Hey Kabane. Can you please explain why all the other gods are not real? Can you explain why the Mesopotamian story of the world's creation is so similar in detail to the Old Testament story in Genesis? Lastly, can you please explain why it seems that christianity seems to have copied so many pagan stories of god men such as Semele, mother of Dionysus, who has a 7 month pregnancy and how Dionysus shared a last supper with his 12 disciples. Seriously dude, your religion is copying from other ones!
The Mesopotamian story of Creation isn't similar to the Jewish story of creation. The only real example you might have of parallels is Genesis 6-7 and the Epic of Gilgamesh, though a case can be made that the Genesis narrative is the more primitive tradition and that they derive from a common source.
Friend, that Dionysus thing is simply false. I have a plethora of videos on the topic of "pagan parallels" to Jesus and Dionysus is addressed.
@KabaneTheChristian I don't know why I thought speaking to one of the blind would have any different results this time. First off, you can't simply vacate Dionysus because you say so as the mythology is there. His mother is reported to have had a 7 month pregnancy just as Mary supposedly did with Jesus. He also had 12 disciples. Lastly, the Enuma Elish so closely mirrors the story of Genesis that only a person as blind as you could not see it. Enjoy your ignorance.
rofl, wow. First, point me to where in the Bible Mary is said to have been pregnant seven months. Okay, next, please point me to the source within the primary texts of the Greek religions where Dionysus is said to have had Twelve Disciples. Third, quote the Enuma Elish and compare it with the account[s] given in Genesis 1 and 2. If you can't do this, then you are the blind one.
@KabaneTheChristian According to most myths Dionysus has a retinue of 16 followers, 12 human and 4 gods. As for the Enuma Elish, the 6 gens of the gods represent the 6 days of gods creation. Marduk, one of the 6th gen gods, creates man as his slave so that the other gods may rest. On the 6th day god creates man and then rests. The first generation of the EE gods created a formless void. The first day of creation was a formless void...really? Do I have to hold your hand through this any more?
@KabaneTheChristian 2nd gen of Enuma Elish gods brought forth a division of the waters. The 3rd Gen of gods brought forth the creation of dry land. Is any of this looking familiar to you yet? 4th gen = lights in the sky. 5th gen = creation of animals and the like. Stop me if you've heard this. So obviously, as even my 12 year old son can tell, there are amazing similarities between the Enuma elish and your precious jesus myths.
@KabaneTheChristian Also, incase you can't make the connection between the jeesus 12 and the Dion 12, the christians just removed the mention of any other "gods" since there is only the one, right [wink, wink, nudge, nudge].
Then again, god does refer to himself in the plural in the book of Gensis AND Judiaism does not, in any manner, way, shape or form accept the notion of a human god that does leave us with some pretty interesting questions to answer, no?
Where do you get your information? Nobody knows who wrote any of the so-called gospels. But certainly none of the writers from Paul onward, met JC, since they were all written decades after the alleged death.
Hi Kabane, I ran across your video on books to read, and I purchased "Jesus and the Eyewitnesses" by Richard Bauckham, and I'm glad I bought it, after reading it everything started to hit home.
We have no testimonial evidence they copied from each other, we merely assume so becausr that usually turns out to be the case when wrters agree so much.
But as you can see, all external evidence in everyway refutes it. In history, if a tradition persists uncontradiction and was started early, we must accept it as most probably valid. With who wrote the Gospel accounts and on what authority they wrote, the tradition is far more overwhelmingly obvious then any other ancient tradition.
I only have a few comments on the matter. The Synoptic Problem is not based on evidnece, it is based on presuppositions. Becaause we have never observed independent witnesses agree so much with each other, we must conclude they copied from each is their mode of thinking.
THis is not to be downplayed. In the absence of evidence, I too would believe this if I saw documents with almost the same wording. However, when history speaks, it is the duty of philosophy and assumptions to be silent.
I watched the clip on the show and he pretty much owned you.
you also said there are no miraculous claims in the khoran koran or however it's spelled...ummmm... what do you call that whole talking to Allah and then riding the horse to the heavens? sounds pretty miraculous to me.
the whole god exists because "it's obvious" argument is dead and buried. it's not obvious at all. U think that someone made all that is and ever will be, yet he has a vested interest in your sex lives?
One extra thing - the woman caught in adultery in John DESERVED to be stoned by the Jews. Jesus pardoned her even though she was guilty and an "enemy of the law" and "a sinner". Jesus did not rejoice in the downfall of this woman by stoning. He saved her through logic. Logic... something useful when confronting hard, ancient scripture
You deserve to die, because in my book ignorence and stupidity is sinfull. You believe in a magic man living in the sky known as God. I can't think of anything more retarded to believe. I would love to stone you to death.
"Rejoicing in the downfall of the enemies of God is permitted in Psalm 58." - this is from your homepage. I read that passage and it made me feel ill. Tell me you don't really "rejoice in bathing your feet in your enemies blood" (Ps. 58) do you? What would Jesus say about this?
Well, Jesus actually was a Jewish reformer, take a glance of the N.T. and you will see that he would (most likely as I am not him) not agree with rejoicing in the downfall of enemies. Despite being a Jew, he clearly preached a different message - hence the "new" aspect of testament... yet on a human to human basis, you rejoice in seeing people suffer when you (subjectively) consider them evil? Is this moral?
Could you ponder if perhaps the interpretation you are taking of Psalm 58, callously rejoicing in others suffering, could be a poor interpretation that Jesus came to rectify? I see Jesus' message being compassion, not vengeance. That view is not displaying compassion, but vengeance.
If you are trying to persuade people it might not be a good idea to come off as so cocky. Honestly, I don't care what you look like. Also, slow down when you talk.
That's why he does talk so fast. You admitted that you lost most of what he said yet you think he's using his brain. I'm not saying he's dumb, but a lot of his arguments aren't good at all. You fell right into his trap...beware!
I think most Xtians that use intellectual arguments to support the bible and are intelligent are *desperately* trying to keep their "faith." I think this kid *is* smart, but the arguments for the resurrection being accepted by historians as an actual event and the arugments that I hear in the videos seem...desperate. They make me sad. It sounds like he is trying to take the "faith" part out and make religion real. It's not. That's why faith is called for by religion.
Lol...that's not really my pic. It's a snapshot out of a video that my ex's brother put on...and it's his friend that I don't even know. Did you catch all that? :) I pretty much figured you thought what you said before you said, but it was music to my...eyes?
Quick note: I think we need an anti-abortion protestor task force to do our best to protect those getting abortions.
About the task force, I think that's a great idea.
I am trying to be careful what I say cause this kid *blocks* and I don't wanna get blocked, ya know? I don't think I have heard arguments like he makes before and I enjoy listening and checking out what he says. Did ya notice we have been marked as SPAM? I don't feel like spam....
my god dude. well actually i dont have a god. but what the hell is with your hair get a haircut or some scissors or something cause that looks like something out of battlestar gallactica.
There are two kinds of scholarship today: conservatie and liberal. The latter was invented by Freemasons and humanists and does not even deserve the name "scholarship." It is a discrace to the Christian tadition and a perversion. No one alive today has the knowledge, illumination and scholarhip of the ancient fathers. "A theologian is one who prays" - St. Symeon the New Theoligian. "Aquisition of spiritual knowledge without purification of the heart is the theology of demons." - St. Maximus.
