RE: McLatchie: If I have to pick between all or nothing, then I'm picking nothing until the supernatural elements of the Bible are deomonstrably verified. Thanks anyway, buddy.
TinyURL has blocked your link as having malware: The TinyURL (DaleJesusQuest) you visited is listed in one or more of several URI reputation databases we use ( SURBL, SpamHaus DBL, URIBL, Google Safe Browsing, our internal blacklist, and others). The reason code given by the blocklist is: Quad9 listed as Malware
I think it devolves into a dichotomy of willful ignorance or intellectual dishonesty. Which is fine, many apologists are intellectually dishonest, willful ignorance is at least honest.
@@hank_says_thingseh, when I was a Christian I found some of his videos very interesting. Now I see that I just watched them for personal reaffirmation of my faith, not to learn. I was happy seeing people who were older than me talking in front of an audience about stuff I wanted to be true. Turek is the Richard Dawkins of Christianity.
Name a more incredible crossover channel for religious discussions than this. This is why I love your work, Paul. You don't just talk the talk on your own; you welcome the other side onto your show, giving them the stage to state their case clearly and fairly. So much appreciation to Dr. Allison for coming!
@shaderunner9582 One who claims he is a Christian who is outside the norms in his beliefs who just happens to align with Paulogia's historical views on Jesus. He would never have a Chrstian historian like NT Wright on.
Dr Allison, thank you for coming on Paul’s channel. You come across as such a genuine person. I kind of wanted to cry when you said , “Maybe I’m a hard hearted person.” No sir, you are definitely not.
100% agree. Dr. Allison, I very much appreciate your approach and your rigor in intellectual pursuit. Though I don't know much of your work, what I am aware of at this time sparks a high level of respect. Thank you for your work and your quests, both personal and professional.
I feel just like you with regards to Dr. Allison's statement. Most likely because I, too, often worry I am this way. But, I don't think Dale has anything to worry about. 😊
Dr. Dale C. Allison Jr is, without a doubt, my preferred Christian scholar with his modest and truthful style. I concur with many of his views, although I suspect he may believe that the Gospels contain more memories than I do. Frankly, I'm unsure how one can determine the degree of memory retention when clever storytelling and mythology have overlaid the original text. Dr. Allison's historical examination of the Quest for the historical Jesus is unparalleled and indispensable for anyone who is genuinely interested in New Testament studies. I highly recommend his course!
@MythVision Podcast I’ve occasionally heard apologists argue for special memory retention or, more commonly, highly robust oral transmission among ancient people. I find this highly suspect because to test an _account_ for any given event you’d have to objectively know in detail what _actually happened_ (somehow) and compare it to the account. And never mind trying to figure out how true the written version is to what was being passed by word of mouth in the first place...especially thousands of years ago.
I agree Derek! Although my beliefs about the Resurrection are more in line with Mike Licona and N.T. Wright, Dale Allison’s humble attitude is something I’m going to take to heart when I study New Testament studies in the university after high school!!!
@ruth oglesby I would not contest that this could happen, but I am skeptical whether it did in the context we’re speaking about here. Short of having a video record of an event, it’d be very difficult to verify the accuracy of 1) the “telling” as compared to the actual event and 2) the most recent oral or written version as compared to the original telling. To some degree we could otherwise verify hard facts, like “this city was destroyed” by archaeological evidence; but establishing who said what would be near impossible.
@@derinderruheliegt Right. My point is fidelity in transmission of any data is not evidence of the truth of validity of said transmission, be it the Bible or the Illiad.
Its pretty gross that some appologists will go so far as accusing a fellow believer of not being a christain just because their more critical of the historic facts of their religion. Its such a toxic "us versus them" mentality. Add to that all this talking down being aimed at a scholar whose done more useful work/research then they probably ever will
It's sad but at least it makes it ever more obvious to a neutral observer how little "scholarly consensus" even exists on this despite what folks like Frank would have you believe.
@@asagoldsmith3328 I studied theology at the University of Bamberg in Germany and there is no "scholarly consensus" on basically anything in theology. That's what's so interesting about it. At least I thought so. There are many interesting theories about things - even things that seem "historical" at first, like dating the gospels. But even these are things were barely anything can be said with certainty. Most is based on the texts alone and how they relate to historic events. I found it highly fascinating. I think trying to come up with "proof" for anything in the new testament is wasted time.
Thats usually the first sign, and only, for stopping listening to people. When you resort that, you simply are not, well, ANYTHING worth listening to. The teaching company has a great course on the historical jesus, and as is obvious, there is certainly no 'consensus' or there certainly would not be more than one religion, end of story.
The fact that Dr. Allison has heroes that contradict on each other on many levels and still take the best from them and be able to remain critical in his own faith is VERY interesting. Much respect. We atheists are not always exposed to this level of thinking. Thank you Paul for bringing him to this episode!
Yeah this is actually kinda cool, I find it hard to believe having this view and remaining theistic. But I love how he goes about it he's so kind hearted you can only like him.
I have to say, I just looked at the sub count and I'm kind of blown away at how undersubscribed Paul is. I watch every single video and I have learned so much. About early Christian history, modern theology, The Academy, and the various sub-cultures of apologetics. His standards of intellectual honesty and quality of work are beyond reproach, probably one of the reasons why he gets so much attention from academics. I particularly love it when he brings on people with different perspectives, like he does here, to weigh in. In conclusion: SUBSCRIBE!
@LuthAMF I mean, yeah, which is why apologists aren't great people to go to get accurate information regarding history and the like. Someone like Paul, who isn't bound by a statement of faith (like Sean McDowell) or by theological motivation is a much better place to get unbiased information from.
It seems to me that Apologetics is basically Religious politics. Apologists defend their a priori position no matter what. Some of them go out of their way to slander dissident opinions.
Apologists are salespersons. Go out there and sell the product by whatever means necessary. I feel sorry for them, because their product is backed by so little convincing evidence.
They absolutely do, which is why they purposefully misinterpret Matthew 16, and Mark 9 to say that Jesus was talking about the transfiguration or the ascension, when he was clearly talking about the second coming.
agreed, they are what we in the UK call "spin doctors", take a war over oil and make it a humanitarian mission. god kills for real estate, if they'd realised what oil was back then god would have been after that too.
Dr. Allison's humility is so unbelievably refreshing... Whatever side of this debate one is one, one has to tip one's hat to him for his incredibly high standards for historicity and found opinion. And, as always, thanks to Paul for his never ending quest to bring reasoned debate to the peoples' search for truth.
When someone wakes up as a Paulogia cartoon: “Your appearance now is what we call your residual self image. I have muscles, you have hair, he is a rhinoceros, etc”
We all have biases and I personally find it hard for me to set mine aside. Really got to admire Dr. Allison for being able to look past his own. It’s an incredibly important and valuable trait.
Reading Dr. Allison's book on the Resurrection right now, and damn, Paul, if this guy ain't the real deal. So stoked to see him on your channel, and a big huge thanks to Dr. Allison for elevating the discourse (as ShannonQ would say).
@@rthompsonmdog I've got EP Sanders book on Jesus also - I vaguely remember that he had this book on Paul, thank you for recommending it! I'll add it to my growing list.
Remembering my own experience leaving the Christian faith in Alabama, it comes as no surprise to see these people circling Dr. Alison like wolves and accusing him of not being a Christian. There truly is no hate quite like Christian brotherly love.
if it was brotherly everything would be great X3 I know me and my sister (I know but my real older brother died at age 1 and the other came alone way to late) fought quite a bit but there was still love there and no hate
...you'd barely know it from this podcast (28:42)...but, no actually right now it is the skeptics who are after him with heir knives...Allison's latest work basically undoes Hume's proto-modernist denial of miracles ...based on consistent historical evidence ... go back and listen very closely to the last part where he tries to inject it in...or watch Dale Allison's "is there Evidence of Miracles" from a week or two ago on "Unbelievable" podcast..
