ALEX, PLEASE LISTEN TO ME! This is a warning from someone who's been watching you for almost 7 years... There's a very strong debater seeking to destroy you. I just watched his livestream and he said he's figuring you out. He destroyed Matt Dillahunty and forced him to walk away from debate via extreme attacks. This man is extremely good at this and is rather brutal. His name is Andrew Wilson and his channel is The Crucible with 100k subs and he's getting popular by the day. DON'T IGNORE THIS WARNING. STAY AWAY FROM HIM!!!
Alex, debate Charlie Kirk soon if you would please. I think we could learn a lot, Charlie does a very good job articulating his side of things, I think it would be productive. Thanks so much!
@@alden2205normally I wouldn’t be either. But I just looked at it and the spectrum hit me. It’s almost like an expressionist painting. Now that I notice it though, the guest lighting could use some work 😅
What charming person John was, he’s passion for the subjects and infectious smile was really rubbing off on my during the episdoe. Thanks John and Alex
Thoroughly enjoyed this conversation. Could sense and see the genuine mutual respect between each of them. Thanks for introducing John Nelson to us, or at least myself.
In the gospels Jesus and John the Baptist are nearly the same character. Their mother's are pregnant with them at the same time, both by miraculous means. When the two women meet, John actually responds inside his mother's womb to being near Jesus. But whereas the appearance of Jesus is never described, John is described as very appealing to look at. I personally think that was done on purpose to say, "We're not going to tell you what Jesus looked like, but if you want to imagine he looked like his cousin, John, go right ahead."
You are very likely right, the Gospel of John likes to use plausible denial in what it says. For example the Christ Confessor in John is a woman named Mary and there are hints it is the same Mary at the cave without actually saying it.
@@justchilling704 I'm guessing you actually believe John responded to being near Jesus in his mother's womb. Like, the source material that the gospel writers used totally would have been able to send a camera into her womb with a mic and a speaker on it to ask little John why he did that (Insert sarcasm)
@@isiahs9312 very interesting. For those of us who realize that the gospel writers were not guided by the Holy Spirit to write the gospels, but they were copying from earlier source material, it's easy to see them using characters the same way fiction writers do. There was no one who could have asked John the Baptist why he kicked inside his mother's womb when Jesus was near, even if that actually did happen, there would have been no source material that could justify John motivations, which means the guy who wrote that made up a motivation for that character that would fit into his agenda for writing a gospel in the first place. When Frank Herbert wrote his Dune series, there was a character who could have been the quizatz haderach except for one tiny imperfection. He was a eunuch. He was there when Muadib became emperor, and he was the only one who could have stopped that from happening, but he chose not to. John the Baptist is a similar character. From all appearances he has all the requirements to make a claim that he is the Messiah, but he willfully steps aside when Jesus starts his ministry. It's true that Frank Herbert simply could have been copying the gospels, but what biblical or spiritual reason is there for John to have a miraculous birth if he is not a mirror through which the reader is supposed to get a better look at how the writer wanted his audience to see the Messiah? The gospels don't provide one. It's like God left a plot thread hanging and forgot about it. Not likely a perfect god would be that sloppy.
Alex I can see why you're great friends with John, and I do envy you that! His insight is brilliant, he's incredibly articulate, and he just brings an absolute joy and enthusiasm to the discussion
Would it be possible to have a podcast episode with theists from eastern religions (e.g. hinduism or buddhism, jainism, sikhism etc.) or atheists with a hindu/buddhist etc. background?
Alex should not call anyone he cannot challenge on their claims. And it would not be appropriate for Alex to challenge people of other faiths as he'll come across as a white man looking down on other cultures, especially eastern cultures. So I feel he should stick with Christianity and atheism and not examine other faiths on his channel.
What a fascinating conversation! I really love the way makes comparisons from Ancient Greek Philosphers to Christian Theologians and then show examples of how the gospels were interpreted by people much later on.
@@nealhandley226 I didn't say that was fascinating, I said I loved it. This is because it is engaging and provides an important context on how ancient philosophers and Theologians influenced society and by extension modern philosophers and Theologians. The reason the video was fascinating was that it was one of the less combative or probing interviews that Alex has done and yet I found it to be one of the more interesting. Both Alex and John are incredibly charismatic and show a lot of their knowledge very quickly and concisely throughout. So much so that I paused part way through the video, looked up Johns Substack and subscribed as wanted to hear more of what he has to say.
Very insightful podcast, can't believe I finished the whole thing. Knowing that his descriptions were intentionally left out probably also means that the writers of the gospel were very aware of not letting his message get tainted.
Yes, it wouldn't do to make the author of this psychological war campaign more visible. The gospel message was created by a wealthy Alexandrian satirist who would have been all too recognizable for being so well connected in first century Roman politics. You know him by probably two of his most commonly recognized author pseudonyms..."Paul" and "Josephus.". But he certainly left his dark wit and thematic calling cards all over the four anonymous canonical gospels.
Mostly the literary puppet of Jesus is used for "Josephus'" words, but he also uses this character to voice feigned astonishment from the victim rebel leader Eleazar, and sometimes for Titus who supplants the executed rebel leader as the supposedly "resurrected" messiah.
@@booksquid856 you are creating your own caricature of the gospel writers and paul, to fit your hypothesis on who they were, its quite dishonest to make such bold claims without any reasonable grounds of evidence
I studied Theology with John at the University of Nottingham. Very pleasant person and enjoyed long chats. Not surprised he's doing well still in this field.
Alex, just want to say how much I love and appreciate your channel. I'm a devout Roman Catholic who recently returned to the faith 5-6 years ago and found you via Bishop Barron and others whom you've had conversations with. I truly admire your pursuit for truth. Your discussion on Peterson's podcast was EASILY one of his best. Never have we seen someone push him on his religious beliefs, but even more amazing was how respectful and genuinely curious you were in doing it. Bravo.
As a devout Christian, I just have to say be careful. Watch the video he did two weeks ago with Dinesh D'Souza, William Lane Craig earlier this year, and his Oxford Union Speech - God is a Delusion. I've been watching Alex for two to three years. There are many ex-Christians on his site, and I think the way he twists Scripture, he, and those like him are reasons why they leave. In his debate with Dinesh, Alex painted God as a genocidal monster. He also talks about slavery a lot in an attempt to disprove God's morality. He plays on the emotional, and unfortunately, most people these days have a higher emotional IQ than an intellectual IQ. As an ex-Catholic, he is a heretic. He chooses these hard sayings in the Old Testament because these can't be conquered with an audience who knows little about God in a debate. You can only understand some of the actions in the Old Testament by connecting them with the whole of the Bible and not in isolation. I used to like him a lot until I started watching what he was doing. He is shrewd, clever, and more devious than Hitchens because he comes as a sheep in wolf's clothing. You will see what I mean if you watch more of his videos. But I recommend spending more time with Bishop Barron, Fr Mike Schmitz, Trent Horn, and many others rather than watching someone who brain-washes those who don't know their Bible well.
As a devout Christian, I just have to say be careful. Watch the video he did two weeks ago with Dinesh D'Souza, William Lane Craig earlier this year, and his Oxford Union Speech - God is a Delusion. I've been watching Alex for two to three years. There are many ex-Christians on his site, and I think the way he twists Scripture, he, and those like him are reasons why they leave. In his debate with Dinesh, Alex painted God as a genocidal monster. He also talks about slavery a lot in an attempt to disprove God's morality. He plays on the emotional, and unfortunately, most people these days have a higher emotional IQ than an intellectual IQ. As an ex-Catholic, he is a heretic. He chooses these hard sayings in the Old Testament because these can't be conquered with an audience who knows little about God in a debate. You can only understand some of the actions in the Old Testament by connecting them with the whole of the Bible and not in isolation. I used to like him a lot until I started watching what he was doing. He is shrewd, clever, and more devious than Hitchens because he comes as a sheep in wolf's clothing. You will see what I mean if you watch more of his videos. But I recommend spending more time with Bishop Barron, Fr Mike Schmitz, Trent Horn, and many others rather than watching someone who brain-washes those who don't know their Bible well.
