totally fucked!"

[TruthSurge]

@GeeKayKayGee :) basically. HEHEHEHE You've heard of writing yourself into a corner? yep.

[Katalyzt]

Wow! I just checked both my interlinear bible, and my tanakh in reference to the mistranslation of the original term: "deeply grieved" to "angry" in current bibles. Whereby confirming that the writers of Mark plagiarized passages from the Septuagint in particular from Jonah 4:1,9, and applied them to the fictional jesus character. And because of all the currents bibles mistranslation of Jonah it makes the gethsemane scene seem original. :O)

P.S.

Great video TruthSurge ★★★★★

Katalyzt

[TruthSurge]

@Katalyzt YES! These things lay dormant because it takes more than just the one document to see what happened.  If we had NO Septuagint text to compare, that'd cloak all of those problems/sources. etc.

[bonnie43uk]

I'm sure we were all brought up with these biblical stories as children, because they are told to us by responsible adults, we accept as fact that they are true, and if everyone around you also accepts it blindly, it just confirms your beliefs. Some of us have managed to step out of the bubble and see reality. Great series TS.

[TruthSurge]

@bonnie43uk thank ya. No matter how crap the rest of my life gets, I can sit back and grin knowing that I made it out, but not necessarily due to me being a genius but just the fact that I DID make it out will keep that grin on my face till I draw my final O2.

[XheraPhine]

New Epiosde!! Yaaaay!!!!

[TruthSurge]

@XheraPhine finally!

[XheraPhine]

@TruthSurge Some things are well worth waiting for. Your videos definitly fall into the "well worth waiting for" category! Thanks so much!

[TruthSurge]

@XheraPhine thank ya! I was afraid these last 2 would be received as kind of boring. lots more text and thinking to do. But necessary in comparing accts.

[AtheistToothFairy]

Just one more nail in the 'jesus on earth' coffin.....WELL DONE!

[TruthSurge]

@AtheistToothFairy haha! I'm slippin them in there, aren't I? heheheheh all I'm missing is an annote to my JM vids. hehehehe

[AtheistToothFairy]

@TruthSurge

I'd love to see you put together a collection of 'fun facts' about the bible, that shows that jesus was nothing more than a creation of fiction and never some 'god on earth'.

Why....Because so often I hear xtians say that such a 'hoax' could never have been invented and passed off as legit, yet I know that is exactly what occured.

[TruthSurge]

@AtheistToothFairy Only thing I disagree with is the hoax part. I don't think he was invented as a hoax. That's kind of the Joseph Atwill argument. I think Mark's "gospel" was written for reasons that later converts would not realize and they took it as history. I just don't see Mark as doing it for a hoax when he paints Christianity in a positive light.

But yeah, that's in essence what happened. Later people bought his story as fact.

[AtheistToothFairy]

@TruthSurge:"Only thing I disagree with is the hoax part"

When I said 'hoax', I'm referring to when I tell xtians that jesus wasn't real and they reply with an inference that my position is; That if he wasn't real it surely must be a hoax then, see?

Legends have a life of their own, even without intent to form them

[TruthSurge]

@AtheistToothFairy right. Christians are eager to paint it as black and white. Why, Jesus had to be Lord, Liar or Lunatic! THERE ARE NO OTHER OPTIONS!

Um, excuse me but, yes there are. He could have not existed at all. :o And another option is that he honestly believed he was Lord and it made perfect sense to him. That's not necessarily a lunatic unless you want to call Christians lunatics. :)

[harussell]

This may seem like a naive question but why did the authors of the gospels go to such lengths to create a fictional story of Jesus? They write the story as if it were historical fact rather than as new prophecy. Why did they do that when they obviously knew is was a lie?