@AnarchoRepublican I expect skeptics to disagree with a believing Bible scholar. That's normal. It's apologists saying he isn't Christian that is gross. They're painting him as a wolf in sheep's clothing. A dog whistle like that is all many believers need to turn off their ears and ignore him for being a fake Christian
@@GoD1014 ...christians have creedal and doctrinally distinct associations...its the very essence of religion... "brother" Dale Allison is unorthodox, perhaps even heretical...so yeah..but nothing personal...big deal...he knows full well what's he's doing...he enjoys it...
christian youtubers and authors are entirely two faced, they are nice as pie when an atheist (or skeptic) is in the room, but left to themselves they really are the pitts. turek is typical, but mcdowell, however subtle he is, is just as bad. i wouldn't trusy them with measles.
@@roqsteady5290 you should read it and hear how he does. He ends up not being able to defeat rainbow bodies. He believes in his personal experiences and measures the veracity of supernatural claims evenly. I can't speak for him though you should check out his book.
@@humpbackdelorean then, from a scientific viewpoint he has it all backwards. He is assuming what he needs to demonstrate. Rainbow bodies, the supernatural, personal experiences all require independent reliable, replicable observations to be taken seriously. Personal experiences don’t really count at all, as they are not independent. He seems like a nice guy though and in a better place than most apologists.
These people would never look at historical evidence and conclude that the miracles of *any other religion* are the most logical reason for *anything* . So they are among the worst of hypocrites.
...you'd barely know it from this podcast (28:42)...but, no actually right now it is the skeptics who are after him with their knives...Allison's latest work basically undoes David Hume's proto-modernist denial of miracles ...and based on consistent historical evidence ... go back and listen very closely to the last part where he tries to inject that in...or watch Dale Allison's "is there Evidence of Miracles" from a week or two ago on "Unbelievable" podcast..
Well no, that's not right. There is no reason within a Christian worldview why miracles should not be possible within other religions. It is described several times within the Bible of miracles occuring in non-Christian communities. Getting tired of hearing non-Christians assert this.
@@wilsophilip1 ...for instance:..."the Magicians" of Pharaoh "Jannes and Jambes" Exodus 7:10-12/2Tim 3:8...Balaam the Moabite prophet, who also appears is known from non-biblical sources...the Greek slave girl with the divining spirit Paul healed...etc. etc... ...makes one wonder if they ever pick Bible up and read it..
I love Dale Allison ❤. He’s intelligent, well considered, well read, intellectually honest, sincere and full of integrity. What is not to like? I respect his options even though I don’t agree with him. I always like to listen to him when I can because I always feel that I can always learn new things from him. I wish him well.
Jonathan mclachey saying that historians should start the practice of just outright accepting entire books as true instead of examining each individual claim made me howl with laughter. What a joke.
His debate with Matt Dillahunty was particularly hilarious. He basically rage quits when he is shown how fallacious his reasoning and how big his personal is.
......then you missed the whole point of Dr.Allison...you'd barely know it from this podcast (28:42)...but, no actually right now it is the skeptics who are after him with their knives...Allison's latest work basically undoes David Hume's proto-modernist denial of miracles ...and based on consistent historical evidence ... go back and listen very closely to the last part where he tries to inject that in...or watch Dale Allison's "is there Evidence of Miracles" from a week or two ago on "Unbelievable" podcast..
After dealing with religious apologists online for years, I’ve noticed that the one thing they like more than arguing with atheists is arguing against other theists.😈
People with marginally different beliefs will always be the most galling. They're the mirror darkly. Reflecting you while showing that your conclusions are maybe not as solid as you thought.
Oh no no no. Apologists never argue with other members of their religion. Look at what's happening with Dr. Allison here. They're saying he *isn't* a member of their religion. To most apologists, anyone who disagrees with you by definition is not a member of your religion.
@@stefanowohsdioghasdhisdg4806 This is how Fundamentalism works. It draws a narrower and narrower circle of inclusions, both intellectually and spiritually.
Now that I am 10 years out of Christianity, it seems very strange that people should actually think that a resurrection of Jesus - of anybody - is plausible and warrants serious debate.
The idea that the contents of an ancient book could be compelling evidence for a supernatural event is just ridiculous. What does it matter what the book says? No possible contents of the book can be evidence that the book is true.
Dr Allison is perhaps my favourite guest Paul has ever had on. The divide he places between what he claims is historically reliable and his beliefs is refreshing. Both athiests and theists often overstate historical claims, and it is great to see Dr Allison's integrity. I also find it very interesting to see a theist's perspective on the Christian apologists that Paul commonly responds to.
The simple fact that a Christian is rebuking what a fellow Christian is saying shows how fundamentally wrong the theology of claiming to be the one true religion really is
Pushing 50 years old here and I still find it so baffling that so many people give so much relevance to Middle Eastern mythology, especially the brands that are so obviously fradulent. I guess that's what happens when you dumb down the populace and then force religion on them. It's quite amazing yet very revealing of human nature...in the face of fear (in this case, death) people will believe anything, and especially so if you teach them to believe in those things when they are children.
I’m pretty sure @DrDaleAllison is the most reasonable Christian I’ve ever heard. As a non-believer, I find his approach refreshing after too many lectures from such dogmatic literalists as Frank Turek and WLC. And unlike those guys’ obviously flawed arguments, Dr. Allison’s work seems worth a second glance.
Memories are notoriously unreliable, especially when they are mixed with strong emotions, that is the basis for nostalgia. We enhance "good memories" with additional invented good qualities and likewise with "bad memories" we elaborate on them, making them more scary. And every time we access a memory, it actually gets "rewritten" with new or missing parts. So to assume that the memories of Jesus are unbiased and 100% in alignment with actually happened is a strech.
@@anarchorepublican5954 if you recall them verbatim, congrats on your rare ability. My guess, though, is that if you do not have a 'photographic' memory, you have refreshed those memories per the prior comment. Either way does not necessarily hold validity in the memory, only of the memory
The best evidence against the resurrection is that it is physically impossible, something people 2,000 years ago did not know, but we all do, though the insistently-deluded don't want reality to apply to their guy.
@@jana731 That and there's not even sufficient reason to think there actually _was_ a tomb at _all,_ given 'lost in a mass grave' is by my understanding a more historically accurate assumption.
@@TheArkman360 You'd have to mention particular ones, I don't know off-hand what objections folks have had. I'd have to imagine though that many objections could be met with 'Even if you propose X, is it more likely than the historical truth being 'What happened was the same thing that'd happened many times to other preachers at that time'?'
I loved the Allison Course. It is less a discussion of the historical facts about Jesus, and more a review of Protestant scholars' theories about gospel interpretation. It was all new content to me. Very enlightening.
I think I see why various apologists are claiming Dr Dale isn't actually christian (even though he is) Several of those apologists are known for their "this book (often one specific version of the book) is 100% the literal word of god anyone who disagrees is (insert insults here)" attitude. So a believer who actually acknowledges historical nuance and that the book isn't 100% covering everything 100% as written would absolutely make some of 'em mad. XD
9:20 Kudos to Dr. Allison. It's time apologists stop thinking they're historians. And since they won't stop thinking it they need to be called out on it at every appropriate occasion.
I agree, and unfortunately I was a huge fan of Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers as a kid. I can't say the name without that damn theme song playing in my head. 😅 Dale's Jesus Quest sounds like the crossover between Bible Adventure and C'nD that I never knew I didn't want.
Its funny how quickly they will turn someone from hero to pariah.. sometimes even having people going back and forth depending on the sentences of them they are reading. So many apologists care absolutely nothing for expertise or facts or honesty in favor of cherry picking their own conclusions as good and pointing to everything else as bad/wrong. Here we have one of the top scholars in the field, someone they crow about when his words support their claims, right up until he contradicts their conclusion on one thing, then "he's not a real Christian". The whiplash is astounding. They do the same thing with science too, they cite it whenever they find some sentence that fits then go full science denial and conspiracy in the next breath.
Never heard of Dr. Allison until this video, but it's nice to find a believer who is honest about what they can and can't prove about Christianity from the standpoint of historical inquiry. I will definitely be checking into more of his work and comparing it to the work of skeptics and apologists alike.
Dale is my favourite person to still be a chistian, maybe 2nd fav, my granny is pretty poggers too, but i am amazed on how reasanable this dude is, i wish i could understand whta makes him a chistian still that would really help me expand my understading of humans.