These secular humanists (liberals, mythicists) who are "doing' theology, are wolves in sheeps clothing. They are spiritual pigs. They dont even live the life in Christ. They imported Enlightenment and humanistic methods and concepts onto the Bible and Christianity which was a tragic error on their part. They don't know and understand what Christianity is.
That is a very broad generalization based on very little empirical observation. As a student under actual biblical scholar and that has read and digested works from scholars in this field, it stand to reason, at least to my understanding, that most scholars are of a Christian, whatever manifestation of that word, in some way, shape or form.
People don't know that Freemasons, Jews and Communists are behind all this liberal "theology." They have been on a relentless campaign to "discredit" Christianity for centuries. They work for the Antichrist and want to push the world toward a non- Biblical and non- Church religion of Antichrist. Read "Orthodoxy and The Religion of the Future," by Father Seraphim Rose.
There is no "synoptic problem." Such an idea comes from heretics. Protestant and liberal theology is not inspired. You can trust all the gospels. Protestant theology is rationalistic and leads to skepticism. Dostoyevsky said Protestantism leads to atheism. The rational tendency in Protestantism was imported from Roman Catholicism, which came from Augustine. He's the cause of all western heresies. Protestants left the Church, now they are leaving the Gospels, soon they will leave the Epistles
The claim that most scholars aren't Christian, is a patent falsehood. Liberal scholarship has always been the minority. The Society for Biblical Liturature has officially condemned the Jesus Seminar for their methodologies. We have two thousand years of conservative scholarship, and the best scholarship comes from Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic and Protestants.
Where did you get your information about the SBL and the Jesus Seminar? Robert Funk, founder of the Jesus Seminar, was also executive secretary of the SBL. If you look at their site, you get generally positive or neutral comments concerning the JS. I doubt seriously that it was "officially condemned".
I have two questions, what evidence do you have that the testaments were written of direct word from god?(as no one witnessed anything from before Adam, and Adam was not a contributor to the bible as an author)and, What evidence do you have that what you call the bible today, is actually what the original authors had written?
The bible says slavery is ok. The bible has a story of god having someone murdered because he was doing work on the sabbath. Yet here I am listening to you argue the semantics, and structural inconsistencies of certain segments of the bible.
Kabane, I don't know wht you deal with these people. You have great patience. I figured out stickam. My screen resulotion was messed up. But I'm not going back there anyway. It's a hive of devils in every room.
Actually, your videos on the historical Jesus made me become interested in the history of Christianity again. My girlfriend thinks I'm crazy for having books by E. P. Sanders and N. T. Wright lying around, but it's just a fascinating subject--historically, theologically, philosophically, sociologically. One of my best friends, a newly minted Ph.D. who does political theology, wants me to read Karl Barth and Stanley Hauerwas, but that may be a bridge too far at this point... heh.
Whoops, I was thinking of a different Karl. Karl Bardht. Very similar names, but the Karl I was thinking of is one who claims Jesus was an Essene. My mistake.
I am an atheist and would never dream of flagging ANY video - regardless of content (and I REALLY mean that!) Free speech is intrinsic to atheism, and for once, it is nice to find a Christian that lets you comment openly on his videos (but not his channel) I think you will find that it is usually bible waving Christians that do most of the flagging, because so few of them appear to believe in free speech. I see I can comment on your channel, so I will continue there.
Flag-WAVING atheists are 1-starring his video simply because he disagreed with the hosts of The Atheist Experience. I never accused atheists, or anyone else for that matter, of flagging videos for TOS violations.
And incidentally, free speech is not intrinsic to atheism. In fact, nothing is intrinsic to atheism--aside from the denial that a god exists. It should not be conflated with any worldview that it is typically associated with, such as secular humanism, which does make moral demands.
"Refuting" Tooltime while he's on his hiatus is as about as good as showing up to a debate without inviting the other person... and then debating him anyway.
Because a writing of scripture has a motive, it is immediately deemed true by people like yourself? Every single person who believes they were abducted by aliens were all hypnotized?
Your mind really is quite amazing -- What you call history the rest of the world calls faith. My pet faeries will pray for you.
Texts counts, but not text alone. You cant just say that because someone wrote that jesus came back to life, thats enough evidence to believe it happened. Because first, there is no proof evidence has ever even happened and miracles are not possible, at least to what we know.
"Texts counts, but not text alone. You cant just say that because someone wrote that jesus came back to life, thats enough evidence to believe it happened."
We went over this in the call. It's just rhetoric to yell TEXT ALONE and say it isn't enough. Why isn't it enough? I'm expecting a logical argument which is syllogistically formulated, by the way.
"Because first, there is no proof evidence has ever even happened and miracles are not possible, at least to what we know. "
MMM, y can't we use text alone for evidence. Well one reason is that people LIE. Not everyone tells the truth one hundred percent of the time. Second, it kind of goes with lying but, people can write down what ever they want. It's really not a hard concept to follow. smart guy. People lie and can say what ever they want and in two thousand years you believe what you read thats you. I guess you've seen miracles, good for you. I see unicorn and dragon everyday on my way home.
Yea I wouldent argue with my argument either tommyboy, You just believe what ever the bible says for no dam reason and you know it. Your argument is cicular buddy, the bible is true because the bible says it is. lol
Oh you're so clever! Now how about you point out where I made that statement? It's a dumb thing that fundies will say but I don't ever say that, so piss off.
you might not say it but it's what you do, the bible says jesus rose from the dead, and the only proof is that the bible says it. Text can be evidence, but not evidence enough. lol your too easy brah
Oh you silly little man. The Bible isn't one book! Attestation from a reliable text is evidence that an event occurred. How do we know they are reliable? Not because they say so, but because we run the same internal and external tests we run on other texts, and they turn up positive here.
Why isn't text evidence enough? Could you give me a logical syllogism to support that statement?
BECAUSE PEOPLE LIE. PEOPLE CAN WRITE WHAT THEY WANT AND SOMEONE LIKE YOU WILL BELIEVE IT WITHOUT EVIDENCE. so other evidence is needed, especially when saying things like people died and then came back to life or turning water into wine, its called a fairytale.
Non-sequitur. Nice. I've dealt with the lying thing before btw. Social factors of the NT world totally knocks it out. Ever read the work of the Context Group?
LOL, Thats not other evidence at all buddy. Just say it, there is no other evidence, just say it. Have you ever read the gilgamish, do you believe everything in that too. Come on, the concept of god dosent even make any dam sense.
You stated that people lied, and therefore we needed evidence other than text. I am waiting for you to present the premise that connects those two statements and validates your syllogism. Until you can do so, your argument is a non-sequitur. I also knocked out your implication that the authors of the NT texts were liars. Yes, I have read the Epic of Gilgamesh actually, but I believe we were discussing the New Testament documents. Let's stay on topic.
Ok follow me and if you dont get this, then you never will. Ok people are not perfect, people lie, people make stories and things up. So people made up all the stories of the bible for who knows what reason, like ppl made up gilgamesh, hindu, buddism, and anyother religion. When did you knock out my argument that the authors of the nt were liars, if you did it so easily, why dont all historians and people think that way. Ther eis no way to know what is true in the nt and what is a lie.
lol, the fact that we dont even know who wrote the nt, And your telling me that all historians believe that jesus preformed miracles and arrose from the dead. Just answe one question for me, Y Did God make this earth, this universe and Make us. I dont see the point if he is all knowing and all powerful, wouldent he already know what we would all do, who is going to heaven and who to hell, does not make sense.