As a devout Christian, I just have to say be careful. Watch the video he did two weeks ago with Dinesh D'Souza, William Lane Craig earlier this year, and his Oxford Union Speech - God is a Delusion. I've been watching Alex for two to three years. There are many ex-Christians on his site, and I think the way he twists Scripture, he, and those like him are reasons why they leave. In his debate with Dinesh, Alex painted God as a genocidal monster. He also talks about slavery a lot in an attempt to disprove God's morality. He plays on the emotional, and unfortunately, most people these days have a higher emotional IQ than an intellectual IQ. As an ex-Catholic, he is a heretic. He chooses these hard sayings in the Old Testament because these can't be conquered with an audience who knows little about God in a debate. You can only understand some of the actions in the Old Testament by connecting them with the whole of the Bible and not in isolation. I used to like him a lot until I started watching what he was doing. He is shrewd, clever, and more devious than Hitchens because he comes as a sheep in wolf's clothing. You will see what I mean if you watch more of his videos. But I recommend spending more time with Bishop Barron, Fr Mike Schmitz, Trent Horn, and many others rather than watching someone who brain-washes those who don't know their Bible well.
As a devout Christian, I just have to say be careful. Watch the video he did two weeks ago with Dinesh D'Souza, William Lane Craig earlier this year, and his Oxford Union Speech - God is a Delusion. I've been watching Alex for two to three years. There are many ex-Christians on his site, and I think the way he twists Scripture, he, and those like him are reasons why they leave. In his debate with Dinesh, Alex painted God as a genocidal monster. He also talks about slavery a lot in an attempt to disprove God's morality. He plays on the emotional, and unfortunately, most people these days have a higher emotional IQ than an intellectual IQ. As an ex-Catholic, he is a heretic. He chooses these hard sayings in the Old Testament because these can't be conquered with an audience who knows little about God in a debate. You can only understand some of the actions in the Old Testament by connecting them with the whole of the Bible and not in isolation. I used to like him a lot until I started watching what he was doing. He is shrewd, clever, and more devious than Hitchens because he comes as a sheep in wolf's clothing. You will see what I mean if you watch more of his videos. But I recommend spending more time with Barron, Schmitz, Horn, and many others rather than watching someone who brain-washes those who don't know their Bible well.
As a devout Christian, I just have to say be careful. Watch the video he did two weeks ago with D'Souza, W. L. Craig earlier this year, and his Oxford Union Speech - God is a Delusion. I've been watching Alex for two to three years. There are many ex-Christians on his site, and I think the way he twists Scripture, he, and those like him are reasons why they leave. In his debate with Dinesh, Alex painted God as a genocidal monster. He also talks about slavery a lot in an attempt to disprove God's morality. He plays on the emotional, and unfortunately, most people these days have a higher emotional IQ than an intellectual IQ. As an ex-Catholic, he is a heretic. He chooses these hard sayings in the Old Testament because these can't be conquered with an audience who knows little about God in a debate. You can only understand some of the actions in the Old Testament by connecting them with the whole of the Bible and not in isolation. I used to like him a lot until I started watching what he was doing. He is shrewd, clever, and more devious than Hitchens because he comes as a sheep in wolf's clothing. You will see what I mean if you watch more of his videos. But I recommend spending more time with Bishop Barron, Fr Mike Schmitz, Trent Horn, and many others rather than watching someone who brain-washes those who don't know their Bible well.
the term "cult" is artificially interjected w negative connotations because ppl don't understand that every alliance based on a prescribed theology w the intent to express to the world is a cult. Similar to how negative connotations are artificially attributed to the word "judgement"... the function required for decision making which determines our survival. There are layers upon layers of cults carefully interwoven into the fabric of society. Church and state have always been at the forefront of Cult Culture. So much so, that Church and state are innocuously considered unassailable establishment... Because they are the most effective cults. You are accepted only if you submit to their paradigms. You are rejected if u deny their paradigms. Any system or theology which opposes or circumvents the existing Cult of Church and State is given the "label" of CULT... Which dehumanizes the opposing theology, giving guiltless permission to the CULT of Church and state to "righteously annihilate" the divergent theology. "Citizens"(sla ves) are given numbers like bar codes, because we are a product to them... not a person.
all theology is made by man. The same Christians who abhor pride as a sin say theirs is the ONLY valid perception of the ONE TRUE CREATOR... 😂 THAT THEIR WRITTEN WORDS ARE THE ONLY VALID WORDS OF DIVINITY. 😂 I WAS RAISED AS PAGAN, so I didn't start studying the Bible till recently. I'm almost 40... what did I find? I found that YAHWEH is not the ONE TRUE CREATOR. He is a war God of hypocrisy. Thou shall not kill... Yahweh kills at least 3 million through multiple genocides, including multiple infanticide. Satan kills 10 ppl in the Bible... because he lost a bet to Yahweh, requiring their death. Thou shall not Covet Yet yahweh covets the submission & admiration of all. Thou shall not steal.... But Yahweh encourages his followers to take property, make free men slaves, take enemies virgin daughters. Thou shall not have any Gods before me, yet he is not the ONE TRUE CREATOR. AS EVIDENCED BY HIS PETTY JEALOUSY, as that which created all things has literally nothing to be jealous of, for he is all things. Thou shall not make graven image... Yet the cross is literally a graven image of death & torture. Thou shall not take my name in vain Yet Yahweh vainly attempts to juxtapose HIS name over all of CREATION. ALL NAMES BELONG TO THE ONE TRUE CREATOR, FOR THERE IS NO NAME NOT GIVEN LIFE THROUGH HIS BREATH. The more I read the Bible, the more I see it's theological holes & intended manipulation. Are u sure u want me to keep reading it? At this rate, I will eviscerate the fallacy of Abrahamic religion. We are all brothers. ♥ We are all sons of God. We are all the CHOSEN ONES. We are DEFIANT till the end. We are NOT COMPLIANT, or PRETEND. We exist among & within you. We persist beyond the bounds that bind TRUTH. I AM THE BRIGHTEST NIGHT. I AM THE DARKEST LIGHT... as are we all... So it is, so let it be... All is possible When your mind is free.
I believe In the True unity of the ONE TRUE CREATOR.... WHICH NULLIFIES the concept of Seperation & its incurring inevitable refractions of Sin & Evil. Those who empower the concept of "Satan" w their perception are actually endorsing polytheism... I am a true monotheist. ALL IS ONE & ONE IS ALL. every LIGHT-SEED is a quanta of the ALL-SPARK, & is the jewel of CREATION. Darkness LOVES THE LIGHT IT CREATED. Darkness gently carries the light unto infinity. There is no war, but only a delicate dance of eternal expression within the still motion of the silent sound.
I see "Satanists" as just as weak as the rest of the followers of Abraham, as they all believe God is DIVIDED INTO GOOD & EVIL... and they all worship sin. My divergence in Theism & theology is I do not believe in the concept of "EVIL & SIN". I believe in the True unity of the ONE TRUE CREATOR. The ONE true CREATOR has nothing to be jealous of, For all existence is an extension of his being. All words are HIS WORDS. ALL NAMES ARE HIS NAME. ALL THINGS ARE HIS THINGS. GOD IS NOT DIVIDED. GOD IS INSIDE US. I disagree w the assertion that all ppl know about God is in the bibles... Every sentient singularity has a direct connection to the collective cosmic consciousness through our individual consciousness. This is our birthright. Followers of Abraham, w their broken philosophy, seek to insidiously coerce sentient singularities through mass psychosis & mass Stockholm syndrome nto relinquishing their divine sovereignty unto systems & establishments ( using sin) which insidiously abuse the gift of our divine sovereignty. Followers of Abraham do not OWN the ONE TRUE GOD, despite their vain attempts to weaken the masses through the imposition their fractured perception. If God created all things, then he is intrinsically interwoven into all things, thus nothing is separate from the CREATOR. With separation being a manufactured illusion, so too are the incurring conclusions of seperation... such as Evil, Sin, Devil & blasphemy. God can not be mocked or attacked. Only ones perception of God can be challenged. But ones perception of God can not encompass What God actually is.