People have been arguing these problems going back to the first century...yes the 1st century. All those bishops and thinkers who were within a hundred years of the crucifixtion didn't have any more evidence then we do now, there just isn't enough information. Everything we know comes from stories passed down from one person to the next and we have no idea if the original story came from eye witnesses or not...what else is there to say?
Yes, well that and there's no way to falsify or confirm any supernatural claims. Along with the fact that everything explanation for every phenomenon has always been a natural cause.
Hey Paul. I turned this into a superthanks so you might read it. I've noticed you seem to have made the noise gate/suppression of your guests more aggressive, and in my ears it is extremely distracting and the sharp cutoff into dead air when they stop talking feels wierd. Of course this is not a complaint and I don't expect you to jump up and change it, but consider it a bit of feedback :) Thanks for your awesome work! ☺️
@@LoisoPondohva I'm actually really glad to hear that. I'll gladly take discomfort if it helps you. It's possible to make it sound a little less harsh though, so it's not necessary an either/or situation.
@@sanaltdelete yeah, some curves on there to smooth the transition could work. As long as the noise is suppressed, I think there's a lot that can be done.
For me a person that came from a ghost, broke natural laws and is still alive after 2,000 years is ridiculous and on this we have no evidence of this but claims. It make the belief even more ridiculous.
i know nothing about the bible really, or bible history, i've always been atheist and i always thought snakes and apples sounded like myth, so pardon my confusion but surely if i'm in court and i say i was in the bank vault and i witnessed a shooting, it means i was in the bank vault and i saw someone shoot someone else, which to me translates to, i was in the tomb when jesus was apparently dead but he stood up and asked for a coffee, i was there and witnessed the ACT of resurrecting. "eyewitness to the resurrection" doesn't mean i thought i saw someone alive some time after they were supposed to be dead, it means i was in the tomb with a dead jesus when jesus stood up. there are no "eyewitnesses to the resurrection" - otherwise you're eyewitness to thinking you saw someone previously dead who appears to have come back to life.
Agree, but most Christians aren’t like Dr. Allison. Most of them are quite the opposite and I’m tired of them. Dr. Allison is one of the few with this level of critical mind….
Dale is a true gem. It's truly pathetic the way he's being attacked and the true weakness it shows in their position. Any amount of critical thinking is seen as a true threat, no matter the source.
Love it. Allison probably could have kept me in christianity a little longer. He seems to have many good answers, and is honest enough if he does not know something. The theologians I knew when I was about to leave did not have his knowledge, but had no problems to pretend if they did not know.
A fundamentalist approach to Christianity or apologetics grounded in a need for absolute certainty has a track record of destroying people's faith in God or Jesus and moral conscience. I wouldn't say that applies to everyone with moderately conservative evangelical or fundamentalist evangelical theology (Mike is better than some others), but I've noticed it as a pattern. It doesn't help if you want people to become more open-minded about Christianity.
I love that Dr. Allison still calls himself a Christian and is drawn to the mystic and perhaps universal elements of Christianity. It was the mystics, the philosophers, which lead me out of traditional Christianity. I find it much more interesting from the outside, than I did as a devout, lifelong believer of the Christian dogma .
The confidence with which so many apologists assert biblical claims has always bothered me. It doesn't shock me in the slightest, that it could run afoul of honest scholarship.
Er, but there is not any evidence demonstrating someone was resurrected." Stories written 1,800 years ago are not evidence. Also, what ever happened to Santa Claus' body? And what ever happened to Zeus' body? If we cannot find them, we must therefore conclude they were resurrected.
Who cares if he resurrected? We don't care about the other people resurrected in the Bible. What does an all powerful God gain from doing miracles at all?
@@goldenalt3166 Good point and something that Christians NEVER bring up. Jesus wasn't the first, nor the last person to be resurrected, nor was he the only person to demonstrate the ability to bring people back to life i the bible. As Hitchens once quipped- resurrections seem to have been a fairly mundane occurrence in first century Palestine.
Hey Paulogia, I’m a Christian and I want to be a New Testament scholar after high school, and if I ever come on your channel, may my cartoon version of me be a stick figure, 1930s style cartoon character🤓🤓🤪
I enjoy learning about the complex relationship that religion, science and skepticism have gone through the centuries, because of the weight society has given to established traditions we have all but forgotten the curiosity and development that religious thinking underwent over time. Thanks for the episode Paul
No Dr. Allison... Jesus is not anything at all like Abraham Lincoln... he was more like David Koresh or Jim Jones... not even reaching the level of Joseph Smith.
He’s more so pointing out how even with people in the modern era, there are drastic epistemic limits that are the result of much more than whether or not the person/event actually existed.
@@Paulogia I have a book by a Roman Catholic publisher “ Saints Who Raised the Dead: true stories of 400 resurrection, miracles“ these stories have a lot better evidence than Jesus! Why don’t Protestants become Roman Catholics been reading too much David Hume???
christians ought to buy william lane craig's book(s), but if they don't like him, then they should buy sean mcdowells' book(s), but maybe they would prefer frank tureks book(s) or even mike liconah's, one thing is for sure though, you won't buy jesus book cos he didn't have the foresight to write ANYTHING. he employed "ghost" writers.
@@truthbebold4009 skepticism of second hand accounts took time to develop. If Jesus were all knowing he would know in the future people would need something more substantial than 3rd hand information of impossible events. He would also have the foresight to know that people would interpret his words in many ways, so providing his own writing would help to settle interpretation disputes. The fact that Jesus didn't do any of that makes the claim he was god at least a little sus.
@@uninspired3583 The Truth isn't found by skeptics, it is found by those who seek for Total Truth. The skeptic mindset is more likely to draw conclusions from the fact that Jesus didn't personally write anything. The truth seeker will make a mental note and keep plugging away, not assuming to know the relevance of this fact.
@@truthbebold4009 sure, but the role of skepticism isn't about finding truth in the first place. The goal of skepticism is to filter out what is false. If we can show that a claim is based on unreliable methodology, we have no reason to accept the claim.
Paulogia, granted Jesus had his " best of " sermons , BUT how about the one off conversations that are recorded? How can we possibly know that is exactly what Jesus said?
That flashes me: The notion that Martin Luther, so to say, gave birth to scepticism is a new - and very convincing - thought to me. Glad to made it through the video. You're one of a kind, Paulogia, thank you!
Same, there's as much evidence for a historical King Arthur or Robin Hood. I think all these characters are either an amalgum of earlier stories all being attributed to one "historical" person, or made up whole cloth. In the case of Jesus many of the miraculous acts attributed to him (healing the sick, raising the dead, walking on water, resurrection etc.) were previously attributed to other fictional deistic characters, so I have no reason to believe that this time they really happened.
@@ziploc2000 It think that if there was an historical person behind the character, he was most likely a preacher associated with a tradition of apocalyptic national liberation of the Jews rooted in previous scriptural prophecy, who either identified himself, or was post hoc identified by his followers, as the promised messiah. Such a person would be a social messiah, a savior of the cultural nation, not a personal redeemer. The likelihood that his beliefs corresponded to anything close to mainstream current Christianity is remote. Just as remote is that his actual biography corresponded in any significant way to the Gospel narratives. If a literary character has virtually no point to point correspondence to any actual person's biography, then it is meaningless to say that character existed, even if there was some real person whose life in some indeterminate way kick started the literary narrative.