[TruthSurge]

@harussell You cannot accuse Mark of trying to pass off a lie for history. In his day, they didn't have TV. So, they would write and I believe Mark was writing a kind of pwnage work where his new religion (having converted from whatever to Christianity) had just been vindicated via the ass-beating Rome just gave to the "evil" Jews who had been rejecting his beliefs. So, he writes a parable/allegory/epic where Jesus himself is on earth playing a role and spanking the Jewish leaders

[TruthSurge]

@harussell No one in Mark's community would have believed his work to represent history. They were all in on the motives and sources he used. Outside of THAT circle, people who were NOT gnostic Christians or people who were not Christian at all could have easily taken it as some kind of historical account, not being familiar with the fictional forms Mark employed. So, I don't think Mark was trying to fool anyone. It was a writing with many other purposes than that.

[TruthSurge]

@harussell just my thoughts! But there are lots of cases where we know the authors knew they were in fact lying and their response might be "if it causes Christianity to flourish, it's all good".

[harussell]

@TruthSurge Well if Mark invented the story of Jesus to further an agenda then logically he couldn't exactly have converted to Christianity because it wouldn't have existed as such before he authored the story of Jesus. Which implies he belonged to some proto-Christian group (Gnostics? Mythraism?) which he helped evolve into Christianity through the preaching of his story whether that was his intent or not. It's plausible he didn't intend it to be taken literally but...

[TruthSurge]

@harussell "then logically he couldn't exactly have converted to Christianity because it wouldn't have existed as such before he authored the story of Jesus. "

There are two thoughts I have. 1, Mark was of the gnostic camp but wrote his gospel as an epic/allegory/metaphor thingy. 2, he WAS already orthodox and was simply creating a written work based on the orthodox beliefs of his community. I tend to believe the former is the only real answer.

[TruthSurge]

@harussell Christianity DID exist prior to any gospel. But it existed as a kind of gnostic version. Jesus in heaven. Jesus never on earth.  Jesus died and rose sometime in the unspecified mythic past or around the time the earth was made.

Then comes Mark and BOOM! orthodoxy is on it's way to becoming "the" Christianity.

[TruthSurge]

@harussell So, I don't think there is some conspiracy like Atwill et al claim. Romans invented Christianity? I'll grant you that A Roman invented (unwittingly) ORTHODOX Christianity but no more than that. The rest is far too tenuous even for me to buy.

[harussell]

@TruthSurge ...to be honest Mark brings to mind Carlos Castaneda who invented his own belief system by drawing on a multitude of sources mostly unrelated to Native American spirituality but masking as such. Millions flocked to him even though his stories were fiction because his message was emotionally and intellectually appealing. Now Castaneda deliberately lied and perhaps Mark didn't but the end result is similar. Just an observation, I reserve the right to change my mind, lol.

[TruthSurge]

@harussell you make a good pt. If you know of an example of what I claim Mark did (Carlos) then it certainly makes sense that Mark would do the same (sans deliberate deception). I think Mark knew he was writing fiction and also that he was not intending people to think it was history because he frames his acct AS fiction. No one would really write a history acct and model it after Homer's Odyssey, a KNOWN fiction. I think it is also a chasm between learned and unlearned folk.

[TruthSurge]

@harussell The learned who knew about Homer and the Odyssey might see that in Mark's work and go "great epic, man! awesome way you blended all that together to make an epic adventure with your god, jesus!" The unlearned would read Mark and go "Wow! this happened!"

[harussell]

@TruthSurge Well I guess it's tough to know what Mark was thinking or what his intent was 2000 years after the fact. You would have to surmise he could have guessed it would be misinterpreted by the less learned but maybe he didn't anticipate it would be distributed outside of a small group of literate friends.  But...

[harussell]

@TruthSurge ...what of the other gospel writers? Were they purely motivated to produce good literature or were they embellishing something they knew to be fiction or assumed was fact in order to improve it's believability among the rank and file or their burgeoning religion? Because at some point after Mark the learned among the Christian church started teaching the story of Jesus as fact whether they believed it or not themselves.

[TruthSurge]

@harussell I think Matthew is clearly a rewrite of Mark. But he improves Mark and adds a lot more prophecy fulfillment. Did he do this to trick people? Or did he honestly believe that ANYTHING in the OT could be a prophecy about Jesus? So he might have felt perfectly ethical by pulling parts of sentences from the OT and claiming they had been fulfilled by Jesus doing them but then I ask.... how is it ethical to invent the EVENT? so, it smells fishy at least.