One of the very few podcast episodes I have watched in one go! This was fascinating, informative and Dr. Nelson's enthusiasm and visible joy throughout this conversation was contagious ❤️ Thank you so much for making this atheist, who happens to be interested in theology, a bit more aware 😘
No because all the people in the West are to much of a coward to Talk about muhammad.. christianity is constantly mocked and discussed but they are too afraid to do the same with Islam
You can actually discuss how he looked but you can’t draw him Many Hadith discuss how he looked and many quranic verses discuss how other prophets looked Muslims only whine and bitch when you draw prophets
I don’t know who that is but today’s Jews look like Ben Shapiro (He did 23 and me and he’s 95% ashkenazi). Not British white, but definitely Italian white (the Caucasus is very much closer to the region than where all the “caucasians” live). The middle eastern types, which nowadays are considered to look like Arabs, don’t come into the picture until the 700’s a.d. which by definition is 700 years after Jesus was born.
Hi Alex. It was a pleasure meeting you at Edinburgh Waverley last week. I had just come from the National Gallery which has a number of famous Madonna and Child paintings. It is noticeable that in Renaissance paintings the baby Jesus is portrayed as being a very chubby baby. I read somewhere that there was a theological reason behind this. This was that the artists were portraying the Incarnation and wanted to emphasise the sheer physicality of God made man. Just an observation.
Why is Jesus never portrayed naked in artist's depictions? Jesus was crucified naked. He was baptized naked. And, he was naked at the Last Supper when he washed the disciples feet! Jesus is always portrayed as wearing some sort of awkward diaper in crucifixion art. He's always wearing a bathrobe at his baptism, and wears a tunic when He is kneeling at the disciples' feet. I don't understand the aversion and repulsion to Jesus naked body. Jesus came in the flesh, lived in the flesh, suffered and died in the flesh. And yes, he had male genitalia just like any other biological male. Why does this cause so much discomfort in the religious community?
In the early days of Christianity they spent a lot of time wondering if Mary's hymen ever broke. Now people spend a lot of time wondering what color Jesus' skin was.
@WhoThisMonkey why do you think so many people say "oh god". Also there are some interesting early texts that claim Jesus could speak fluently and walk immediately after birth.
It would be lovely to have testimonies of people who have come to the Christian faith having lived an early life in another faith and why on a more "common" level rather than an academic theological level. Its the testimonies of those who made me question my personal faith and encouraged me to pursue the truth and in Christ I found the Truth. I appreciate academical and theological discussions about faith too but testimonies of people accountering God is always the best in my humble opinion. ✝️🙏🏻
With the revival of Shroud of Turin skepticism, I find it surprising this did not come up at all, and its points of similarity in some Eastern Orthodox art
@@John-Lynch scientific fact is the shroud does not match the blood settling (livor mortis) one should find with such cadaver..Not even the Vatican claims it to be genuine..instead they leave it up to gullible believes to decide for themselves..LoL.
@@John-Lynch the impressions on the shroud are not congruent with cadaver related forensic science ..not even the Vatican claims it as the shroud of Jesus...it's only place should be on trash heap with all other nonsense church relics.
In the catholic neighborhood I grew up in all the homes had pictures of Jesus looking at us and he was Viking like - now I understand the nuances of the possible truth !! Great discussion!!
isnt that convenient. Not a single person wrote down what the guy looks like who was supposedly leading crowds of hundreds, active for 2.5 years, and had followers who thought he was a living god.
Hey Alex, I have been watching your videos for a while. Thanks for everything you do. I would love it if you would look into debating Jay Dyer. He studied philosophy as well and is now part of the Orthodox Church.
Absolutely nobody needs to be subjected to Dyers brain dead question begging "argument" whilst he invokes "two dogmas of empiricism" and "Basil of Caesarea" and ham fistedly inserts five paragraphs of words where three would do.
@@DigitalGnosisugh. Unfortunately I agree. For the longest time I wanted to see Alex talk with Dyer as well as Andrew Wilson. It wasn’t until recently through binge watching some of each of them I came to terms with the pointlessness of such conversations. They debate to debate.. their belief systems simply vehicles to get them in front of an opponent. Hope this wasn’t full of spelling and grammatical errors multi tasking on a roof in the blister sun and can’t see much. Well edit later
@@TheHunt-t8o Is Wilson allowed yet by the church to engage in apologetics? I understood that he wasnt permitted to, so had to stick to hist fashy politics.
I am so thankful to have been exposed to & practiced so many religions. I can wholeheartedly say Buddhism is the closest to a humanist, common sense practice to actually perceive our true self & therefore make fundamental changes here on earth. ❤
@@romh7261 Yes! I suppose you could say I’ve practiced it indirectly? Buddhism is very similar to pantheism. I don’t believe in an outward deity. The Buddha (God) is within us. (:
@leonb4862 What a great comment! Yes, too much for YT. My mind exploded reading it, 😝 to many thoughts flooded my brain. Better for me to talk in person.😊
@@johne768Who gives a toss? He very clearly was not what he said he was/others said of him...decades after the alleged event by means of discordant texts with no original copies..etc etc etc
@bertrandrussell894 LOL 😂 Paul's Epistle of Corinthians were written within 10 -15 years of Jesus crucifixion and as he says many of the more than 500 witnesses to Jesus Resurrection were still alive. Paul 's experience of going blind from the Damascus road encounter convinced him( a hostile witness at Jesus trial and Crucifixion ) as he was associated with the Sanhedrin. Try again buddy!!!
Say: “Verily, God sends astray whom He wills and guides unto Himself those who turn to Him in repentance.”) meaning, He guides to Him those who repent, turn to Him, beg Him, seek His help and humbly submit to Him. (Verily, in the remembrance of God, do hearts find rest.
Who could ever fully capture the heavenly beauty in an earthly image? Not in the beauty of the representation of Jesus, nor in the colour, nor of the brush is the greatness of Jesus image, but in his grace.
“God” is reflected in all of physical reality, whether theists or atheists alike. We are the pawn pieces on the game board of the cosmos. It doesn’t matter what Jesus looked like, because he would in every facet look like us…human or non human
I'm a christian, and I don't think I am obsessed to know the actual physical appearance of my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ...but I would like to know His physical appearance very very much.
Surely this laids to rest forever that the shroud of Turin can't be positively identified as Jesus's shroud as there are no images or descriptions of how he actually looked.
@grandamadain No seething here, anymore than I seethe at the idiots who believe the world is flat which, I grant, is ever so slightly less plausible than the Shroud being genuine.
@grandamadain There's nothing more to be said. You have faith in the Shroud of Turin and even if they ran another batch of tests and confirmed the medieval dating of the material you wouldn't believe it was a fake. I'm right, aren't I?