I'll say what I always say: define Jesus My snarky response is, to the extent he resembles the character in the bible, he doesn't exist. To the extent he exists, he doesn't resemble the character in the bible. I mean, consider the comment by ziploc below about Robin Hood or King Arthur. If the guy didn't rob from the rich and give to the poor and hang out with Maid Marian and Friar Tuck, can you really say he is Robin Hood? If someone says, "Oh there was a historical Robin Hood, but he was just a guy who robbed people in Sherwood Forrest and so the Sheriff of Notthingham arrested him" would you accept that as Robin Hood? If so, then it's pretty meaningless. There was also a girl in Kansas named Dorothy who lived with her Aunt "M" who we know was the inspiration for the character of Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz (she was L Frank Baum's niece, and her Aunt M was Baum's wife, Maude). So we know she existed and inspired the story. Will we call her the Historical Dorothy? (oh, and before you say it, Frank Baum actually called himself the Historian of Oz, so the Oz books are Oz history books)
Christian theists sometimes ask the question, "Well if you don't accept the Bible as evidence for Jesus' resurrection, just what kind of evidence would you accept?" The answer to that is simple: If there was a report from some well connected near term non-believing commentator on affairs in Judea (and there were a number of such people still known to us) of the Roman authorities having crucified an apocalyptic messianic thought leader that they felt was a danger to the state, and that the guy they crucified was later reliably reported to somehow still be alive, despite the officers who crucified him having stuck him with a lance before leaving the execution site, and that they had, after hearing reports of him being resurrected, launched an unsuccessful search for him but turned up a bunch of people who had previously known the guy and reported that he was currently wandering around with the nail holes in his hands and feet clearly visible, well-- yeah, that would be some substantial evidence for a supernatural resurrection. Not enough for a rational person to believe that the incident was truly an instance of resurrection from the dead, however. It would be valid evidence, but not sufficient evidence for belief. Many people in history have survived traumatic experiences that would have been expected to kill them, but somehow failed to do so, perhaps through a combination of luck and their own physical vigor. There have been many cases of people in catatonic states in which they were judged to be dead, but from which they later revived. However rare such cases are, they have an a priori greater probability than resurrection from the dead. Even if Jesus did in fact resurrect from the dead, there is almost no chance that sufficiently compelling evidence for it would survive into our own time. Consider this: suppose that in today's worldwide news outlets there was a report that a cutting edge biological lab in South Africa had acquired a dead guy on whom they had done biopsy analysis on his brain tissue, establishing that his neural structures were too decomposed to support life, that he had subsequently come back to life, and had been positively identified through DNA analysis to be the same guy that they had taken the biopsy samples from. Would you believe that report? I wouldn't. I would think that it was more likely that the guy had a previously unknown twin who had been conspiratorially substituted for the dead man, or that the lab was controlled by some kind of religious cult despite being staffed by vetted biomedical experts, or that there was some other explanation that I hadn't yet figured out. Resurrection from the dead is a proposition that has such a low a priori probability that sufficient evidence is almost conceptually unachievable. But not quite. If the lab was able to repeat the occurrence in the presence of numerous other expert teams who were dispatched from around the world to check the whole thing out, THEN we would have to start thinking about it seriously. So Christians, get us a time machine and a large team of top ranked pathologists. Then get ready for a disheartening null report. I know you wouldn't stop believing, however.
It seems that Dale's thinking based on reality and rationalism is at odds with his thinking based on supernatural fantasies, and perhaps that his thinking about history is torn between the two
..you'd barely know it from this podcast (28:42)...but, no actually right now it is the skeptics who are after him with their knives...Allison's latest work basically undoes David Hume's proto-modernist denial of miracles ...and based on consistent historical evidence ... go back and listen very closely to the last part where he tries to inject that in...or watch Dale Allison's "is there Evidence of Miracles" from a week or two ago on "Unbelievable" podcast..
~~ SIGN UP NOW FOR DALE's "The Quest for the Historical Jesus" COURSE ~~ www.tinyurl.com/DaleJesusQuest
RE: McLatchie: If I have to pick between all or nothing, then I'm picking nothing until the supernatural elements of the Bible are deomonstrably verified. Thanks anyway, buddy.
Definitely interested in Dr. Allison's course, looking at my money situation now.
Paul, do I need to buy Dr. Allison's book to get the most out of his course?
TinyURL has blocked your link as having malware:
The TinyURL (DaleJesusQuest) you visited is listed in one or more of several URI reputation databases we use ( SURBL, SpamHaus DBL, URIBL, Google Safe Browsing, our internal blacklist, and others). The reason code given by the blocklist is:
Quad9 listed as Malware
Get yr free all old aches and pains washed away. Last 30 min is intense. A gift from Jesus for all.
What's wrong with "I believe but I don't really know", it's a much more honest answer than the typical apologist gives.
Honesty doesn’t sell the Bible
Because, that will bring in doubt.
”[Doubt] is the path to the [truth]. [Doubt] leads to [questioning]. [Questioning] leads to [answers]. [Answers] lead to [truth].”
I think it devolves into a dichotomy of willful ignorance or intellectual dishonesty. Which is fine, many apologists are intellectually dishonest, willful ignorance is at least honest.
I would not call Allison an apologist. He is a genuine scholar, even though I disagree with his ultimate conclusion.
The fact that Dale Allison does not know who Frank Turdek is shows how pure of heart (and mind) he is. Truly an angelic hero ❤
Surely, he must be the son of god.
Blessed is he who doesn’t smash their head against a rock after listening to Turek.
It's fair to say that most reasonable and educated people have no idea who he is. When they find out, they're horrified
@@hank_says_thingseh, when I was a Christian I found some of his videos very interesting. Now I see that I just watched them for personal reaffirmation of my faith, not to learn. I was happy seeing people who were older than me talking in front of an audience about stuff I wanted to be true. Turek is the Richard Dawkins of Christianity.
@@logans.butler285 Most apologists are forthright that their work is not to convince non-believers, but to strengthen the faith of current believers.
Name a more incredible crossover channel for religious discussions than this. This is why I love your work, Paul. You don't just talk the talk on your own; you welcome the other side onto your show, giving them the stage to state their case clearly and fairly. So much appreciation to Dr. Allison for coming!
Thank you, David.
Hear hear.
He only has people on who ageee with his views. He is not looking for truth.
@@jamiehudson3661 they are literally a Christian and an Atheist
@shaderunner9582 One who claims he is a Christian who is outside the norms in his beliefs who just happens to align with Paulogia's historical views on Jesus. He would never have a Chrstian historian like NT Wright on.
Dr Allison, thank you for coming on Paul’s channel. You come across as such a genuine person. I kind of wanted to cry when you said , “Maybe I’m a hard hearted person.” No sir, you are definitely not.
100% agree.
Dr. Allison, I very much appreciate your approach and your rigor in intellectual pursuit. Though I don't know much of your work, what I am aware of at this time sparks a high level of respect. Thank you for your work and your quests, both personal and professional.
I feel just like you with regards to Dr. Allison's statement. Most likely because I, too, often worry I am this way. But, I don't think Dale has anything to worry about. 😊
Dr. Dale C. Allison Jr is, without a doubt, my preferred Christian scholar with his modest and truthful style. I concur with many of his views, although I suspect he may believe that the Gospels contain more memories than I do. Frankly, I'm unsure how one can determine the degree of memory retention when clever storytelling and mythology have overlaid the original text.
Dr. Allison's historical examination of the Quest for the historical Jesus is unparalleled and indispensable for anyone who is genuinely interested in New Testament studies. I highly recommend his course!
@MythVision Podcast I’ve occasionally heard apologists argue for special memory retention or, more commonly, highly robust oral transmission among ancient people.
I find this highly suspect because to test an _account_ for any given event you’d have to objectively know in detail what _actually happened_ (somehow) and compare it to the account. And never mind trying to figure out how true the written version is to what was being passed by word of mouth in the first place...especially thousands of years ago.
Highly robust oral traditions are evidenced; we know this has/can occur. But that phrases are catchy does not argue for it's truth, or even utility.
I agree Derek!
Although my beliefs about the Resurrection are more in line with Mike Licona and N.T. Wright, Dale Allison’s humble attitude is something I’m going to take to heart when I study New Testament studies in the university after high school!!!
@ruth oglesby I would not contest that this could happen, but I am skeptical whether it did in the context we’re speaking about here. Short of having a video record of an event, it’d be very difficult to verify the accuracy of 1) the “telling” as compared to the actual event and 2) the most recent oral or written version as compared to the original telling.
To some degree we could otherwise verify hard facts, like “this city was destroyed” by archaeological evidence; but establishing who said what would be near impossible.
@@derinderruheliegt Right. My point is fidelity in transmission of any data is not evidence of the truth of validity of said transmission, be it the Bible or the Illiad.