[harussell]

@TruthSurge I agree it does look fishy. Bu if it all looks fishy to us wouldn't it be logical to assume it also looks fishy to bible scholars who are members of the clergy? Do you think the Pope has yet to figure out the gospels are fiction? Well when you figure some people still think the sun revolves around the earth then I guess anything is possible.

[TruthSurge]

@harussell I think some of those people are honestly not smart enough to understand the enormity of the problem. The others are but wave it all away and just HOPE somewhere deep inside there is a kernel of truth. Prob all types just like in any big set of people. But the ones that don't believe and say they do... those would be pretty slimy people.

[harussell]

@TruthSurge Have you seen this video?

/watch?v=oXYQ0d5FYtc

What do you think of Father Foster "Senior Vatican Priest"?

[TruthSurge]

@harussell didn't ever see that but I like him! he's admitting that a lot of it is silly tacked on stories but of course, he can't go back further to say the WHOLE story is just silly and a tackon.

[harussell]

@TruthSurge Assuming it wasn't staged then I like him too. But I've never come across a priest around here with such modern outlook. I wonder if Pope Ben likes him or if he will be assigned to a church in Antarctica shortly, lol.

[TruthSurge]

@harussell nah,he's helping to spread the word! get those borderliners in here!

[TruthSurge]

@harussell iow, Matthew knew he was writing fiction but it was ok to him because it furthered his cause and his beliefs.  It was a struggle of doctrines and he was going to use steroids no matter what! His beliefs would win and he knew there would be no drug testing. :)

[Zentz29]

Good shit!

[TruthSurge]

@Zentz29 thank ya!

[fallbread]

interesting

[TruthSurge]

@fallbread thanks

[rchuso]

I am of the opinion that Paul was strictly Gnostic, and the gospels were modified to give Jesus a physical life. This makes the N.T. partly Gnostic, partly anti-Gnostic. There's a quote I came upon decades ago that "Christianity was almost swallowed up by the Gnostic religion", when in fact, it was probably more true that Christianity *was* Gnostic in the first century. Likely?

[TruthSurge]

@rchuso Very. There are all kinds of ideas. Some people think Paul was fictional. I am skeptical of that. They claim Marcion actually wrote his epistles maybe 120 CE. Not sure why Marcion would create fictional letters when most people FORGED letters to add authority. If Paul had authority of some kind, it explains why Ephesians, 1 and 2 Tim, Titus, etc were forged. Those people wanted to ride on Paul's coattails to get their letters and beliefs propagated.

[TruthSurge]

@rchuso To me, this is exactly what happened. Early Christians believed in a heavenly-only Jesus. Nothing of the gospels is anywhere in these works except the faintest hints of a few particular scenes which is always the case. the primitive, non-fleshed-out stuff comes FIRST, later writers copy THAT and embellish with lots of new details. Exactly what we see with the NT. Hebrews is great along these lines. It explicitly says Jesus sacrificed himself in heaven, not on earth.

[rozeboosje]

A joy

[TruthSurge]

@rozeboosje thank ye!

[Pablo113]

Jesus is ABBA...aka....Yahweh, So why would he have to ask himself to let this cup pass by?

[TruthSurge]

@Pablo113 Well, because Mark (the 1st gospel) didn't cast Jesus as being also God. In Mark, Jesus is only God's son and a separate entity from god.

[Pablo113]

Awesome Video series!

[TruthSurge]

@Pablo113 thanks!

[SmilingSkeptic]

Excellent work

[TruthSurge]

@SmilingSkeptic thank ya!