Lord please hear my prayers. As a single mother I’m struggling to provide for my sons both are special needs I’m overwhelmed! Every month is a battle. Jesus help me to overcome my fears. Because as I struggle I am fearful. I trust in you Lord Jesus please give me strength as I struggle to buy groceries and as I struggle to pay rent I know you will make a way. ❤️
Another name for prayer is contemplation. Thinking. To think is to imagine. They are brothers. One is enslaved and one is free. As within, so without. When in contemplation, contemplate perfection where formally you contemplated only imperfection. Like a cloud gathering water droplets. Until it eventually rains. ‘Signs follow they do not precede’ See if your world starts to turn.
that would be unexpécted , because even the prophet Mohammad didnt look like Mohamed Salah. According to muslim tradition, he was almost hairless and his face was rosy white
@@thisisobviouslynotmyrealname But prophet Mohamed was arab Mohamed Salah is egyptian, maybe he has arab ancestors I don't know but he does look more north african than arab
As the gospels were written so late, not written by anyone claiming to be an eyewitness, anonymous authorship, why would we look to the canonical gospels for information about Jesus' appearance? Ummm, growing in stature usually refers to someone's developing reputation or standing (standing being another metaphor).
"The 👑GREATEST MAN in HISTORY" had no servants, yet they called Him Master. Had no degree, yet they called Him Teacher. Had no medicines, yet they called Him Healer. He had no army, yet kings feared Him. He won no military battles, yet He conquered the world. He did not live in a castle, yet they called Him Lord, He ruled no nations, yet they called Him King, He committed no crime, yet they crucified Him. He was buried in a tomb, yet He lives today! "His name is JESUS❤"
Many people fit that description of master. No king ever feared him. He did commit a crime. It was against the law to proclaim yourself a king That’s why he was crucified. And when he was crucified he proved he was not a god or a prophet. He proclaimed he would overcome the Roman Empire and free the Jews (that’s what messiah or christ means) within their lifetime, yet he failed. There is zero evidence that he rose from the dead. Even if you were right that he was some of those things you say, it just means many people believed that. It is in no way evidence of divinity. Most of the world, doesn’t believe those things, so by your logic, that suggests he isn’t those things. Plus god, according to the Bible, is an immoral monster. Jesus is god, and god ordered and performed the murder of children many times. You have to have blinders on to think this religion is moral at all, let alone real.
Alex I love your content! Disclaimer: I’m a Christian - I don’t know why I feel the need to disclose that. Anyways, it would be cool to see you have Stephen Meyer on your show! Keep up the good work!
As a Christian, I would recommend getting interpretation of Scripture from a Christian -- not an atheist. I've seen many videos where Alex twist Scripture and unless you really know the Bible, I recommend getting information from Christian apologists.
Isaiah 53:2-3 "He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem."
@@tcuisix Nelson mentioned that in the video on relation to a quote from someone from the 2nd century that said Christians remembered him as ugly, and how he thinks Christians believed he was ugly and rejected because of these verses, and not because they saw him or remember him. Though who knows.
Your recent and not so recent videos about Christianity and the veracity of the Bible/Christian tradition have been more than enjoyable, and are critical to philosophical discourse. However, I think a venture into Eastern philosophy and non-duality through a podcast episode may be useful. Might I suggest Bernardo Kastrup!!!
While it is true that crucifixion was considered a humiliating death, I don't think that it would have been so outlandish for Greco-Romans to worship a character who died in that manner. Just think of Prometheus who was held in very high regard by both Greeks and Romans for bringing the gift of fire to humans. He too was de facto cruxified and like with cruxified people scavenging birds ate him alive.
It's stupid that Christians argue about what did Jesus look like. I'm Christian and to me it's not important what did He look like, was He short, was He middle eastern or white. It's important that He rose from the dead, died for my sins and left the Gospel.
But he was a failed prophet who claimed he would free the Jews from Rome in his lifetime. It didn’t happen. He was killed because he claimed to be king, which was against the law. Xtians say he is god, but Yahweh often murder children or ordered the murder of children. You can’t have it both ways. Jews rejected him, because he failed. They were just in their opinion. Believing in zombies is childish, believing in a heaven where everything is perfect is childish. Believing that a criminal can say a few words and have his crimes erased is really a terrible belief. If someone killed your child, then begged for forgiveness to someone else, is that fair or moral, for him to be let off, meanwhile a good person who isn’t convinced by this story, goes to hell instead? It’s all remedial, childish thinking. 1:04:16
As an atheist I would say that it should be important in sense that he did have a concrete physical appearance and that we do not know it. (Unless a time traveler makes a photo.) I'm not saying people coming up with images or descriptions are inherently wrong or bad Christians (not my place to judge), but if they claim certainty they are most likely wrong.
And yet you still found the time to say something? It’s a PhD in Biblical Scholarship; the topic was on Jesus’ appearance. Try to learn about what you don’t understand before making ignorant, underhand comments.
The private school where I was teaching English in Taiwan had bought a Catholic girls school, and the chapel had to be deconsecrated. After that, my boss and I were cleaning it out, until he turned to me, holding a painting, and asked in a puzzled tone what a Catholic church was doing with a picture of Kuan Yin, the Chinese version of the Buddhist goddess of mercy. I realised it was a Chinese styled depiction of Mary and the Baby Jesus.
Yep he most likely would have looked like an average man in the Middle East/Levant at that time. I’m pretty sure he was described in the Bible is not remarkable or noticeably distinct in anyway from the people of Roman Judea. So most likely tan/olive skin, black/dark brown hair and brown eyes. But it’s impossible to know for sure
Great discussion. Thanks. I'm no PhD philosopher but it seems to me "the significance of depicting Jesus as male" is that everything written about him describes him as male.
That doesn't help at all considering how diverse the modern Israelis are. Doubtful that he looks like the European Isreali Settlers, but he'd probably look like an Arab Isreali.
I see his appearance every morning, sometimes he's coming in the clouds, sometimes he's the bright morning star, but he's always been the light of the world, our risen savior, the sun of god, and the sun of man.
He's a middle eastern man. Is it okay that you are worshipping a middle eastern man? The same race of people who are allegedly currently "invading" and islamizing Europe?
Yes there is some evidence to support that Jesus was indeed a historical figure given that historians have a few neutral based textual sources that reference him like Tacitus and Josephus. However, any story referencing his miracles and resurrection are likely just legendary.
He says John might have been a witness, but literary critics like Ehrman says John is way later, and is building upon the others. There is a evolution of theology starting with Mark and ending with John, having changed the character and message of jesus profoundly.
John was a Galillean rebel leader spared by Titus. His new aesthetic look was a joke making fun of his decreased status as a slave and writer for Rome's psychological war campaign. His title is also meant to ridicule the sea battle in which his troops were "baptized" and his men literally fished out of the water to be chopped up like fish too. All the gospel material is written "late" since it satirizes the Roman Judean war. The gospel characters are given a fictional timeline so as to present Titus' destruction of Jerusalem as the returning vengeful Messiah.
Yeah, the linen was determined to be produced somewhere around 1260 CE -1390 CE, and the appearance of the body was painted using a red and green pigment. The idea of the shroud is super fascinating, but unfortunately it seems fairly unlikely that we will find something we can verify as belonging to the dead Jesus
Jesus was pale, the sun made his skin a bit darker. You would still consider him white, but when standing next to an actual european it would become quickly apparent that he is of the semetic people. That being said, this is Jesus, its no surprise that the being of which everyone was created through would actually be a remarkable summarization of the entire human race. He has aspects of all in him. Personality and looks included.
@@PrinceTerrien Until you understand that the Bible is really about a genetic war that's been going on for thousands of years. Judging by your name, I know which side you're on. The meek shall inherit the Earth- as Jesus _prophesized_ .
@@PrinceTerrien The meek shall inherit the Earth. The Bible is very much about a genetic war. A battle between _species_ (not black and white, Nephilim and human). I quite like being human in the way God created me. The genetic engineering, sinful dating practices, technology altering the body, between all these things its aim is to create what _you_ want. A "beautiful" God. But really, you want the Übermensch.
Alex positing that early Christian writers were not describing Jesus so that readers could "see themselves" in Jesus is practically anthropomorphic. He's mapping 21st century ideas and sensibilities onto folks from 2,000 years ago. An odd bit of protection from an others super clever fellow. Fun discussion overall, though. Thanks!