Its pretty gross that some appologists will go so far as accusing a fellow believer of not being a christain just because their more critical of the historic facts of their religion. Its such a toxic "us versus them" mentality.
Add to that all this talking down being aimed at a scholar whose done more useful work/research then they probably ever will
Agree
It's sad but at least it makes it ever more obvious to a neutral observer how little "scholarly consensus" even exists on this despite what folks like Frank would have you believe.
Those apologists don't get to dictate their own definition of who is a "true" Christian.
@@asagoldsmith3328 I studied theology at the University of Bamberg in Germany and there is no "scholarly consensus" on basically anything in theology. That's what's so interesting about it. At least I thought so. There are many interesting theories about things - even things that seem "historical" at first, like dating the gospels. But even these are things were barely anything can be said with certainty. Most is based on the texts alone and how they relate to historic events.
I found it highly fascinating. I think trying to come up with "proof" for anything in the new testament is wasted time.
Thats usually the first sign, and only, for stopping listening to people. When you resort that, you simply are not, well, ANYTHING worth listening to.
The teaching company has a great course on the historical jesus, and as is obvious, there is certainly no 'consensus' or there certainly would not be more than one religion, end of story.
The fact that Dr. Allison has heroes that contradict on each other on many levels and still take the best from them and be able to remain critical in his own faith is VERY interesting. Much respect. We atheists are not always exposed to this level of thinking. Thank you Paul for bringing him to this episode!
Yeah this is actually kinda cool, I find it hard to believe having this view and remaining theistic. But I love how he goes about it he's so kind hearted you can only like him.
@@jana731 right, I have the same idea in my head but who knows, maybe he is in process of that….
I have to say, I just looked at the sub count and I'm kind of blown away at how undersubscribed Paul is. I watch every single video and I have learned so much. About early Christian history, modern theology, The Academy, and the various sub-cultures of apologetics. His standards of intellectual honesty and quality of work are beyond reproach, probably one of the reasons why he gets so much attention from academics. I particularly love it when he brings on people with different perspectives, like he does here, to weigh in.
In conclusion: SUBSCRIBE!
Very kind... and good advice!
Well said. Seconded!
@LuthAMF
Because the "apostates" actually look at history and what is written and don't tend to twist facts to support their agenda.
@LuthAMF
I mean, yeah, which is why apologists aren't great people to go to get accurate information regarding history and the like.
Someone like Paul, who isn't bound by a statement of faith (like Sean McDowell) or by theological motivation is a much better place to get unbiased information from.
@LuthAMF
Yes, exactly. You have 100% accurately gotten my position right and haven't straw manned me at ALL. Well done.
It seems to me that Apologetics is basically Religious politics. Apologists defend their a priori position no matter what. Some of them go out of their way to slander dissident opinions.
Apologists are salespersons. Go out there and sell the product by whatever means necessary. I feel sorry for them, because their product is backed by so little convincing evidence.
Our reason is primarily a lawyer, not a detective.
They absolutely do, which is why they purposefully misinterpret Matthew 16, and Mark 9 to say that Jesus was talking about the transfiguration or the ascension, when he was clearly talking about the second coming.
@@timothymulholland7905Ditto with politicians. I think you're in agreement with each other.
agreed, they are what we in the UK call "spin doctors", take a war over oil and make it a humanitarian mission. god kills for real estate, if they'd realised what oil was back then god would have been after that too.
Dr. Allison's humility is so unbelievably refreshing... Whatever side of this debate one is one, one has to tip one's hat to him for his incredibly high standards for historicity and found opinion. And, as always, thanks to Paul for his never ending quest to bring reasoned debate to the peoples' search for truth.
And yet, avid Christians claim he can't be a "real" Christian...
When someone wakes up as a Paulogia cartoon: “Your appearance now is what we call your residual self image. I have muscles, you have hair, he is a rhinoceros, etc”
That sounds like one of those irregular verbs: "I have an independent mine, your are eccentric, and he is round the twist." -- Sir Bernard Woolley.
@@michaelsommers2356 😂 it does!
the blinking eyed Barney Rubble of internet HAThEisms...
"You have been assimilated. Your likeness has been added to our collective"
We all have biases and I personally find it hard for me to set mine aside. Really got to admire Dr. Allison for being able to look past his own. It’s an incredibly important and valuable trait.
Reading Dr. Allison's book on the Resurrection right now, and damn, Paul, if this guy ain't the real deal. So stoked to see him on your channel, and a big huge thanks to Dr. Allison for elevating the discourse (as ShannonQ would say).
It was a great book. I am reading E. P. Sander’s Paul: The Apostle’s Life, Letters and Thought now and recommend it as well.
@@rthompsonmdog I've got EP Sanders book on Jesus also - I vaguely remember that he had this book on Paul, thank you for recommending it! I'll add it to my growing list.
Remembering my own experience leaving the Christian faith in Alabama, it comes as no surprise to see these people circling Dr. Alison like wolves and accusing him of not being a Christian.
There truly is no hate quite like Christian brotherly love.
if it was brotherly everything would be great X3 I know me and my sister (I know but my real older brother died at age 1 and the other came alone way to late) fought quite a bit but there was still love there and no hate
...you'd barely know it from this podcast (28:42)...but, no actually right now it is the skeptics who are after him with heir knives...Allison's latest work basically undoes Hume's proto-modernist denial of miracles ...based on consistent historical evidence ...
go back and listen very closely to the last part where he tries to inject it in...or watch Dale Allison's "is there Evidence of Miracles" from a week or two ago on "Unbelievable" podcast..
@AnarchoRepublican I expect skeptics to disagree with a believing Bible scholar. That's normal. It's apologists saying he isn't Christian that is gross. They're painting him as a wolf in sheep's clothing. A dog whistle like that is all many believers need to turn off their ears and ignore him for being a fake Christian
@@GoD1014 ...christians have creedal and doctrinally distinct associations...its the very essence of religion...
"brother" Dale Allison is unorthodox, perhaps even heretical...so yeah..but nothing personal...big deal...he knows full well what's he's doing...he enjoys it...
@@anarchorepublican5954 No true Xtian, indeed.
"You don't know Christian Apologist Frank Turek? Ohhh how I envy you Dr. Allison!" Truer words were never spoken!
Can't wait to see this quote on the back of Frank's next book:
"Who's the first person, just out of curiosity?" - Dr. Dale Allison
I can smell the burn from the other side of the Atlantic.
Dale's rant in the beginning is beautiful.
christian youtubers and authors are entirely two faced, they are nice as pie when an atheist (or skeptic) is in the room, but left to themselves they really are the pitts. turek is typical, but mcdowell, however subtle he is, is just as bad. i wouldn't trusy them with measles.
Listened to Dale Allison's The resurrection audiobook. He does an incredible job at eliminating personal bias and fairly evaluating every argument.
And yet he still believes that Jesus rose from the dead in some way or other!? Is that really an elimination of personal bias?
@@roqsteady5290 you should read it and hear how he does. He ends up not being able to defeat rainbow bodies. He believes in his personal experiences and measures the veracity of supernatural claims evenly. I can't speak for him though you should check out his book.
@@humpbackdelorean then, from a scientific viewpoint he has it all backwards. He is assuming what he needs to demonstrate. Rainbow bodies, the supernatural, personal experiences all require independent reliable, replicable observations to be taken seriously. Personal experiences don’t really count at all, as they are not independent. He seems like a nice guy though and in a better place than most apologists.
@@roqsteady5290 yes
@@roqsteady5290 He doesnt need to demonstrate to others to believe it for himself!
Thank you for creating content that is actually “forwardable” to those who disagree.
These people would never look at historical evidence and conclude that the miracles of *any other religion* are the most logical reason for *anything* . So they are among the worst of hypocrites.
Dr Allison's main objectionable enterprise is asking Christians to do just that.
Yep, special pleading all the way down
...you'd barely know it from this podcast (28:42)...but, no actually right now it is the skeptics who are after him with their knives...Allison's latest work basically undoes David Hume's proto-modernist denial of miracles ...and based on consistent historical evidence ...
go back and listen very closely to the last part where he tries to inject that in...or watch Dale Allison's "is there Evidence of Miracles" from a week or two ago on "Unbelievable" podcast..