[bigboy45454545]

Starting at about 7:35 you call us Shirley three times in this video? That's a little insulting don't you think? :-)

[TruthSurge]

@bigboy45454545 Well, just chalk it up to senility. :) Keeps me from having to remember all my subs' names. HEHE

[0gods]

@TruthSurge

It was some of these parallelisms that I heard as evidence _for_ Jesus by fundamentalists that first started me to question if there actually was an historical Jesus (~1982). When one zooms out on the gospels, it is clear all of the writers were searching for real details to flesh out a mythical Jesus--in essence to confirm their bias, their faith that he was real: to bring him to life. What sealed the deal for me was a lack of contemporary narratives about this controversial Jesus.

[TruthSurge]

@0gods yep. No contemporary writings. No writings by the man himself. Nothing in the historians that show independent witness and the Josephus forgery is so bald as to really not need comment. Then, the 4 gospelers can't even get their basic facts straight beyond that he WAS crucified and DID die and DID come back. That's about all. All other details conflict because they were synthesized, not relayed orally from witnesses. Theological motivations. Bias. etc.

[astrophonix]

I was shocked to learn that Jesus was an Abba fan. (@ 3:46) I thought he'd be more into the Manic Street Preachers?

[TruthSurge]

@astrophonix hehehe

[gamutman]

I read that book years ago. I agree. It's great.

[TruthSurge]

@gamutman yep. gives a lot of food for thought.

[gamutman]

@TruthSurge The part that stands out in my memory was the way the author covered the story of the fruit bearing tree that bore no fruit and how when the gospels were read knowing that Matthew and Luke were rewriting Mark you could see the embellishments clear as day.

[TruthSurge]

@gamutman yeah, when you have all the stuff to compare, it's more clear about what happened to what. Imagine living 1900 years back in Palestine. ! I mean, you might get lucky and find a copy of Matthew but not Mark and Luke. You live your life and never know. Then, post-400CE, no one has bibles because the church knew that people would start to question. Enter the printing press. Pandora's box flung wide with no going back. :)

[ulthea]

Erm...is there an 11c yet? Don't keep me hanging! :D

[TruthSurge]

@ulthea part 12. I use a, b if a section is longer than 15 min (YT limit).

[ulthea]

Great video!

[TruthSurge]

@ulthea thanks!

[lawbag1]

A video series that is enjoyable to listen to several times, as TS covers a lot of material. This is the kind of educational material you need to refute any biblical claim.

[TruthSurge]

@lawbag1 thanks! Plus, this is just touching upon the quantity of problems. Many others I won't even look at in this series. I'm just showing some examples of various kinds of issues related to the unreliability of the gospels and later I'll get more focused onto the resurrection itself.

[rollofnickles]

I am amazed at the connections and deceit.

[bvwatcher2]

This whole series has been fascinating....and educational. I thank you.

[TruthSurge]

@bvwatcher2 thanks!

[lawbag1]

nice, was the Russian "see you later" at the end a clue to the next episode or just said on a whim?

[TruthSurge]

@lawbag1 Now, I wasn't clever this time. It was just me saying buh bye now in Russian. The next one will be similar to Ehrman's book "misquoting Jesus" in regard to showing some verses that were added to the gospels. thank ya

[MacNutz2]

I have loved this series and learned much from it. You've touched upon so many questions that have occurred such as which came first, the OT stories as prophecies, or the claims that those original writings were prophecies. A variation on the theme of rewriting the past for contemporary purposes. Contemporary to that time.

[TruthSurge]

@MacNutz2 yep. Did a guy named Jesus really live a life that perfectly matched up to many OT verses? Or... did the gospel authors go prophecy hunting and create the details FROM the passages they snatched out of context from the OT? which is easier? which is more likely? And what of the passages that are clearly misinterpreted by Matthew? Jerked out of context? Lots to think about. thanks!

[SpaceFrawg]

@TruthSurge "And what of the passages that are clearly misinterpreted by Matthew? " There's the rub, if not for that theists could maintain the claim that it is prophecy. I suspect many still will, evidence has not stopped them in the past.

[TruthSurge]

@SpaceFrawg yep.  One thing I like about doing these vids is that it lets me say what I want the way I want and anyone can watch and then decide if there is any merit or not. Arguing with someone is usually a waste of two people's time.