Already dealt with that argument. I outline the arguments for authorship based on standard internal and external tests for authorship in my video "The Gospel Evidence" No, I told you that no historian would suggest that the apostles deliberately lied, as you suggested. The atheist and secular historians of today suggest other alternative explanations (which fail equally). Don't change the subject. We are discussing the NT documents.
So again you show no real evidence. Maybe they didnt deliberately lied, but they lied. Again the only evidence is the bible, not good enough as Matt told you Sunday. Maybe a guy named jesus lived, and maybe he went around preaching ,but that does not mean that there is a god. Because no real historian or scientist believe in the miracles in the bible, you know the flood, moses storey, jesus miracles, Y not change the subject we r getting no where anyway, you just keep repeating ur propaganda
And therein lies the problem. They told a falsehood according to you, but they had a sincere belief. So, what was the cause of the origin of the disciples beliefs?
Don't make claims about historians. You haven't read them. I'll list you five who believe in Jesus' miracles, and if you want more, I'll keep listing them until you finally apologize for that falsehood that no real historian accepts Jesus' miracles.
Are you suggesting also that Ken Miller and Francis Colins aren't real scientists?
then they are shitty historians aint they, and they are not real scientist because any scientist that believe in miracles are creationist crazy fake scientist. Sorry i dont have the time to read religious propaganda, too busy with college, so i'd rather read science and medicine books. Can you name me an example of a mircacle that has been proven to happen?
Ah, I expected this. The No True Scotsman fallacy. Any historian who agrees with me is "not a real historian". It's a nice way to create a consensus in your own mind. Really? Ken Miller goes across the country, debating for evolution and defending it being taught in schools. Collins is the head of the Human Genome Project and also argues for evolution.
Sure. The resurrection. I asked you to explain the origin of the apostles beliefs. You are apparently unable to.
Wait so all scientist and historians agree that the bible is 100% true? and they all say that the miracles happened? this is news to me. wow kabane you are so right. Again, how does jesus mean there is a god, because that is the real argument here. I dont care if a guy named jesus walked around, preaching, there has been cult leaders before him and after him. Still dont mean there is a god
NO! I never said that. I said that there are respected scholars who say that Christianity is true. It sure means there's a God if he rose from the dead.
LOL, Just give me one good reason for god to make the earth, the universe, and the people, the animals, the plants, and everything else, What is he bored, he Already knows whats going to happen. Does he want friends in heaven?, why not just put everyone in heaven, why make a litmus test?
Actually, there were 12 other messianic movements before and after Jesus. Each of them dissipated after their leaders were killed. Not so with Jesus. That is the critical question. Why is it different? What is the origin of their belief in the resurrection. Excellent historians such as NT Wright conclude that the resurrection is the only plausible explanation
What about the other religions, they are still here as well. I dont care if some people think its the only plausible explanation, i dont even see how its the only plausible explanation. How about its just a cult made up, just like the musilms, the Hindus, the buddist and any other religion. So the only way god could save us is by sending someone down to die on a cross? Makes no sense just like everything else in the bible.
Stop trying to force me off-topic, I'm not falling for that. The made up point has already been addressed, see my discussion of kinship. Any other alternative explanations for me to crush or are you willing to admit that you're ignorant on this subject?
Not so with Islam either, or Mormonism or Scientology ~ Many other religions are thriving, while yours is dying to modern and progressive society. All it shows is that people are gullible, nothing more.
Your select references are widely refuted, hence your bronze-age pagan scripture isn't and won't be considered historical. That's like saying all the other historians are wrong, but the one you like is right.
Call in again on Sunday, have your "no miracles in the Quran" revealed as another lie.
We ALL do have a choice..... we all came into this World with nothing and some will leave that way, but we also have a choice to change this and gaining everything on the other side. Why are you here having a go at Kabane??? are you searching for God...
I listened to the mp3 of your encounter with The Atheist Experience in full. I don't think that you got the better of him in any way, but it does not surprise me to learn that you and other Christians judge the debate differently. Like one of your last replies to Psyjax, the conversation only served to make plain your metaphysical assumptions and the different levels of confidence each of you place in the historical method as a means to discover truth.
Your chief problem if that you reify the historical method. You think that if one follows the generally agreed upon rules of historical reconstruction--regardless of the incompleteness or untrustworthiness of the data that we happen to have available to us due to historical accident--the picture that the method yields is the truth. It is historical reality. It is what happened.
The problem, though, is that few historians in the twenty-first century are naive realists philosophically, even with regard to everyday historical matters, like what Lincoln actually said during the Gettysburg address or when he died (the accounts differ). You manage to be naive realist about supernatural events occurring some 2000 years ago! And all without so much as a blush. This is just -one- of the reasons why the hosts of The Atheist Experience were frustrated by your overconfidence.
Some people believe that Matt talking for an hour and giving me ten seconds to reply is "pwnage". Every time I had an equal amount of time to respond, he was destroyed. Example: The Qu'ran vs. the hadith. The use of ECREE as a standard of evidence. The objectivity of the rationality of atheism.
Yea he had more time, but that's because you think a book written thousands of years ago is evidence enough for miracles. Not so my friend. and second, i remember we had a debate months ago about Socrates and he might have not ever existed and you acted like you had no clue what I was saying. Come on dude, be serious, evidence is evidence, and you put different standards on things.
Ehrman said he deconverted from Christianity because of the problem of evil in his book "God's problem". I think the textual issues were only secondary.
I wish I had a dollar for every time that book is cited in the comments section of this channel. Can anyone show evidence for having read a word of it beyond the title? Did you know that Robert J. Fogelin addresses the flaws in Earman's reconstruction of Hume's argument in 'A Defense of Hume on Miracles?' No doubt it's convincing, given the title.
And while we're at it, have you ever heard of a book called 'Gospel Fictions' by Randel Helms? Well, I guess that settles it!
"I wish I had a dollar for every time that book is cited in the comments section of this channel."
I can't recall anyone citing this book all the time. I was pointing out that, since Matt wanted people that reject Hume that are not christians, and John Earman is an example. So what's so bad about it?
And yes, I read Earman.
Randel Helms is no scholar in the relevant field and the book is mainly his own fiction.
Would you mind providing references when you make videos like this? it would be very helpful to viewers who actually want to check and see if you are right.
otherwise it just sounds like a series of assertions to me.
I just thought of the strongest reason why an apostolic tradition would not explain the double or triple tradition passages. If such a tradition existed, it would of course have existed in Aramaic, because that is what Jesus and the apostles spoke. This would not provide a basis for why the there is such remarkable agreement in the Greek gospels.
And no one has ever found Q, no one knows whether it's a written document or an oral source, no one knows what it contains and we don't know whether it really existed.
However, there are people who argue that Q had 5 layers of redaction!
The agreement in the Greek gospels is far, far exaggerated. In fact, the agreement IN EXACT WORDING in the shared tradition is only 23%. This is a serious problem for theories of literary dependence, and why oral dependence best explains Matthew's and Mark's accounts.