Well no, that's not right. There is no reason within a Christian worldview why miracles should not be possible within other religions. It is described several times within the Bible of miracles occuring in non-Christian communities. Getting tired of hearing non-Christians assert this.
@@wilsophilip1 ...for instance:..."the Magicians" of Pharaoh "Jannes and Jambes" Exodus 7:10-12/2Tim 3:8...Balaam the Moabite prophet, who also appears is known from non-biblical sources...the Greek slave girl with the divining spirit Paul healed...etc. etc...
...makes one wonder if they ever pick Bible up and read it..
I miss these type of videos you do. I am glad to see you are still doing them.
Still doing them. Still my favourite.
I love Dale Allison ❤.
He’s intelligent, well considered, well read, intellectually honest, sincere and full of integrity.
What is not to like? I respect his options even though I don’t agree with him.
I always like to listen to him when I can because I always feel that I can always learn new things from him.
I wish him well.
Jonathan mclachey saying that historians should start the practice of just outright accepting entire books as true instead of examining each individual claim made me howl with laughter. What a joke.
But he sounds so smart, and he offers what a large Christian audience wants to believe.
His debate with Matt Dillahunty was particularly hilarious. He basically rage quits when he is shown how fallacious his reasoning and how big his personal is.
The way Jonathan McLatchie's accent moves from American to Irish to Scottish in the space of a single sentence never fails to amaze me...
If you let in the supernatural, you actually can't be sure of anything.
You can be sure of one thing
......then you missed the whole point of Dr.Allison...you'd barely know it from this podcast (28:42)...but, no actually right now it is the skeptics who are after him with their knives...Allison's latest work basically undoes David Hume's proto-modernist denial of miracles ...and based on consistent historical evidence ...
go back and listen very closely to the last part where he tries to inject that in...or watch Dale Allison's "is there Evidence of Miracles" from a week or two ago on "Unbelievable" podcast..
@@tompatterson1548 yeah, it’s bullshit
"Timmy, where is your homework?"
"A wizard ate it."
I loved Allison’s book. It’s one of the most enjoyable, captivating nonfiction books I’ve ever read. And I’m not even a Christian. Highly recommended!
After dealing with religious apologists online for years, I’ve noticed that the one thing they like more than arguing with atheists is arguing against other theists.😈
People with marginally different beliefs will always be the most galling.
They're the mirror darkly. Reflecting you while showing that your conclusions are maybe not as solid as you thought.
@@rainbowkrampus Religious apologists are like little children who can’t face the fact that no conclusions are very solid.🤡
Oh no no no. Apologists never argue with other members of their religion. Look at what's happening with Dr. Allison here. They're saying he *isn't* a member of their religion. To most apologists, anyone who disagrees with you by definition is not a member of your religion.
@@stefanowohsdioghasdhisdg4806 This is how Fundamentalism works. It draws a narrower and narrower circle of inclusions, both intellectually and spiritually.
The contrast between Dr. Allison and Frank Turek couldn’t be more stark.
Frank Turek would never strike me as someone who would dare to engage with a ‘legitimate’ Xian scholar.
This should prove illuminating.
Dr. Allison was my professor and it was great to have him.
McLatchie lecturing others on the methods of historians is top shelf shamelessness.
Especially since his degree is in biology.
@@michaelsommers2356 Didn't know that! I don't think people should use "Dr." when they're talking about something outside of their specialty.
Now that I am 10 years out of Christianity, it seems very strange that people should actually think that a resurrection of Jesus - of anybody - is plausible and warrants serious debate.
The idea that the contents of an ancient book could be compelling evidence for a supernatural event is just ridiculous. What does it matter what the book says? No possible contents of the book can be evidence that the book is true.
@@donnievance1942 that people today even have to consider whether stories about a resurrection could be true…
What we have here is a clear illustration of the difference between an historian and an apologist
Dale Allison is such an amazing scholar, thanks for having him on
I really like Dale"s cartoon character representation. It really captures his inner sweet grandpa vibe.
Alas, I wish I could afford his course! Always overjoyed to see your videos with Dr Dale :-)
Excellent, excellent conversation.
Just ordered the book.
This guy seems to be one of the most objective and honest scholars who is still a believer.
He has earned my respect.
God has Lydia McGrew's number on speed dial in case he is not sure whether someone is a Christian or not.
🤣
Dr Allison is perhaps my favourite guest Paul has ever had on. The divide he places between what he claims is historically reliable and his beliefs is refreshing. Both athiests and theists often overstate historical claims, and it is great to see Dr Allison's integrity. I also find it very interesting to see a theist's perspective on the Christian apologists that Paul commonly responds to.
"oh how I envy you, Dr Allison" 🤣 #metoo
A supernatural event IS outside of history. Really revealing how little they care about truth & honesty.
The simple fact that a Christian is rebuking what a fellow Christian is saying shows how fundamentally wrong the theology of claiming to be the one true religion really is
Thank you for all your research and hard work...
Pushing 50 years old here and I still find it so baffling that so many people give so much relevance to Middle Eastern mythology, especially the brands that are so obviously fradulent.
I guess that's what happens when you dumb down the populace and then force religion on them. It's quite amazing yet very revealing of human nature...in the face of fear (in this case, death) people will believe anything, and especially so if you teach them to believe in those things when they are children.
yep
The real key is to keep it up until no living person can recall what actually went down when it started. Then it somehow becomes MORE credible!
I'm now listening to Dale's book on the resurrection. It's amazing!
My speaker skipped missed first fraction of a second and I heard Frank say "Erection of Jesus." Spit take with coffee is not fun!
He has risen. 😅
However, surely, he comes quickly.
What an awesome video! Tyvm much for this one.❤❤
You are so welcome!
I’m pretty sure @DrDaleAllison is the most reasonable Christian I’ve ever heard. As a non-believer, I find his approach refreshing after too many lectures from such dogmatic literalists as Frank Turek and WLC. And unlike those guys’ obviously flawed arguments, Dr. Allison’s work seems worth a second glance.
Thank you for this informative conversation, and the link to the course! I am intrigued 🤔
Memories are notoriously unreliable, especially when they are mixed with strong emotions, that is the basis for nostalgia. We enhance "good memories" with additional invented good qualities and likewise with "bad memories" we elaborate on them, making them more scary. And every time we access a memory, it actually gets "rewritten" with new or missing parts. So to assume that the memories of Jesus are unbiased and 100% in alignment with actually happened is a strech.
sorry Oscar...but I heard Ronald Reagan speak over 30 years ago...I still remember all his jokes...unenhanced...
@@anarchorepublican5954 if you recall them verbatim, congrats on your rare ability. My guess, though, is that if you do not have a 'photographic' memory, you have refreshed those memories per the prior comment. Either way does not necessarily hold validity in the memory, only of the memory
Brilliant discussion. I just ordered Dale's book last week and look forward to reading it. Thank you Paul.
The best evidence against the resurrection is that it is physically impossible, something people 2,000 years ago did not know, but we all do, though the insistently-deluded don't want reality to apply to their guy.
Yeah there are several reasons for an empty tomb. The most probable could be that someone took the body out of there.
@@jana731 That and there's not even sufficient reason to think there actually _was_ a tomb at _all,_ given 'lost in a mass grave' is by my understanding a more historically accurate assumption.
@@Cellidor What do think of the objections to the mass grave hypothesis? Personally, I think it's the most likely.
@@TheArkman360 You'd have to mention particular ones, I don't know off-hand what objections folks have had. I'd have to imagine though that many objections could be met with 'Even if you propose X, is it more likely than the historical truth being 'What happened was the same thing that'd happened many times to other preachers at that time'?'
I loved the Allison Course. It is less a discussion of the historical facts about Jesus, and more a review of Protestant scholars' theories about gospel interpretation. It was all new content to me. Very enlightening.
