Loading...

Dinesh D'Souza Gets Owned on the Historicity of Jesus

301,038 views

Loading...

Loading...

Transcript

The interactive transcript could not be loaded.

Loading...

Loading...

Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Published on Sep 4, 2008

Ok then, I made this video when I was 16, so keep that in mind regarding my opinions (which have evolved since then) and my awful spelling. The clip itself is great. Had I made this clip today I would have not added any commentary, as I find that sort of thing very annoying, so I apologize for that too. I also don't read the comments, they just fill up my email. So if you're super pissed at me, chances are I don't really care. However feel free to yell at each other in the comment section.

Comments • 3,720

zman421111
Jesus said to Peter, "Come forth and I will give you eternal glory." Peter came fifth and won a toaster....
View all 11 replies
Hide replies
Marcus Coltrane
dont think there was any need for your editing. would have been clear enough to watch the debate un-interrupted
View all 2 replies
Hide replies
Joseph Nordenbrock
Nothing has been dug up yet to validate the bible stories and not from a lack of trying.
View all 23 replies
Hide replies
Tushar Barot
who put Dinesh there in front of a magnificent brain Hitchens possessed.. such a shame..Dinesh would not have left his house for a year..
View reply
Hide replies
Northern Brother
There's as much evidence for the existence of Jesus as there is for the existence of Hercules. Hitchens is right, whether Socrates actually existed is irrelevant because no one is claiming he was a divine being. Similarly, there's no evidence that Homer actually existed, but again, it's ultimately irrelevant because the only things attributed to him are epic poems. But if someone claimed that Socrates or Homer were actually gods, then we'd have a problem. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
View all 39 replies
Hide replies
Johan Lund
I must say this video becomes a bit "douchy" when you pause it for your own commentary and have some dramatic music in the background.
View all 2 replies
Hide replies
Adam _
Dinesh is the epitome of a pseudo intellectual. He talks in the same manner and uses the same words as intellectuals but the basis of all his arguments are invalid.  He is just a schoolboy at heart that still wants to be called smart and also keep his God. You can't have both unfortunately.
View all 7 replies
Hide replies
SIMKINETICS
Literacy in the ancient world was rare.  Two thousand years ago, it was common practice to use the oral tradition in order to keep a record of history; we who've played the game 'Telephone' know how unreliable that is for historicity and fidelity of the original message!  Much of the text of early scripture happened several generations after Jesus' alleged life & death, ripe for hyperbolic rhetoric in each verbal re-telling before it was written down by the few literate scholars of the time.  Note that the greatest stories ever told came out of exaggerated, magically imaginative tales told by word-of-mouth before coming to print!  If Jesus actually existed, he may merely have been a charismatic teacher who got mythologized through the oral tradition and later in the 'testimony' of people who weren't yet born for generations after the event, then written down with inevitable flourish.  So, we're left with a book that was transcribed from oral history & edited in ancient Hebrew, that later got translated to Greek, curated by Romans, then (centuries later) got re-translated into English like hardly anyone speaks today.  Hmmmm.  Is it possible that something got lost in translation? The New Testament bible is the only 'historical' record of Jesus' existence, the only single bit of history or evidence about him.  Is it not reasonable that Hitchens had his doubts?  
View all 13 replies
Hide replies
GodlessBob Lee
I might also add, that none of the "Scholars" to which I referred earlier are evangelical fundamentalists, because those people don't accept any historical information which would force them to alter their biblical worldview. Evangelical Fundies cannot be open minded critical historians. One must go where the evidence leads. Example: Jesus was probably not buried. The Roman custom of Crucifixion, was to leave the criminal on the cross for days to be ravaged by birds of prey. After that, the body would be removed and deposited in an open pit where ground based scavengers would finish what was left. The Jews had no say in Jesus execution. He was a criminal and was executed for crimes against the Roman Empire. This is a relatively recent position offered by John Dominic Crossan, New Testament Scholar and former Catholic Priest. The only reason for the burial tomb, is to act as a setup for the resurrection. Empty tomb = Resurrection. Good story, probably not true. History is all about levels of probability of what happened. Resurrection has a near zero probability of actually occurring. At least it has never been observed, and it is extremely unlikely that it ever will.  
View all 18 replies
Hide replies
Shaan Siton
The Bible says that that everything was created in 7 days, but how did we know what days were before he made the Sun? Honestly such a childish belief.
When autoplay is enabled, a suggested video will automatically play next.

Up next


to add this to Watch Later

Add to

Loading playlists...