23% agreement in EXACT WORDING is HUGE, KTC. Especially when these are supposedly translations. If 23% of your answers on an essay exam matched someone elses answers EXACTLY, you have some major explaining to do. (And I don't think anyone would buy that you had studied together and therefore have a shared oral tradition which, by the way, was in French.)
No, it isn't huge. The common core of oral tradition best explains that, because it would have some vary slight variations in most of the sayings. Literary dependence means they had a copy of Mark/Quelle sitting there, and they could have copied straight out of it. The shared tradition should be 100% identical if your theory is correct.
It's unreasonable to assume that Luke and Matthew would have used Mark 100% if they used him at all. The agreement in wording is actually much higher than 23%. (don't know where you're getting that number from.)
I get it, that's probably a combination of the figures for Matthew AND Luke, right? It's true that Luke copies Mark much less than Matthew, but Matthew still has over 50% of the EXACT wording from Mark.
Yes, they probably did have a copy of Mark and/or Q right there, but dependence doesn't mean they were scribes. Many of the other verses that weren't exact were close, which is what you would expect. And you've never addressed the issues of translation. You simply wouldn't expect two independent translators to come as close as they did to each other. (Just compare the NIV translation to the NAS translation. You don't get anywhere close to 23% agreement in exact wording.)
No, that doesn't even come close to explaining anything. For one thing, Greek is an inflected language, where Aramaic is an analytical language. You don't expect independent translations from languages that different to be exact.
Give me one example of two independent translations where the wording is EXACT 23% of the time. It doesn't happen.
Hey Kabane. Can you please explain why all the other gods are not real? Can you explain why the Mesopotamian story of the world's creation is so similar in detail to the Old Testament story in Genesis? Lastly, can you please explain why it seems that christianity seems to have copied so many pagan stories of god men such as Semele, mother of Dionysus, who has a 7 month pregnancy and how Dionysus shared a last supper with his 12 disciples. Seriously dude, your religion is copying from other ones!
captwasabi 1 year ago
@captwasabi
The Mesopotamian story of Creation isn't similar to the Jewish story of creation. The only real example you might have of parallels is Genesis 6-7 and the Epic of Gilgamesh, though a case can be made that the Genesis narrative is the more primitive tradition and that they derive from a common source.
Friend, that Dionysus thing is simply false. I have a plethora of videos on the topic of "pagan parallels" to Jesus and Dionysus is addressed.
KabaneTheChristian 1 year ago
@KabaneTheChristian I don't know why I thought speaking to one of the blind would have any different results this time. First off, you can't simply vacate Dionysus because you say so as the mythology is there. His mother is reported to have had a 7 month pregnancy just as Mary supposedly did with Jesus. He also had 12 disciples. Lastly, the Enuma Elish so closely mirrors the story of Genesis that only a person as blind as you could not see it. Enjoy your ignorance.
captwasabi 1 year ago
@captwasabi
rofl, wow. First, point me to where in the Bible Mary is said to have been pregnant seven months. Okay, next, please point me to the source within the primary texts of the Greek religions where Dionysus is said to have had Twelve Disciples. Third, quote the Enuma Elish and compare it with the account[s] given in Genesis 1 and 2. If you can't do this, then you are the blind one.
KabaneTheChristian 1 year ago
@KabaneTheChristian According to most myths Dionysus has a retinue of 16 followers, 12 human and 4 gods. As for the Enuma Elish, the 6 gens of the gods represent the 6 days of gods creation. Marduk, one of the 6th gen gods, creates man as his slave so that the other gods may rest. On the 6th day god creates man and then rests. The first generation of the EE gods created a formless void. The first day of creation was a formless void...really? Do I have to hold your hand through this any more?
captwasabi 1 year ago
Comment removed
captwasabi 1 year ago
@KabaneTheChristian 2nd gen of Enuma Elish gods brought forth a division of the waters. The 3rd Gen of gods brought forth the creation of dry land. Is any of this looking familiar to you yet? 4th gen = lights in the sky. 5th gen = creation of animals and the like. Stop me if you've heard this. So obviously, as even my 12 year old son can tell, there are amazing similarities between the Enuma elish and your precious jesus myths.
captwasabi 1 year ago
@KabaneTheChristian Also, incase you can't make the connection between the jeesus 12 and the Dion 12, the christians just removed the mention of any other "gods" since there is only the one, right [wink, wink, nudge, nudge].
Then again, god does refer to himself in the plural in the book of Gensis AND Judiaism does not, in any manner, way, shape or form accept the notion of a human god that does leave us with some pretty interesting questions to answer, no?
captwasabi 1 year ago
Actually, Bart Ehrman deconverted because of the problem of evil. Thats what he said in his book.
SonnyDelight55 1 year ago
Where do you buy hats?
rrpostalagain 1 year ago
Where do you get your information? Nobody knows who wrote any of the so-called gospels. But certainly none of the writers from Paul onward, met JC, since they were all written decades after the alleged death.
purbrookian 1 year ago
He has a picture of Bush in the background, what a douche.
JohnWoo 1 year ago
Hi Kabane, I ran across your video on books to read, and I purchased "Jesus and the Eyewitnesses" by Richard Bauckham, and I'm glad I bought it, after reading it everything started to hit home.
4IDHero 1 year ago
We have no testimonial evidence they copied from each other, we merely assume so becausr that usually turns out to be the case when wrters agree so much.
But as you can see, all external evidence in everyway refutes it. In history, if a tradition persists uncontradiction and was started early, we must accept it as most probably valid. With who wrote the Gospel accounts and on what authority they wrote, the tradition is far more overwhelmingly obvious then any other ancient tradition.
inkillerxyz1 2 years ago
I only have a few comments on the matter. The Synoptic Problem is not based on evidnece, it is based on presuppositions. Becaause we have never observed independent witnesses agree so much with each other, we must conclude they copied from each is their mode of thinking.
THis is not to be downplayed. In the absence of evidence, I too would believe this if I saw documents with almost the same wording. However, when history speaks, it is the duty of philosophy and assumptions to be silent.
inkillerxyz1 2 years ago
THis retard has a picture of bush on his wall.
ICANGO247 2 years ago
I watched the clip on the show and he pretty much owned you.
you also said there are no miraculous claims in the khoran koran or however it's spelled...ummmm... what do you call that whole talking to Allah and then riding the horse to the heavens? sounds pretty miraculous to me.
the whole god exists because "it's obvious" argument is dead and buried. it's not obvious at all. U think that someone made all that is and ever will be, yet he has a vested interest in your sex lives?
XD
TheGreatLyger 2 years ago
One extra thing - the woman caught in adultery in John DESERVED to be stoned by the Jews. Jesus pardoned her even though she was guilty and an "enemy of the law" and "a sinner". Jesus did not rejoice in the downfall of this woman by stoning. He saved her through logic. Logic... something useful when confronting hard, ancient scripture
jenglis9 2 years ago
You deserve to die, because in my book ignorence and stupidity is sinfull. You believe in a magic man living in the sky known as God. I can't think of anything more retarded to believe. I would love to stone you to death.
WolfySnackrib666 2 years ago
"Rejoicing in the downfall of the enemies of God is permitted in Psalm 58." - this is from your homepage. I read that passage and it made me feel ill. Tell me you don't really "rejoice in bathing your feet in your enemies blood" (Ps. 58) do you? What would Jesus say about this?
jenglis9 2 years ago
Aw! It made your subjective morality hurt a wee bit? I don't care. It's an ancient metaphor for victory. Read up.