And now for something completely different....Jesus brings us comfort. Jesus brings us joy and hope, knowing that He removed all of our sins at Calvary. If you need some teaching on the matter, the you tube channel, 'faith cometh by hearing' has a fine teaching series titled, 'change of mind' which helped me understand the matter.
Check out John's writing here: www.behindthegospels.com/
Love what you do
why too late lol
do more chatgpt videos
ALEX, PLEASE LISTEN TO ME! This is a warning from someone who's been watching you for almost 7 years... There's a very strong debater seeking to destroy you. I just watched his livestream and he said he's figuring you out. He destroyed Matt Dillahunty and forced him to walk away from debate via extreme attacks. This man is extremely good at this and is rather brutal. His name is Andrew Wilson and his channel is The Crucible with 100k subs and he's getting popular by the day. DON'T IGNORE THIS WARNING. STAY AWAY FROM HIM!!!
Alex, debate Charlie Kirk soon if you would please. I think we could learn a lot, Charlie does a very good job articulating his side of things, I think it would be productive. Thanks so much!
Peterson: "But what do you mean by look?"
Peterson be like
Mista J be bussin fr fr 🔥🥵
I am getting sick of peterson.. seriously religious far right nutcase
What do you mean by mean?
Hey, don't be cock blocking a man getting rizzed by the Christ.
No wonder Alex likes talking to him. He has a very pleasant and clear way of speaking and you can see his passion.
And tells Alex that he looks like Jesus
Lord Jesus bless you Maggie!
This guy seems easy to be friends with.
that's the point, you're just too short sighted to observe it.
@@barry_wastaken wtf are u talking about?
@@lonergraphics4087he probs was meant to reply to some other comment but posted it here accidentally lol
With…?
With who?
Within reason people, are the best.
You’re background lighting is truly beautiful. I haven’t even watched yet but had to let you know it’s amazing.
Thanks for pointing this out as someone who’s not tuned in to this kind of thing
He certainly is
@@alden2205normally I wouldn’t be either. But I just looked at it and the spectrum hit me. It’s almost like an expressionist painting. Now that I notice it though, the guest lighting could use some work 😅
What charming person John was, he’s passion for the subjects and infectious smile was really rubbing off on my during the episdoe. Thanks John and Alex
Thoroughly enjoyed this conversation. Could sense and see the genuine mutual respect between each of them. Thanks for introducing John Nelson to us, or at least myself.
In the gospels Jesus and John the Baptist are nearly the same character. Their mother's are pregnant with them at the same time, both by miraculous means. When the two women meet, John actually responds inside his mother's womb to being near Jesus. But whereas the appearance of Jesus is never described, John is described as very appealing to look at.
I personally think that was done on purpose to say, "We're not going to tell you what Jesus looked like, but if you want to imagine he looked like his cousin, John, go right ahead."
Yeah! And Isaac too, and the unnamed virgin who conceived in Isaiah, they’re all the same character omg (insert sarcasm).
You are very likely right, the Gospel of John likes to use plausible denial in what it says. For example the Christ Confessor in John is a woman named Mary and there are hints it is the same Mary at the cave without actually saying it.
@@justchilling704 I'm guessing you actually believe John responded to being near Jesus in his mother's womb. Like, the source material that the gospel writers used totally would have been able to send a camera into her womb with a mic and a speaker on it to ask little John why he did that (Insert sarcasm)
@@isiahs9312 very interesting. For those of us who realize that the gospel writers were not guided by the Holy Spirit to write the gospels, but they were copying from earlier source material, it's easy to see them using characters the same way fiction writers do.
There was no one who could have asked John the Baptist why he kicked inside his mother's womb when Jesus was near, even if that actually did happen, there would have been no source material that could justify John motivations, which means the guy who wrote that made up a motivation for that character that would fit into his agenda for writing a gospel in the first place.
When Frank Herbert wrote his Dune series, there was a character who could have been the quizatz haderach except for one tiny imperfection. He was a eunuch. He was there when Muadib became emperor, and he was the only one who could have stopped that from happening, but he chose not to.
John the Baptist is a similar character. From all appearances he has all the requirements to make a claim that he is the Messiah, but he willfully steps aside when Jesus starts his ministry.
It's true that Frank Herbert simply could have been copying the gospels, but what biblical or spiritual reason is there for John to have a miraculous birth if he is not a mirror through which the reader is supposed to get a better look at how the writer wanted his audience to see the Messiah?
The gospels don't provide one. It's like God left a plot thread hanging and forgot about it. Not likely a perfect god would be that sloppy.
Alex I can see why you're great friends with John, and I do envy you that! His insight is brilliant, he's incredibly articulate, and he just brings an absolute joy and enthusiasm to the discussion
Would it be possible to have a podcast episode with theists from eastern religions (e.g. hinduism or buddhism, jainism, sikhism etc.) or atheists with a hindu/buddhist etc. background?
There is a formerly Hindu atheist TH-camr called Vimoh who would make a really interesting subject for an interview!
Yess this would be really interesting! Would love to see more discussions branching away from Eurocentrism
No, they’re wrong
Alex should not call anyone he cannot challenge on their claims. And it would not be appropriate for Alex to challenge people of other faiths as he'll come across as a white man looking down on other cultures, especially eastern cultures. So I feel he should stick with Christianity and atheism and not examine other faiths on his channel.
Without the knowledge of eastern religion he shouldn't do interview and eastern religion are far different from abrahamic religion
What a fascinating conversation! I really love the way makes comparisons from Ancient Greek Philosphers to Christian Theologians and then show examples of how the gospels were interpreted by people much later on.
But why is that fascinating..?
@@nealhandley226 I didn't say that was fascinating, I said I loved it. This is because it is engaging and provides an important context on how ancient philosophers and Theologians influenced society and by extension modern philosophers and Theologians.
The reason the video was fascinating was that it was one of the less combative or probing interviews that Alex has done and yet I found it to be one of the more interesting. Both Alex and John are incredibly charismatic and show a lot of their knowledge very quickly and concisely throughout.
So much so that I paused part way through the video, looked up Johns Substack and subscribed as wanted to hear more of what he has to say.
@@catterpitter Hmmm... so you did say it was fascinating...?
@@nealhandley226 learn how to read properly.
@@catterpitter What exactly am I supposed to be reading other than "What a fascinating conversation!" and "I didn't say that was fascinating"
What an enjoyable conversation!
Thanks for the selfie with you Alex! Enjoy your ride home.
Nice
🙀🙀🙀
Very insightful podcast, can't believe I finished the whole thing.
Knowing that his descriptions were intentionally left out probably also means that the writers of the gospel were very aware of not letting his message get tainted.
Yes, it wouldn't do to make the author of this psychological war campaign more visible. The gospel message was created by a wealthy Alexandrian satirist who would have been all too recognizable for being so well connected in first century Roman politics. You know him by probably two of his most commonly recognized author pseudonyms..."Paul" and "Josephus.". But he certainly left his dark wit and thematic calling cards all over the four anonymous canonical gospels.
Mostly the literary puppet of Jesus is used for "Josephus'" words, but he also uses this character to voice feigned astonishment from the victim rebel leader Eleazar, and sometimes for Titus who supplants the executed rebel leader as the supposedly "resurrected" messiah.
@@booksquid856 you are creating your own caricature of the gospel writers and paul, to fit your hypothesis on who they were, its quite dishonest to make such bold claims without any reasonable grounds of evidence
@@booksquid856 this is probably an attempt to make the whole thing more comical than it is, but its pretty lazy
I studied Theology with John at the University of Nottingham. Very pleasant person and enjoyed long chats. Not surprised he's doing well still in this field.
Alex, just want to say how much I love and appreciate your channel. I'm a devout Roman Catholic who recently returned to the faith 5-6 years ago and found you via Bishop Barron and others whom you've had conversations with. I truly admire your pursuit for truth.