I think I see why various apologists are claiming Dr Dale isn't actually christian (even though he is)
Several of those apologists are known for their "this book (often one specific version of the book) is 100% the literal word of god anyone who disagrees is (insert insults here)" attitude. So a believer who actually acknowledges historical nuance and that the book isn't 100% covering everything 100% as written would absolutely make some of 'em mad. XD
9:20 Kudos to Dr. Allison. It's time apologists stop thinking they're historians. And since they won't stop thinking it they need to be called out on it at every appropriate occasion.
Every time I look at the URL, "DaleJesusQuest" makes me imagine some kind of bible themed adventure game for the nes. My brain is weird.
Can you help me? I need two fish. Try asking people in the crowd.
Like those bootleg blue cartridges for the Bible Adventure games.
I agree, and unfortunately I was a huge fan of Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers as a kid. I can't say the name without that damn theme song playing in my head. 😅
Dale's Jesus Quest sounds like the crossover between Bible Adventure and C'nD that I never knew I didn't want.
*Check Inventory*
1 loaf
1 fish
1 pair sandals.
We love honesty. Good on you sir
Its funny how quickly they will turn someone from hero to pariah.. sometimes even having people going back and forth depending on the sentences of them they are reading. So many apologists care absolutely nothing for expertise or facts or honesty in favor of cherry picking their own conclusions as good and pointing to everything else as bad/wrong.
Here we have one of the top scholars in the field, someone they crow about when his words support their claims, right up until he contradicts their conclusion on one thing, then "he's not a real Christian". The whiplash is astounding.
They do the same thing with science too, they cite it whenever they find some sentence that fits then go full science denial and conspiracy in the next breath.
Great conversation @Paulogia!! Thank you!
Dale Allison is too pure for this world. The absolute GOAT 🐐
Never heard of Dr. Allison until this video, but it's nice to find a believer who is honest about what they can and can't prove about Christianity from the standpoint of historical inquiry. I will definitely be checking into more of his work and comparing it to the work of skeptics and apologists alike.
Dale is my favourite person to still be a chistian, maybe 2nd fav, my granny is pretty poggers too, but i am amazed on how reasanable this dude is, i wish i could understand whta makes him a chistian still that would really help me expand my understading of humans.
He’s had experiences that he feels are best explained with a god. He agrees that this is no reason for anyone other than he to be a believer.
@@Paulogia thanks i wodner if ur next thought was also "why the cristian god tho? Why not a generic unknow entity?"
@@Paulogia I am very respectful towards personal experiences (although I hold an almost impoverished notion of what 'privileged access' affords).
Have you ever come across a more thoughtful and honest person than Dale? Never!
People have been arguing these problems going back to the first century...yes the 1st century. All those bishops and thinkers who were within a hundred years of the crucifixtion didn't have any more evidence then we do now, there just isn't enough information. Everything we know comes from stories passed down from one person to the next and we have no idea if the original story came from eye witnesses or not...what else is there to say?
Yes, well that and there's no way to falsify or confirm any supernatural claims. Along with the fact that everything explanation for every phenomenon has always been a natural cause.
Keep up the Good work. Your a prophetic person, not after Profit, based on Hear-sayism. Your channel is doing a Service to those whom would listen.
I like it. I’m still baffled though, that grown ups believe ,and will defend, someone rising from the dead and other miracles.
Gotta appreciate honest people you don't have to agree on anything but dishonesty and ignorance just divides people. Thank you Mr. Allison!
If frank turek were honest, he would write his books in alternating caps and non caps letters.
If he were honest, he wouldn't write his books.
I dont have enough faith to believe in turek's books, now hear me how i use faith to believe in something i cant use evidence for.
Another great video. Dale Alison is awesome.
Comment for the TH-cam algorithm god 🙏 because that thing actually exists
Hey Paul. I turned this into a superthanks so you might read it.
I've noticed you seem to have made the noise gate/suppression of your guests more aggressive, and in my ears it is extremely distracting and the sharp cutoff into dead air when they stop talking feels wierd. Of course this is not a complaint and I don't expect you to jump up and change it, but consider it a bit of feedback :)
Thanks for your awesome work! ☺️
As a hearing-impaired person, it actually is A HUGE improvement.
I'll take distracting over unintelligible any day.
@@LoisoPondohva I'm actually really glad to hear that. I'll gladly take discomfort if it helps you. It's possible to make it sound a little less harsh though, so it's not necessary an either/or situation.
@@sanaltdelete yeah, some curves on there to smooth the transition could work.
As long as the noise is suppressed, I think there's a lot that can be done.
Guest audio is problematic, as you can imagine.
For me a person that came from a ghost, broke natural laws and is still alive after 2,000 years is ridiculous and on this we have no evidence of this but claims. It make the belief even more ridiculous.
Damn Paul you are crushing it with these guests.
i know nothing about the bible really, or bible history, i've always been atheist and i always thought snakes and apples sounded like myth, so pardon my confusion but surely if i'm in court and i say i was in the bank vault and i witnessed a shooting, it means i was in the bank vault and i saw someone shoot someone else, which to me translates to, i was in the tomb when jesus was apparently dead but he stood up and asked for a coffee, i was there and witnessed the ACT of resurrecting.
"eyewitness to the resurrection" doesn't mean i thought i saw someone alive some time after they were supposed to be dead, it means i was in the tomb with a dead jesus when jesus stood up.
there are no "eyewitnesses to the resurrection" - otherwise you're eyewitness to thinking you saw someone previously dead who appears to have come back to life.
dead people don't come back to life period. That is biology and medical science. Zero exceptions.
This is why eyewitness testimony is actually not considered strong evidence in court trials. It is evidence but it is often unreliable.
This was very intellectual. I’m gonna need to listen to this again.
More Christian guests please. Wonderful for perspective
Agree, but most Christians aren’t like Dr. Allison. Most of them are quite the opposite and I’m tired of them. Dr. Allison is one of the few with this level of critical mind….
Dale is a true gem. It's truly pathetic the way he's being attacked and the true weakness it shows in their position. Any amount of critical thinking is seen as a true threat, no matter the source.
Love it. Allison probably could have kept me in christianity a little longer. He seems to have many good answers, and is honest enough if he does not know something. The theologians I knew when I was about to leave did not have his knowledge, but had no problems to pretend if they did not know.
Very much agree
Thanks Paul. This is a really good one.
A fundamentalist approach to Christianity or apologetics grounded in a need for absolute certainty has a track record of destroying people's faith in God or Jesus and moral conscience. I wouldn't say that applies to everyone with moderately conservative evangelical or fundamentalist evangelical theology (Mike is better than some others), but I've noticed it as a pattern. It doesn't help if you want people to become more open-minded about Christianity.
I love that Dr. Allison still calls himself a Christian and is drawn to the mystic and perhaps universal elements of Christianity. It was the mystics, the philosophers, which lead me out of traditional Christianity. I find it much more interesting from the outside, than I did as a devout, lifelong believer of the Christian dogma
.
The confidence with which so many apologists assert biblical claims has always bothered me.
It doesn't shock me in the slightest, that it could run afoul of honest scholarship.
Er, but there is not any evidence demonstrating someone was resurrected." Stories written 1,800 years ago are not evidence.
Also, what ever happened to Santa Claus' body? And what ever happened to Zeus' body? If we cannot find them, we must therefore conclude they were resurrected.
Who cares if he resurrected? We don't care about the other people resurrected in the Bible.
What does an all powerful God gain from doing miracles at all?
Santa Claus is still alive, obviously. And Zeus is immortal. There are no dead bodies of them to find.
@@goldenalt3166 Good point and something that Christians NEVER bring up. Jesus wasn't the first, nor the last person to be resurrected, nor was he the only person to demonstrate the ability to bring people back to life i the bible. As Hitchens once quipped- resurrections seem to have been a fairly mundane occurrence in first century Palestine.
You can’t prove a theological conclusion historically, because it exists as an assertion only 😮😮😮
Hey Paulogia, I’m a Christian and I want to be a New Testament scholar after high school, and if I ever come on your channel, may my cartoon version of me be a stick figure, 1930s style cartoon character🤓🤓🤪
We'll talk !
@@Paulogia Yay!
*In the voice of Freakazoid*
Hugbees!!!