Jesus would affirm it. He was after all a Jew.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
Well, Jesus actually was a Jewish reformer, take a glance of the N.T. and you will see that he would (most likely as I am not him) not agree with rejoicing in the downfall of enemies. Despite being a Jew, he clearly preached a different message - hence the "new" aspect of testament... yet on a human to human basis, you rejoice in seeing people suffer when you (subjectively) consider them evil? Is this moral?
jenglis9 2 years ago
Jesus was a Jew. He rejected poor interpretation of the OT. He did not reject the OT itself, and cited it over and over.
Yeah, I rejoice in their judgment. It's moral.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
Could you ponder if perhaps the interpretation you are taking of Psalm 58, callously rejoicing in others suffering, could be a poor interpretation that Jesus came to rectify? I see Jesus' message being compassion, not vengeance. That view is not displaying compassion, but vengeance.
jenglis9 2 years ago
haha just watched the atheist experience when u called. went on forever man. but hey man i give u credit for calling.
davedarunner2000 2 years ago
this dude looks hilarious
slothtopsy 2 years ago
DICK
thrashmetalteen 2 years ago
lol George Bush poster
rayruiz12345 2 years ago
I know lol :P
mk555712 2 years ago
and the 50 states quarter poster xD
rayruiz12345 2 years ago
Wow.... xD
DanLightning 2 years ago
If you are trying to persuade people it might not be a good idea to come off as so cocky. Honestly, I don't care what you look like. Also, slow down when you talk.
drewd2 2 years ago
Yeah, you're a cute kid, but *please* slow down. I really do like listening, but lose most of what you say.
I still appreciate the fact that you are using your brain.
cherrymiss72 2 years ago
That's why he does talk so fast. You admitted that you lost most of what he said yet you think he's using his brain. I'm not saying he's dumb, but a lot of his arguments aren't good at all. You fell right into his trap...beware!
drewd2 2 years ago
(drewd2, like your pic!)
I think most Xtians that use intellectual arguments to support the bible and are intelligent are *desperately* trying to keep their "faith." I think this kid *is* smart, but the arguments for the resurrection being accepted by historians as an actual event and the arugments that I hear in the videos seem...desperate. They make me sad. It sounds like he is trying to take the "faith" part out and make religion real. It's not. That's why faith is called for by religion.
cherrymiss72 2 years ago
Lol...that's not really my pic. It's a snapshot out of a video that my ex's brother put on...and it's his friend that I don't even know. Did you catch all that? :) I pretty much figured you thought what you said before you said, but it was music to my...eyes?
Quick note: I think we need an anti-abortion protestor task force to do our best to protect those getting abortions.
drewd2 2 years ago
Still, shows a sense of humor and I love that! =)
About the task force, I think that's a great idea.
I am trying to be careful what I say cause this kid *blocks* and I don't wanna get blocked, ya know? I don't think I have heard arguments like he makes before and I enjoy listening and checking out what he says. Did ya notice we have been marked as SPAM? I don't feel like spam....
cherrymiss72 2 years ago
my god dude. well actually i dont have a god. but what the hell is with your hair get a haircut or some scissors or something cause that looks like something out of battlestar gallactica.
sirtalkshitalot 2 years ago
can't thumbs up this comment so yea... *thumbs up*
mk555712 2 years ago
Mean and mean. Make an argument or sound like a dumb-ass for just talking about his hair. I don't agree with him either but grow up!
cherrymiss72 2 years ago
MATT FTW!!!!!! :D
jonbej 2 years ago
You got pwned by Matt :D
patrick888881 2 years ago
well i dont know how come you sleep with bush's on your bedroom's wall. i guess you are not very reliable.
jangordo18 2 years ago
Kabane, I believe Ehrman deconverted due to the problems of good and evil and not textual issues. i think Habermas said this, but not sure.
theman77777777232 2 years ago
Perhaps it's both?
Craig Evans brought up Ehrman's history and reasons for being a liberal NT scholar in Fabricating Jesus.
Bandfred 2 years ago
Perhaps.
theman77777777232 2 years ago
Well, I doubt Evans would outright lie.
I don't know. It really doesn't matter to me.
Bandfred 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There are two kinds of scholarship today: conservatie and liberal. The latter was invented by Freemasons and humanists and does not even deserve the name "scholarship." It is a discrace to the Christian tadition and a perversion. No one alive today has the knowledge, illumination and scholarhip of the ancient fathers. "A theologian is one who prays" - St. Symeon the New Theoligian. "Aquisition of spiritual knowledge without purification of the heart is the theology of demons." - St. Maximus.
Apologist117 2 years ago
Freemasons and humanists and liberals, oh my!
I'm just going to walk away slowly and try not to make eye contact.
nnix 2 years ago
Comment removed
Apologist117 2 years ago
These secular humanists (liberals, mythicists) who are "doing' theology, are wolves in sheeps clothing. They are spiritual pigs. They dont even live the life in Christ. They imported Enlightenment and humanistic methods and concepts onto the Bible and Christianity which was a tragic error on their part. They don't know and understand what Christianity is.
Apologist117 2 years ago
Tooltime is a major tool lol, his arguments are backwards and moot.
Letsmakeasamich 2 years ago
"Most scholars of the Bible are not Christians."
That is a very broad generalization based on very little empirical observation. As a student under actual biblical scholar and that has read and digested works from scholars in this field, it stand to reason, at least to my understanding, that most scholars are of a Christian, whatever manifestation of that word, in some way, shape or form.
Divinecovenant0012 2 years ago
I listened to your call in on Dillahunty's "show", I think you did a fantastic job dealing with such an angry atheist.
Great job! I'm featuring you on my channel.
God bless you.
philos71 2 years ago
He didn't seem very angry to me.
jamminjago 2 years ago
are you kidding me? Did you not hear him say "If you don't shut up and let me talk, I'm going to hang up on your a**!"
Buckfush 2 years ago
did we listen to the same thing?
cherbine888 2 years ago
Thanks philos! God bless you as well.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
lol Matt Dillahunty was angry on that show.
Buckfush 2 years ago
People don't know that Freemasons, Jews and Communists are behind all this liberal "theology." They have been on a relentless campaign to "discredit" Christianity for centuries. They work for the Antichrist and want to push the world toward a non- Biblical and non- Church religion of Antichrist. Read "Orthodoxy and The Religion of the Future," by Father Seraphim Rose.
Apologist117 2 years ago
I often quote and refer to Protestant scholars in my apologetics because there has never been an issue of liberalism in Orthodoxy.
Apologist117 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is no "synoptic problem." Such an idea comes from heretics. Protestant and liberal theology is not inspired. You can trust all the gospels. Protestant theology is rationalistic and leads to skepticism. Dostoyevsky said Protestantism leads to atheism. The rational tendency in Protestantism was imported from Roman Catholicism, which came from Augustine. He's the cause of all western heresies. Protestants left the Church, now they are leaving the Gospels, soon they will leave the Epistles
Apologist117 2 years ago
The claim that most scholars aren't Christian, is a patent falsehood. Liberal scholarship has always been the minority. The Society for Biblical Liturature has officially condemned the Jesus Seminar for their methodologies. We have two thousand years of conservative scholarship, and the best scholarship comes from Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic and Protestants.