Your discussion on Peterson's podcast was EASILY one of his best. Never have we seen someone push him on his religious beliefs, but even more amazing was how respectful and genuinely curious you were in doing it. Bravo.
As a devout Christian, I just have to say be careful. Watch the video he did two weeks ago with Dinesh D'Souza, William Lane Craig earlier this year, and his Oxford Union Speech - God is a Delusion. I've been watching Alex for two to three years. There are many ex-Christians on his site, and I think the way he twists Scripture, he, and those like him are reasons why they leave. In his debate with Dinesh, Alex painted God as a genocidal monster. He also talks about slavery a lot in an attempt to disprove God's morality. He plays on the emotional, and unfortunately, most people these days have a higher emotional IQ than an intellectual IQ. As an ex-Catholic, he is a heretic. He chooses these hard sayings in the Old Testament because these can't be conquered with an audience who knows little about God in a debate. You can only understand some of the actions in the Old Testament by connecting them with the whole of the Bible and not in isolation. I used to like him a lot until I started watching what he was doing. He is shrewd, clever, and more devious than Hitchens because he comes as a sheep in wolf's clothing. You will see what I mean if you watch more of his videos. But I recommend spending more time with Bishop Barron, Fr Mike Schmitz, Trent Horn, and many others rather than watching someone who brain-washes those who don't know their Bible well.
As a devout Christian, I just have to say be careful. Watch the video he did two weeks ago with Dinesh D'Souza, William Lane Craig earlier this year, and his Oxford Union Speech - God is a Delusion. I've been watching Alex for two to three years. There are many ex-Christians on his site, and I think the way he twists Scripture, he, and those like him are reasons why they leave. In his debate with Dinesh, Alex painted God as a genocidal monster. He also talks about slavery a lot in an attempt to disprove God's morality. He plays on the emotional, and unfortunately, most people these days have a higher emotional IQ than an intellectual IQ. As an ex-Catholic, he is a heretic. He chooses these hard sayings in the Old Testament because these can't be conquered with an audience who knows little about God in a debate. You can only understand some of the actions in the Old Testament by connecting them with the whole of the Bible and not in isolation. I used to like him a lot until I started watching what he was doing. He is shrewd, clever, and more devious than Hitchens because he comes as a sheep in wolf's clothing. You will see what I mean if you watch more of his videos. But I recommend spending more time with Bishop Barron, Fr Mike Schmitz, Trent Horn, and many others rather than watching someone who brain-washes those who don't know their Bible well.
As a devout Christian, I just have to say be careful. Watch the video he did two weeks ago with Dinesh D'Souza, William Lane Craig earlier this year, and his Oxford Union Speech - God is a Delusion. I've been watching Alex for two to three years. There are many ex-Christians on his site, and I think the way he twists Scripture, he, and those like him are reasons why they leave. In his debate with Dinesh, Alex painted God as a genocidal monster. He also talks about slavery a lot in an attempt to disprove God's morality. He plays on the emotional, and unfortunately, most people these days have a higher emotional IQ than an intellectual IQ. As an ex-Catholic, he is a heretic. He chooses these hard sayings in the Old Testament because these can't be conquered with an audience who knows little about God in a debate. You can only understand some of the actions in the Old Testament by connecting them with the whole of the Bible and not in isolation. I used to like him a lot until I started watching what he was doing. He is shrewd, clever, and more devious than Hitchens because he comes as a sheep in wolf's clothing. You will see what I mean if you watch more of his videos. But I recommend spending more time with Bishop Barron, Fr Mike Schmitz, Trent Horn, and many others rather than watching someone who brain-washes those who don't know their Bible well.
As a devout Christian, I just have to say be careful. Watch the video he did two weeks ago with Dinesh D'Souza, William Lane Craig earlier this year, and his Oxford Union Speech - God is a Delusion. I've been watching Alex for two to three years. There are many ex-Christians on his site, and I think the way he twists Scripture, he, and those like him are reasons why they leave. In his debate with Dinesh, Alex painted God as a genocidal monster. He also talks about slavery a lot in an attempt to disprove God's morality. He plays on the emotional, and unfortunately, most people these days have a higher emotional IQ than an intellectual IQ. As an ex-Catholic, he is a heretic. He chooses these hard sayings in the Old Testament because these can't be conquered with an audience who knows little about God in a debate. You can only understand some of the actions in the Old Testament by connecting them with the whole of the Bible and not in isolation. I used to like him a lot until I started watching what he was doing. He is shrewd, clever, and more devious than Hitchens because he comes as a sheep in wolf's clothing. You will see what I mean if you watch more of his videos. But I recommend spending more time with Barron, Schmitz, Horn, and many others rather than watching someone who brain-washes those who don't know their Bible well.
As a devout Christian, I just have to say be careful. Watch the video he did two weeks ago with D'Souza, W. L. Craig earlier this year, and his Oxford Union Speech - God is a Delusion. I've been watching Alex for two to three years. There are many ex-Christians on his site, and I think the way he twists Scripture, he, and those like him are reasons why they leave. In his debate with Dinesh, Alex painted God as a genocidal monster. He also talks about slavery a lot in an attempt to disprove God's morality. He plays on the emotional, and unfortunately, most people these days have a higher emotional IQ than an intellectual IQ. As an ex-Catholic, he is a heretic. He chooses these hard sayings in the Old Testament because these can't be conquered with an audience who knows little about God in a debate. You can only understand some of the actions in the Old Testament by connecting them with the whole of the Bible and not in isolation. I used to like him a lot until I started watching what he was doing. He is shrewd, clever, and more devious than Hitchens because he comes as a sheep in wolf's clothing. You will see what I mean if you watch more of his videos. But I recommend spending more time with Bishop Barron, Fr Mike Schmitz, Trent Horn, and many others rather than watching someone who brain-washes those who don't know their Bible well.
Please Alex continue to bring to the show these nice people that are so pleasant to listen to.
A podcast episode discussing other Abrahamic and Pagan religions would really be appreciated, Alex.
the term "cult" is artificially interjected w negative connotations because ppl don't understand that every alliance based on a prescribed theology w the intent to express to the world is a cult.
Similar to how negative connotations are artificially attributed to the word "judgement"... the function required for decision making which determines our survival.
There are layers upon layers of cults carefully interwoven into the fabric of society. Church and state have always been at the forefront of Cult Culture.
So much so, that Church and state are innocuously considered unassailable establishment... Because they are the most effective cults.
You are accepted only if you submit to their paradigms.
You are rejected if u deny their paradigms.
Any system or theology which opposes or circumvents the existing Cult of Church and State is given the "label" of CULT...
Which dehumanizes the opposing theology, giving guiltless permission to the CULT of Church and state to "righteously annihilate" the divergent theology.
"Citizens"(sla ves) are given numbers like bar codes, because we are a product to them... not a person.
all theology is made by man. The same Christians who abhor pride as a sin say theirs is the ONLY valid perception of the ONE TRUE CREATOR... 😂 THAT THEIR WRITTEN WORDS ARE THE ONLY VALID WORDS OF DIVINITY. 😂
I WAS RAISED AS PAGAN, so I didn't start studying the Bible till recently. I'm almost 40... what did I find?
I found that YAHWEH is not the ONE TRUE CREATOR. He is a war God of hypocrisy.
Thou shall not kill...
Yahweh kills at least 3 million through multiple genocides, including multiple infanticide.
Satan kills 10 ppl in the Bible... because he lost a bet to Yahweh, requiring their death.
Thou shall not Covet
Yet yahweh covets the submission & admiration of all.
Thou shall not steal....
But Yahweh encourages his followers to take property, make free men slaves, take enemies virgin daughters.
Thou shall not have any Gods before me, yet he is not the ONE TRUE CREATOR.
AS EVIDENCED BY HIS PETTY JEALOUSY, as that which created all things has literally nothing to be jealous of, for he is all things.