I enjoy learning about the complex relationship that religion, science and skepticism have gone through the centuries, because of the weight society has given to established traditions we have all but forgotten the curiosity and development that religious thinking underwent over time. Thanks for the episode Paul
...for an balanced historical understanding of Science and Faith, might I suggest "Logos and Literacy", by prof. Jordan Peterson
Ah, but what about the resurrection of Elvis? HOW MANY people SAW Elvis after He died? LOL 🤣
Thousands, bud. An old friend of mine told me. Then I wrote it down.
@@donnievance1942 For sure man 😉👍👍
Excited to watch.
Paul has been very generous with Dale's hair 🤫
I myself would appreciate creative license if I were a caricature.
No Dr. Allison... Jesus is not anything at all like Abraham Lincoln... he was more like David Koresh or Jim Jones... not even reaching the level of Joseph Smith.
He’s more so pointing out how even with people in the modern era, there are drastic epistemic limits that are the result of much more than whether or not the person/event actually existed.
I appreciate Dr. Allison pointing out the link between the Reformation and the rise of modern skepticism!
Right?!? Excellent observation
@@Paulogia I have a book by a Roman Catholic publisher “ Saints Who Raised the Dead: true stories of 400 resurrection, miracles“ these stories have a lot better evidence than Jesus! Why don’t Protestants become Roman Catholics been reading too much David Hume???
@@tgrogan6049 A little skepticism does the brain good!
christians ought to buy william lane craig's book(s), but if they don't like him, then they
should buy sean mcdowells' book(s), but maybe they would prefer frank tureks book(s) or
even mike liconah's, one thing is for sure though, you won't buy jesus book cos he didn't
have the foresight to write ANYTHING. he employed "ghost" writers.
What do you mean that he didn't have the foresight to write anything?
@@truthbebold4009 skepticism of second hand accounts took time to develop. If Jesus were all knowing he would know in the future people would need something more substantial than 3rd hand information of impossible events.
He would also have the foresight to know that people would interpret his words in many ways, so providing his own writing would help to settle interpretation disputes.
The fact that Jesus didn't do any of that makes the claim he was god at least a little sus.
@@uninspired3583 The Truth isn't found by skeptics, it is found by those who seek for Total Truth. The skeptic mindset is more likely to draw conclusions from the fact that Jesus didn't personally write anything. The truth seeker will make a mental note and keep plugging away, not assuming to know the relevance of this fact.
@@truthbebold4009 sure, but the role of skepticism isn't about finding truth in the first place. The goal of skepticism is to filter out what is false. If we can show that a claim is based on unreliable methodology, we have no reason to accept the claim.
@@uninspired3583 supposedly jebus did miracles in front of 1000s of witnesses. But then he died and disappeared for 2000 years.
I appreciate Dr. Allisons honesty and willingness to admit his own biased.
Paulogia, granted Jesus had his " best of " sermons , BUT how about the one off conversations that are recorded? How can we possibly know that is exactly what Jesus said?
Yes, that's a big problem. Good point.
That flashes me: The notion that Martin Luther, so to say, gave birth to scepticism is a new - and very convincing - thought to me.
Glad to made it through the video. You're one of a kind, Paulogia, thank you!
I still have a problem with the historical Jesus. Just about all is based off Mark. They just added their views into his story
Same, there's as much evidence for a historical King Arthur or Robin Hood. I think all these characters are either an amalgum of earlier stories all being attributed to one "historical" person, or made up whole cloth.
In the case of Jesus many of the miraculous acts attributed to him (healing the sick, raising the dead, walking on water, resurrection etc.) were previously attributed to other fictional deistic characters, so I have no reason to believe that this time they really happened.
@@ziploc2000 It think that if there was an historical person behind the character, he was most likely a preacher associated with a tradition of apocalyptic national liberation of the Jews rooted in previous scriptural prophecy, who either identified himself, or was post hoc identified by his followers, as the promised messiah. Such a person would be a social messiah, a savior of the cultural nation, not a personal redeemer. The likelihood that his beliefs corresponded to anything close to mainstream current Christianity is remote. Just as remote is that his actual biography corresponded in any significant way to the Gospel narratives. If a literary character has virtually no point to point correspondence to any actual person's biography, then it is meaningless to say that character existed, even if there was some real person whose life in some indeterminate way kick started the literary narrative.
I'll say what I always say: define Jesus
My snarky response is, to the extent he resembles the character in the bible, he doesn't exist. To the extent he exists, he doesn't resemble the character in the bible.
I mean, consider the comment by ziploc below about Robin Hood or King Arthur. If the guy didn't rob from the rich and give to the poor and hang out with Maid Marian and Friar Tuck, can you really say he is Robin Hood? If someone says, "Oh there was a historical Robin Hood, but he was just a guy who robbed people in Sherwood Forrest and so the Sheriff of Notthingham arrested him" would you accept that as Robin Hood? If so, then it's pretty meaningless.
There was also a girl in Kansas named Dorothy who lived with her Aunt "M" who we know was the inspiration for the character of Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz (she was L Frank Baum's niece, and her Aunt M was Baum's wife, Maude). So we know she existed and inspired the story. Will we call her the Historical Dorothy? (oh, and before you say it, Frank Baum actually called himself the Historian of Oz, so the Oz books are Oz history books)
Christian theists sometimes ask the question, "Well if you don't accept the Bible as evidence for Jesus' resurrection, just what kind of evidence would you accept?"
The answer to that is simple: If there was a report from some well connected near term non-believing commentator on affairs in Judea (and there were a number of such people still known to us) of the Roman authorities having crucified an apocalyptic messianic thought leader that they felt was a danger to the state, and that the guy they crucified was later reliably reported to somehow still be alive, despite the officers who crucified him having stuck him with a lance before leaving the execution site, and that they had, after hearing reports of him being resurrected, launched an unsuccessful search for him but turned up a bunch of people who had previously known the guy and reported that he was currently wandering around with the nail holes in his hands and feet clearly visible, well-- yeah, that would be some substantial evidence for a supernatural resurrection.
Not enough for a rational person to believe that the incident was truly an instance of resurrection from the dead, however. It would be valid evidence, but not sufficient evidence for belief. Many people in history have survived traumatic experiences that would have been expected to kill them, but somehow failed to do so, perhaps through a combination of luck and their own physical vigor. There have been many cases of people in catatonic states in which they were judged to be dead, but from which they later revived. However rare such cases are, they have an a priori greater probability than resurrection from the dead.
Even if Jesus did in fact resurrect from the dead, there is almost no chance that sufficiently compelling evidence for it would survive into our own time. Consider this: suppose that in today's worldwide news outlets there was a report that a cutting edge biological lab in South Africa had acquired a dead guy on whom they had done biopsy analysis on his brain tissue, establishing that his neural structures were too decomposed to support life, that he had subsequently come back to life, and had been positively identified through DNA analysis to be the same guy that they had taken the biopsy samples from.
Would you believe that report? I wouldn't. I would think that it was more likely that the guy had a previously unknown twin who had been conspiratorially substituted for the dead man, or that the lab was controlled by some kind of religious cult despite being staffed by vetted biomedical experts, or that there was some other explanation that I hadn't yet figured out. Resurrection from the dead is a proposition that has such a low a priori probability that sufficient evidence is almost conceptually unachievable. But not quite. If the lab was able to repeat the occurrence in the presence of numerous other expert teams who were dispatched from around the world to check the whole thing out, THEN we would have to start thinking about it seriously.
So Christians, get us a time machine and a large team of top ranked pathologists. Then get ready for a disheartening null report. I know you wouldn't stop believing, however.
Thank you Dale Allison
It seems that Dale's thinking based on reality and rationalism
is at odds with his thinking based on supernatural fantasies,
and perhaps that his thinking about history is torn between the two
..you'd barely know it from this podcast (28:42)...but, no actually right now it is the skeptics who are after him with their knives...Allison's latest work basically undoes David Hume's proto-modernist denial of miracles ...and based on consistent historical evidence ...
go back and listen very closely to the last part where he tries to inject that in...or watch Dale Allison's "is there Evidence of Miracles" from a week or two ago on "Unbelievable" podcast..