Apologist117 2 years ago
Where did you get your information about the SBL and the Jesus Seminar? Robert Funk, founder of the Jesus Seminar, was also executive secretary of the SBL. If you look at their site, you get generally positive or neutral comments concerning the JS. I doubt seriously that it was "officially condemned".
RationalRat 2 years ago
Scholarship in the modern sense of the term has only existed for a couple of hundred years...
nnix 2 years ago
And you got destroyed by Matt Dillahunty...
TheMadPole 2 years ago
I have two questions, what evidence do you have that the testaments were written of direct word from god?(as no one witnessed anything from before Adam, and Adam was not a contributor to the bible as an author)and, What evidence do you have that what you call the bible today, is actually what the original authors had written?
freqmart 2 years ago
The bible says slavery is ok. The bible has a story of god having someone murdered because he was doing work on the sabbath. Yet here I am listening to you argue the semantics, and structural inconsistencies of certain segments of the bible.
igodstheoryi 2 years ago
christian-thinktank(.)com/qnoslave(.)html
xEternalRosex 2 years ago
Kabane, I don't know wht you deal with these people. You have great patience. I figured out stickam. My screen resulotion was messed up. But I'm not going back there anyway. It's a hive of devils in every room.
Apologist117 2 years ago
I'm 5-starring this video, if only to counter the effects of the flag-waving atheists.
nnix 2 years ago
Thank you. You are one of the atheists I respect, and not just for the 5 star.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
Actually, your videos on the historical Jesus made me become interested in the history of Christianity again. My girlfriend thinks I'm crazy for having books by E. P. Sanders and N. T. Wright lying around, but it's just a fascinating subject--historically, theologically, philosophically, sociologically. One of my best friends, a newly minted Ph.D. who does political theology, wants me to read Karl Barth and Stanley Hauerwas, but that may be a bridge too far at this point... heh.
nnix 2 years ago
Kudos on reading NT Wright btw. He's great.\
Karl Barth...hahaha
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
Why do you laugh at the mention of Barth? (Keep in mind that you will not be hurting my feelings if your assessment is brutal.)
nnix 2 years ago
Whoops, I was thinking of a different Karl. Karl Bardht. Very similar names, but the Karl I was thinking of is one who claims Jesus was an Essene. My mistake.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
I am an atheist and would never dream of flagging ANY video - regardless of content (and I REALLY mean that!) Free speech is intrinsic to atheism, and for once, it is nice to find a Christian that lets you comment openly on his videos (but not his channel) I think you will find that it is usually bible waving Christians that do most of the flagging, because so few of them appear to believe in free speech. I see I can comment on your channel, so I will continue there.
630633 2 years ago
Flag-WAVING atheists are 1-starring his video simply because he disagreed with the hosts of The Atheist Experience. I never accused atheists, or anyone else for that matter, of flagging videos for TOS violations.
And incidentally, free speech is not intrinsic to atheism. In fact, nothing is intrinsic to atheism--aside from the denial that a god exists. It should not be conflated with any worldview that it is typically associated with, such as secular humanism, which does make moral demands.
nnix 2 years ago
Comment removed
Apologist117 2 years ago
So how was it being on the Atheist Experience? lol
rba718 2 years ago
It kind of depresses me that somebody who seams as smart as you wastes his time with this bible bullshit...
superjesus117 2 years ago
Looks like Tooltime has goons of his own.
xEternalRosex 2 years ago
fuck you, you little shit, you should honestly kill yourself ASAP
NewtonsStudent 2 years ago
wow you really got it fed to you by buddy on the show hey!lol
balls deep first push.lol
NATEandtheMONKEY 2 years ago
I didn't watch the video, I had to pause it because I felt the overwhelming urge, no, NEED to tell you how much you look like Rob Blagojavech.
tehAntiJohn 2 years ago
Who's the guy in the suit on your wall there, brother?
stengevarsel 2 years ago
Looks a bit like Barack Obama but I can't be sure
Thanat0s67 2 years ago
Good vid.
fenoglios 2 years ago
with that haircut... you remind me a bit Mac, from Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends... which fits flawlessly with this topic.
imapuniverse 2 years ago
"Refuting" Tooltime while he's on his hiatus is as about as good as showing up to a debate without inviting the other person... and then debating him anyway.
UnDeitized 2 years ago
yea no kidding. and when there is no response this guy will probly try to claim either victory or that tooltime is scared.
This is a very sneaky tactic.
I also like the talk in this vid about which Apostle has more "status" then another apostle...I thought we were all equal in the eyes of the lord.
mnewf2002 2 years ago
grow up, cut your hair, and stop believeing in fairy tales. Thanks.
lothrazar 2 years ago
A bit off topic but why on earth do you have a picture of Bush on your wall?
ThrosturH 2 years ago
ROFL @ YOU
mikebell 2 years ago
Do you really think zombies are real?
RandyLayhea 2 years ago
And can you give me an example of a "miracle" that has happend after any of the bibles have been written? please.
RandyLayhea 2 years ago
Also define miracle. Everything you say has no meaning without evidence. It does not matter who says what. Don't you understand that?
RandyLayhea 2 years ago
Uh, you could watch his OTHER videos to see his evidence.
xEternalRosex 2 years ago
Uh, are you Kabane?......No......then Fuck off.
RandyLayhea 2 years ago
Hi! I concur with Eternal Rose!
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
I have watched some of your videos. Can't you just answer my questions?
RandyLayhea 2 years ago
Well aren't you the model of good debate...
xEternalRosex 2 years ago
What the hell are you talking about? Who the hell are you? where did you come from. Go back to your bordom loser.
RandyLayhea 2 years ago
Eh, I've been called worse. Have a good day. :)
xEternalRosex 2 years ago
Me too, cheers, best wishes, and goodnight sweetheart. :0)
RandyLayhea 2 years ago
That was some serious ownage. I'm suprised you have the nerve to come back on YouTube.
MonsieurChateauroux 2 years ago
I just listened to you on the Atheist Experience and laughed my ass off with regards to how terribly you got pwned.
All Alleged Alien Abductions = hypnosis?
I thought you could do better. You really sounded like a tool on there. Better luck next time eh^^
HumanStrategy 2 years ago
Because a writing of scripture has a motive, it is immediately deemed true by people like yourself? Every single person who believes they were abducted by aliens were all hypnotized?
Your mind really is quite amazing -- What you call history the rest of the world calls faith. My pet faeries will pray for you.
Jacena 2 years ago
Haha wow your voice broke!
eggbert333 2 years ago
Texts counts, but not text alone. You cant just say that because someone wrote that jesus came back to life, thats enough evidence to believe it happened. Because first, there is no proof evidence has ever even happened and miracles are not possible, at least to what we know.
cherbine888 2 years ago
"Texts counts, but not text alone. You cant just say that because someone wrote that jesus came back to life, thats enough evidence to believe it happened."
We went over this in the call. It's just rhetoric to yell TEXT ALONE and say it isn't enough. Why isn't it enough? I'm expecting a logical argument which is syllogistically formulated, by the way.