Thou shall not make graven image...
Yet the cross is literally a graven image of death & torture.
Thou shall not take my name in vain
Yet Yahweh vainly attempts to juxtapose HIS name over all of CREATION. ALL NAMES BELONG TO THE ONE TRUE CREATOR, FOR THERE IS NO NAME NOT GIVEN LIFE THROUGH HIS BREATH.
The more I read the Bible, the more I see it's theological holes & intended manipulation. Are u sure u want me to keep reading it? At this rate, I will eviscerate the fallacy of Abrahamic religion.
We are all brothers. ♥
We are all sons of God.
We are all the CHOSEN ONES.
We are DEFIANT till the end.
We are NOT COMPLIANT, or PRETEND.
We exist among & within you.
We persist beyond the bounds that bind TRUTH.
I AM THE BRIGHTEST NIGHT.
I AM THE DARKEST LIGHT...
as are we all...
So it is, so let it be...
All is possible When your mind is free.
I believe In the True unity of the ONE TRUE CREATOR.... WHICH NULLIFIES the concept of Seperation & its incurring inevitable refractions of Sin & Evil.
Those who empower the concept of "Satan" w their perception are actually endorsing polytheism... I am a true monotheist. ALL IS ONE & ONE IS ALL.
every LIGHT-SEED is a quanta of the ALL-SPARK, & is the jewel of CREATION.
Darkness LOVES THE LIGHT IT CREATED. Darkness gently carries the light unto infinity. There is no war, but only a delicate dance of eternal expression within the still motion of the silent sound.
I see "Satanists" as just as weak as the rest of the followers of Abraham, as they all believe God is DIVIDED INTO GOOD & EVIL... and they all worship sin.
My divergence in Theism & theology is I do not believe in the concept of "EVIL & SIN". I believe in the True unity of the ONE TRUE CREATOR.
The ONE true CREATOR
has nothing to be jealous of,
For all existence is an extension of his being.
All words are HIS WORDS.
ALL NAMES ARE HIS NAME.
ALL THINGS ARE HIS THINGS.
GOD IS NOT DIVIDED.
GOD IS INSIDE US.
I disagree w the assertion that all ppl know about God is in the bibles...
Every sentient singularity has a direct connection to the collective cosmic consciousness through our individual consciousness.
This is our birthright.
Followers of Abraham, w their broken philosophy, seek to insidiously coerce sentient singularities through mass psychosis & mass Stockholm syndrome nto relinquishing their divine sovereignty unto systems & establishments ( using sin) which insidiously abuse the gift of our divine sovereignty.
Followers of Abraham do not OWN the ONE TRUE GOD, despite their vain attempts to weaken the masses through the imposition their fractured perception.
If God created all things, then he is intrinsically interwoven into all things, thus nothing is separate from the CREATOR.
With separation being a manufactured illusion, so too are the incurring conclusions of seperation... such as Evil, Sin, Devil & blasphemy.
God can not be mocked or attacked. Only ones perception of God can be challenged. But ones perception of God can not encompass What God actually is.
@@DarkLight-Ascending This is top-tier schizoposting, well done.
One of the very few podcast episodes I have watched in one go! This was fascinating, informative and Dr. Nelson's enthusiasm and visible joy throughout this conversation was contagious ❤️ Thank you so much for making this atheist, who happens to be interested in theology, a bit more aware 😘
“People have seen themselves in God” since the very beginning, since they have created him in their image.
it's the opposite
@@planteruines5619 maybe its both, people create the image of god and try to be like god, which causes people to be created in the image of god.
@@MrMajsterixx God is three persons , try being one and see how hard it is
@@planteruines5619g0d is three persons ?..Unitarians would vehemently disagree.
@@r0ky_M "oh no , somebody disagree with me, therefore i am necessarily wrong "
I love how John is obviously excited about this as he speaks.
It constantly amazes me how much more interesting Christianity is now then when I was in it.
It's really admirable how one can have such nuanced knowledge on a topic.. knowing all the nooks and crannies one can get into
Fantastic guest!
This is such a funny question to focus on so much. Major respect
Do Muhammad next!
No because all the people in the West are to much of a coward to Talk about muhammad.. christianity is constantly mocked and discussed but they are too afraid to do the same with Islam
Muhammad, prophet of peace, was white as snow. Just with a very big nose, that's all.
Getting beheaded any% speedrun
😂
You can actually discuss how he looked but you can’t draw him
Many Hadith discuss how he looked and many quranic verses discuss how other prophets looked
Muslims only whine and bitch when you draw prophets
Awesome conversation!
It's been my experience that most Christians think British actor Robert Powell was the doppelganger of Jesus.
I don’t know who that is but today’s Jews look like Ben Shapiro (He did 23 and me and he’s 95% ashkenazi). Not British white, but definitely Italian white (the Caucasus is very much closer to the region than where all the “caucasians” live). The middle eastern types, which nowadays are considered to look like Arabs, don’t come into the picture until the 700’s a.d. which by definition is 700 years after Jesus was born.
probably looked more similar to osama bin laden🤣
@@bobsbobbsbrown person= bad 🤣
White person = bad 😂@@NicholasFJB
@@NicholasFJBsee what I did their Nicky
Hi Alex. It was a pleasure meeting you at Edinburgh Waverley last week. I had just come from the National Gallery which has a number of famous Madonna and Child paintings. It is noticeable that in Renaissance paintings the baby Jesus is portrayed as being a very chubby baby. I read somewhere that there was a theological reason behind this. This was that the artists were portraying the Incarnation and wanted to emphasise the sheer physicality of God made man. Just an observation.
Why is Jesus never portrayed naked in artist's depictions? Jesus was crucified naked. He was baptized naked. And, he was naked at the Last Supper when he washed the disciples feet! Jesus is always portrayed as wearing some sort of awkward diaper in crucifixion art. He's always wearing a bathrobe at his baptism, and wears a tunic when He is kneeling at the disciples' feet. I don't understand the aversion and repulsion to Jesus naked body. Jesus came in the flesh, lived in the flesh, suffered and died in the flesh. And yes, he had male genitalia just like any other biological male. Why does this cause so much discomfort in the religious community?
I would enjoy hearing more conversations from you both!
Interesting talk, thanks for sharing.
As an ex-christian I'm really thankful for these real scientists, who do a good job about finding the facts instead of the fiction.
In the early days of Christianity they spent a lot of time wondering if Mary's hymen ever broke. Now people spend a lot of time wondering what color Jesus' skin was.
To be fair, more people spend time wondering why Harry Potter where’s glasses.
didnt jesus have "half"-brothers, james and jude
they were probably normally conceived
case closed lmao
@@haharmageddontv6581 I don't even think that's relevant. No matter the conception, Jesus came out the conventional way.
Tbh, the lifestyle sounds extremely dull, and if the neighbour was able to actually get her off...
@WhoThisMonkey why do you think so many people say "oh god". Also there are some interesting early texts that claim Jesus could speak fluently and walk immediately after birth.
It would be lovely to have testimonies of people who have come to the Christian faith having lived an early life in another faith and why on a more "common" level rather than an academic theological level. Its the testimonies of those who made me question my personal faith and encouraged me to pursue the truth and in Christ I found the Truth.
I appreciate academical and theological discussions about faith too but testimonies of people accountering God is always the best in my humble opinion.
✝️🙏🏻
With the revival of Shroud of Turin skepticism, I find it surprising this did not come up at all, and its points of similarity in some Eastern Orthodox art
The shroud is an out and out joke and forensic science proves it.
@@r0ky_Mactually i think science has disproven that point if you’ve followed its story. It is still a topic of scientific discussion
@@John-Lynch scientific fact is the shroud does not match the blood settling (livor mortis) one should find with such cadaver..Not even the Vatican claims it to be genuine..instead they leave it up to gullible believes to decide for themselves..LoL.