"Because first, there is no proof evidence has ever even happened and miracles are not possible, at least to what we know. "
Circular.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
MMM, y can't we use text alone for evidence. Well one reason is that people LIE. Not everyone tells the truth one hundred percent of the time. Second, it kind of goes with lying but, people can write down what ever they want. It's really not a hard concept to follow. smart guy. People lie and can say what ever they want and in two thousand years you believe what you read thats you. I guess you've seen miracles, good for you. I see unicorn and dragon everyday on my way home.
cherbine888 2 years ago
Yea I wouldent argue with my argument either tommyboy, You just believe what ever the bible says for no dam reason and you know it. Your argument is cicular buddy, the bible is true because the bible says it is. lol
cherbine888 2 years ago
Oh you're so clever! Now how about you point out where I made that statement? It's a dumb thing that fundies will say but I don't ever say that, so piss off.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
you might not say it but it's what you do, the bible says jesus rose from the dead, and the only proof is that the bible says it. Text can be evidence, but not evidence enough. lol your too easy brah
cherbine888 2 years ago
Oh you silly little man. The Bible isn't one book! Attestation from a reliable text is evidence that an event occurred. How do we know they are reliable? Not because they say so, but because we run the same internal and external tests we run on other texts, and they turn up positive here.
Why isn't text evidence enough? Could you give me a logical syllogism to support that statement?
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
BECAUSE PEOPLE LIE. PEOPLE CAN WRITE WHAT THEY WANT AND SOMEONE LIKE YOU WILL BELIEVE IT WITHOUT EVIDENCE. so other evidence is needed, especially when saying things like people died and then came back to life or turning water into wine, its called a fairytale.
cherbine888 2 years ago
Hmmm....
People can lie.
Therefore other evidence is needed.
Non-sequitur. Nice. I've dealt with the lying thing before btw. Social factors of the NT world totally knocks it out. Ever read the work of the Context Group?
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
LOL, Thats not other evidence at all buddy. Just say it, there is no other evidence, just say it. Have you ever read the gilgamish, do you believe everything in that too. Come on, the concept of god dosent even make any dam sense.
cherbine888 2 years ago
gilgamesh****
cherbine888 2 years ago
You stated that people lied, and therefore we needed evidence other than text. I am waiting for you to present the premise that connects those two statements and validates your syllogism. Until you can do so, your argument is a non-sequitur. I also knocked out your implication that the authors of the NT texts were liars. Yes, I have read the Epic of Gilgamesh actually, but I believe we were discussing the New Testament documents. Let's stay on topic.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
Ok follow me and if you dont get this, then you never will. Ok people are not perfect, people lie, people make stories and things up. So people made up all the stories of the bible for who knows what reason, like ppl made up gilgamesh, hindu, buddism, and anyother religion. When did you knock out my argument that the authors of the nt were liars, if you did it so easily, why dont all historians and people think that way. Ther eis no way to know what is true in the nt and what is a lie.
cherbine888 2 years ago
I knocked it out using the NT social factor of kinship. No historian seriously suggests that the apostles deliberately lied.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
lol, the fact that we dont even know who wrote the nt, And your telling me that all historians believe that jesus preformed miracles and arrose from the dead. Just answe one question for me, Y Did God make this earth, this universe and Make us. I dont see the point if he is all knowing and all powerful, wouldent he already know what we would all do, who is going to heaven and who to hell, does not make sense.
cherbine888 2 years ago
Already dealt with that argument. I outline the arguments for authorship based on standard internal and external tests for authorship in my video "The Gospel Evidence" No, I told you that no historian would suggest that the apostles deliberately lied, as you suggested. The atheist and secular historians of today suggest other alternative explanations (which fail equally). Don't change the subject. We are discussing the NT documents.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
So again you show no real evidence. Maybe they didnt deliberately lied, but they lied. Again the only evidence is the bible, not good enough as Matt told you Sunday. Maybe a guy named jesus lived, and maybe he went around preaching ,but that does not mean that there is a god. Because no real historian or scientist believe in the miracles in the bible, you know the flood, moses storey, jesus miracles, Y not change the subject we r getting no where anyway, you just keep repeating ur propaganda
cherbine888 2 years ago
And therein lies the problem. They told a falsehood according to you, but they had a sincere belief. So, what was the cause of the origin of the disciples beliefs?
Don't make claims about historians. You haven't read them. I'll list you five who believe in Jesus' miracles, and if you want more, I'll keep listing them until you finally apologize for that falsehood that no real historian accepts Jesus' miracles.
Are you suggesting also that Ken Miller and Francis Colins aren't real scientists?
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
then they are shitty historians aint they, and they are not real scientist because any scientist that believe in miracles are creationist crazy fake scientist. Sorry i dont have the time to read religious propaganda, too busy with college, so i'd rather read science and medicine books. Can you name me an example of a mircacle that has been proven to happen?
cherbine888 2 years ago
Ah, I expected this. The No True Scotsman fallacy. Any historian who agrees with me is "not a real historian". It's a nice way to create a consensus in your own mind. Really? Ken Miller goes across the country, debating for evolution and defending it being taught in schools. Collins is the head of the Human Genome Project and also argues for evolution.
Sure. The resurrection. I asked you to explain the origin of the apostles beliefs. You are apparently unable to.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
Wait so all scientist and historians agree that the bible is 100% true? and they all say that the miracles happened? this is news to me. wow kabane you are so right. Again, how does jesus mean there is a god, because that is the real argument here. I dont care if a guy named jesus walked around, preaching, there has been cult leaders before him and after him. Still dont mean there is a god
cherbine888 2 years ago
NO! I never said that. I said that there are respected scholars who say that Christianity is true. It sure means there's a God if he rose from the dead.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
so the bible is not a fact, only christians believe that. So the rest of the world is wrong and going to hell, GREAT GOD!
cherbine888 2 years ago
Oh dear...fallacy, appeal to outrage. Try again.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
LOL, Just give me one good reason for god to make the earth, the universe, and the people, the animals, the plants, and everything else, What is he bored, he Already knows whats going to happen. Does he want friends in heaven?, why not just put everyone in heaven, why make a litmus test?
cherbine888 2 years ago
No sir, I am not going to fall for your tricks. I'm going to force you to stay on-topic. What is the cause of the origins of the disciples beliefs?
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
How would I or anyone ever know that, i;m i a mind reader. People believed in cult leaders and god's before jesus. So it all makes sense.
cherbine888 2 years ago
Actually, there were 12 other messianic movements before and after Jesus. Each of them dissipated after their leaders were killed. Not so with Jesus. That is the critical question. Why is it different? What is the origin of their belief in the resurrection. Excellent historians such as NT Wright conclude that the resurrection is the only plausible explanation
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
What about the other religions, they are still here as well. I dont care if some people think its the only plausible explanation, i dont even see how its the only plausible explanation. How about its just a cult made up, just like the musilms, the Hindus, the buddist and any other religion. So the only way god could save us is by sending someone down to die on a cross? Makes no sense just like everything else in the bible.
cherbine888 2 years ago
Stop trying to force me off-topic, I'm not falling for that. The made up point has already been addressed, see my discussion of kinship. Any other alternative explanations for me to crush or are you willing to admit that you're ignorant on this subject?
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
Amen
Totothemonkey 2 years ago
Not so with Islam either, or Mormonism or Scientology ~ Many other religions are thriving, while yours is dying to modern and progressive society. All it shows is that people are gullible, nothing more.
Your select references are widely refuted, hence your bronze-age pagan scripture isn't and won't be considered historical. That's like saying all the other historians are wrong, but the one you like is right.
Call in again on Sunday, have your "no miracles in the Quran" revealed as another lie.
Jacena 2 years ago
We ALL do have a choice..... we all came into this World with nothing and some will leave that way, but we also have a choice to change this and gaining everything on the other side. Why are you here having a go at Kabane??? are you searching for God...
Totothemonkey 2 years ago
I listened to the mp3 of your encounter with The Atheist Experience in full. I don't think that you got the better of him in any way, but it does not surprise me to learn that you and other Christians judge the debate differently. Like one of your last replies to Psyjax, the conversation only served to make plain your metaphysical assumptions and the different levels of confidence each of you place in the historical method as a means to discover truth.
nnix 2 years ago
Your chief problem if that you reify the historical method. You think that if one follows the generally agreed upon rules of historical reconstruction--regardless of the incompleteness or untrustworthiness of the data that we happen to have available to us due to historical accident--the picture that the method yields is the truth. It is historical reality. It is what happened.
nnix 2 years ago
The problem, though, is that few historians in the twenty-first century are naive realists philosophically, even with regard to everyday historical matters, like what Lincoln actually said during the Gettysburg address or when he died (the accounts differ). You manage to be naive realist about supernatural events occurring some 2000 years ago! And all without so much as a blush. This is just -one- of the reasons why the hosts of The Atheist Experience were frustrated by your overconfidence.
nnix 2 years ago
Wow tommy/kabane got pwned by matt brah. I dont think you understand what he was saying dude. that sucks your to closed minded. lol
cherbine888 2 years ago
Some people believe that Matt talking for an hour and giving me ten seconds to reply is "pwnage". Every time I had an equal amount of time to respond, he was destroyed. Example: The Qu'ran vs. the hadith. The use of ECREE as a standard of evidence. The objectivity of the rationality of atheism.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
Yea he had more time, but that's because you think a book written thousands of years ago is evidence enough for miracles. Not so my friend. and second, i remember we had a debate months ago about Socrates and he might have not ever existed and you acted like you had no clue what I was saying. Come on dude, be serious, evidence is evidence, and you put different standards on things.
cherbine888 2 years ago
Let's not forget when we had the discussion on "text alone". He had no idea how to respond when I asked him why text alone can't count.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
You should know why eye witness accounts(bible) don't necessarily prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it's true.
That's why we have lawyers. right?
It's people like you that put people in jail when they're innocent.
RandyLayhea 2 years ago
Ehrman said he deconverted from Christianity because of the problem of evil in his book "God's problem". I think the textual issues were only secondary.
facilisdescenus 2 years ago
You should have told him "John Earman is an agnostic and wrote: 'Hume's Abject Failure' "
Pumbaelo 2 years ago
I wish I had a dollar for every time that book is cited in the comments section of this channel. Can anyone show evidence for having read a word of it beyond the title? Did you know that Robert J. Fogelin addresses the flaws in Earman's reconstruction of Hume's argument in 'A Defense of Hume on Miracles?' No doubt it's convincing, given the title.
And while we're at it, have you ever heard of a book called 'Gospel Fictions' by Randel Helms? Well, I guess that settles it!
nnix 2 years ago
"I wish I had a dollar for every time that book is cited in the comments section of this channel."
I can't recall anyone citing this book all the time. I was pointing out that, since Matt wanted people that reject Hume that are not christians, and John Earman is an example. So what's so bad about it?
And yes, I read Earman.
Randel Helms is no scholar in the relevant field and the book is mainly his own fiction.
Pumbaelo 2 years ago
Would you mind providing references when you make videos like this? it would be very helpful to viewers who actually want to check and see if you are right.
otherwise it just sounds like a series of assertions to me.
932016 2 years ago
The citations are typically found in my series', like HOJ, and MOTR.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
great thanks.
932016 2 years ago
For someone who probably hasn't graduated high school yet, you seem to know a lot. Keep it up mate. :P
YodatheJedi12 2 years ago
Ehrman deconverted because of the emotional problem of evil.
Just do a Google Search on "Bart Ehrman: How the Problem of Pain Ruined My Faith"
Pumbaelo 2 years ago
I just thought of the strongest reason why an apostolic tradition would not explain the double or triple tradition passages. If such a tradition existed, it would of course have existed in Aramaic, because that is what Jesus and the apostles spoke. This would not provide a basis for why the there is such remarkable agreement in the Greek gospels.
RationalRat 2 years ago
In addition, you are back to the problem with protoMatt, namely that there is no evidence that Matthew was translated from an Aramaic source.
RationalRat 2 years ago
And no one has ever found Q, no one knows whether it's a written document or an oral source, no one knows what it contains and we don't know whether it really existed.
However, there are people who argue that Q had 5 layers of redaction!
This type of criticism is just insane.
Pumbaelo 2 years ago
The agreement in the Greek gospels is far, far exaggerated. In fact, the agreement IN EXACT WORDING in the shared tradition is only 23%. This is a serious problem for theories of literary dependence, and why oral dependence best explains Matthew's and Mark's accounts.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
23% agreement in EXACT WORDING is HUGE, KTC. Especially when these are supposedly translations. If 23% of your answers on an essay exam matched someone elses answers EXACTLY, you have some major explaining to do. (And I don't think anyone would buy that you had studied together and therefore have a shared oral tradition which, by the way, was in French.)
RationalRat 2 years ago
No, it isn't huge. The common core of oral tradition best explains that, because it would have some vary slight variations in most of the sayings. Literary dependence means they had a copy of Mark/Quelle sitting there, and they could have copied straight out of it. The shared tradition should be 100% identical if your theory is correct.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
Ugh, I meant "very" not "vary".
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
It's unreasonable to assume that Luke and Matthew would have used Mark 100% if they used him at all. The agreement in wording is actually much higher than 23%. (don't know where you're getting that number from.)
protoplasm08 2 years ago
Agreement in EXACT wording is 23%.
Source: John Wenham, Redating Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
I get it, that's probably a combination of the figures for Matthew AND Luke, right? It's true that Luke copies Mark much less than Matthew, but Matthew still has over 50% of the EXACT wording from Mark.
protoplasm08 2 years ago
Yeah, I'm not sure about the 23% figure at all, but assuming it is correct, it is still hugely problematc.
RationalRat 2 years ago
Yes, they probably did have a copy of Mark and/or Q right there, but dependence doesn't mean they were scribes. Many of the other verses that weren't exact were close, which is what you would expect. And you've never addressed the issues of translation. You simply wouldn't expect two independent translators to come as close as they did to each other. (Just compare the NIV translation to the NAS translation. You don't get anywhere close to 23% agreement in exact wording.)
RationalRat 2 years ago
Yes, they were close. But they weren't exact. That's the point! Oral tradition with slight variations.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
How long are you going to ignore the fact that these would be translations?
RationalRat 2 years ago
Darklink already addressed that.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago
No, that doesn't even come close to explaining anything. For one thing, Greek is an inflected language, where Aramaic is an analytical language. You don't expect independent translations from languages that different to be exact.
Give me one example of two independent translations where the wording is EXACT 23% of the time. It doesn't happen.
RationalRat 2 years ago
You're right. I'll look into it some more. Thanks for the brainfood.
KabaneTheChristian 2 years ago