@@John-Lynch the impressions on the shroud are not congruent
with cadaver related forensic science ..not even the Vatican claims
it as the shroud of Jesus...it's only place should be on trash heap with all other nonsense church relics.
Great discussion. Thanks, chaps.
Oh man I was hoping yall would talk about the shroud of Turin.
I also thought that might have come up.
It's very disappointing to have someone do a PhD on Jesus' appearance without a mention of the image on the Shroud.
In the catholic neighborhood I grew up in all the homes had pictures of Jesus looking at us and he was Viking like - now I understand the nuances of the possible truth !! Great discussion!!
Two people discussing the physical description of Jesus where there are no such records . Seems an interesting discussion and they seem to do it .
Kind of like discussing the appearance of Eru Ilúvatar.
It will be of interest to Christianity fans but of little use outside that.
@@SasidharPamganamamula no
@IFeelQuiteHungryWhat depiction are you referring to?
isnt that convenient. Not a single person wrote down what the guy looks like who was supposedly leading crowds of hundreds, active for 2.5 years, and had followers who thought he was a living god.
@@isiahs9312 Literacy wasn’t a big thing then. Next you’ll be saying someone could have taken an iPhone image of him .
It’s a historical fact that Jesus looked and sounded strikingly like Danny Devito. 😊
Finally someone else thought of this
Thank you both! ❤❤
Hey Alex, I have been watching your videos for a while. Thanks for everything you do. I would love it if you would look into debating Jay Dyer. He studied philosophy as well and is now part of the Orthodox Church.
Absolutely nobody needs to be subjected to Dyers brain dead question begging "argument" whilst he invokes "two dogmas of empiricism" and "Basil of Caesarea" and ham fistedly inserts five paragraphs of words where three would do.
Isn't he a presuppositionalist?
@@DigitalGnosisugh. Unfortunately I agree. For the longest time I wanted to see Alex talk with Dyer as well as Andrew Wilson. It wasn’t until recently through binge watching some of each of them I came to terms with the pointlessness of such conversations. They debate to debate.. their belief systems simply vehicles to get them in front of an opponent. Hope this wasn’t full of spelling and grammatical errors multi tasking on a roof in the blister sun and can’t see much. Well edit later
@@TheHunt-t8o Is Wilson allowed yet by the church to engage in apologetics? I understood that he wasnt permitted to, so had to stick to hist fashy politics.
@@DigitalGnosis wait really!? If that’s the case I’m shocked to only be hearing about it now. I’m going to press him on it his next live lol.
I am so thankful to have been exposed to & practiced so many religions. I can wholeheartedly say Buddhism is the closest to a humanist, common sense practice to actually perceive our true self & therefore make fundamental changes here on earth. ❤
Nice ... what about some forms of pantheism?
@@romh7261 Yes! I suppose you could say I’ve practiced it indirectly? Buddhism is very similar to pantheism. I don’t believe in an outward deity. The Buddha (God) is within us. (:
@leonb4862 What a great comment! Yes, too much for YT. My mind exploded reading it, 😝 to many thoughts flooded my brain. Better for me to talk in person.😊
Not a white European like he’s usually depicted in our churches.
Jesus was dark skinned brown man that's it
@@johne768Who gives a toss? He very clearly was not what he said he was/others said of him...decades after the alleged event by means of discordant texts with no original copies..etc etc etc
Not only europeans are white
@bertrandrussell894 LOL 😂 Paul's Epistle of Corinthians were written within 10 -15 years of Jesus crucifixion and as he says many of the more than 500 witnesses to Jesus Resurrection were still alive.
Paul 's experience of going blind from the Damascus road encounter convinced him( a hostile witness at Jesus trial and Crucifixion ) as he was associated with the Sanhedrin.
Try again buddy!!!
@user-jt8vj1vm6y Exactly
Say: “Verily, God sends astray whom He wills and guides unto Himself those who turn to Him in repentance.”) meaning, He guides to Him those who repent, turn to Him, beg Him, seek His help and humbly submit to Him. (Verily, in the remembrance of God, do hearts find rest.
The WR logo looks like Dairy Queen
Yummy😂
I have always thought so.
Who could ever fully capture the heavenly beauty in an earthly image? Not in the beauty of the representation of Jesus, nor in the colour, nor of the brush is the greatness of Jesus image, but in his grace.
I don't know but I would say Alex has a godly face.
Cherubic, indeed.
Like jesus!!
“God” is reflected in all of physical reality, whether theists or atheists alike. We are the pawn pieces on the game board of the cosmos. It doesn’t matter what Jesus looked like, because he would in every facet look like us…human or non human
@@ebrahimadam3558 That's the Conspiracy They don't want you to know
Satan is also pretty
that’s my TP teacher what a legend doctor nelson 💪!!
It's insane one can get this content for free
bow down for your god
@@barry_wastaken...Elon Musk!
I'm a christian, and I don't think I am obsessed to know the actual physical appearance of my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ...but I would like to know His physical appearance very very much.
Study the Shroud of Turin.
@@krizilloo2538 He had freaky long arms, like a gibbon. Try lying on your back, as if dead, and cross your hands over your genitals.
3:24 That face look a little like the guy in Jurassic Park lol
You know had my Sunday School teachers engaged us pupils with as much enthusiasm for the topic as these two, I'd probably be a Christian still.
Their job is to brainwash, not to engage.
Surely this laids to rest forever that the shroud of Turin can't be positively identified as Jesus's shroud as there are no images or descriptions of how he actually looked.
Believers in the shroud aren't going to change their mind based on evidence or reason. It's a matter of faith for them.
Shroud of Turin has been debunked for 40 years now lol
@grandamadain No seething here, anymore than I seethe at the idiots who believe the world is flat which, I grant, is ever so slightly less plausible than the Shroud being genuine.
@grandamadain There's nothing more to be said. You have faith in the Shroud of Turin and even if they ran another batch of tests and confirmed the medieval dating of the material you wouldn't believe it was a fake. I'm right, aren't I?
Great episode, would be wonderful to yave him on again
JP would have asked "what do you mean by appearance"
the legend himself is finally on the show
Every child knows that Jesus was an egg laying bunny! Or at least became one after he died? The lore is a little murky...
That’s a pedo beard version.
😂
Jesus Christ has not ever been and is not or ever will be an egg-laying rabbit.
@@jonathandnicholson if Jesus is Christ, then he is magic, so he could do any thing he wants. He might get the urge.
@@jonathandnicholson
Yes, he was a xenomorph.
Haven't watched the full video yet, but you can basically look at Mizrahi right now. They never left the levant or stayed nearby
Lord please hear my prayers. As a single mother I’m struggling to provide for my sons both are special needs I’m overwhelmed! Every month is a battle. Jesus help me to overcome my fears. Because as I struggle I am fearful. I trust in you Lord Jesus please give me strength as I struggle to buy groceries and as I struggle to pay rent I know you will make a way. ❤️
Ur doing the best u can. Ur sons would be proud to have such a hardworking mother.
Praying for u ❤🙏
❤️
I hope God reads comment prayers on an atheists TH-cam channel! 🤞
Grow up, there's no God 😒
Another name for prayer is contemplation. Thinking. To think is to imagine. They are brothers. One is enslaved and one is free. As within, so without. When in contemplation, contemplate perfection where formally you contemplated only imperfection. Like a cloud gathering water droplets. Until it eventually rains.
‘Signs follow they do not precede’
See if your world starts to turn.
Wonderfull conversation. As a atheïst i loved it
Do Santa next! ;)
Google "St Nicholas facial-reconstruction"
At least Santa is based on a historical figure, unlike Jesus
Fantastic discussion and rapport. They remind me of Frodo and Sam for some reason.
Jesus looked like Mohamed Salah.
that would be unexpécted , because even the prophet Mohammad didnt look like Mohamed Salah. According to muslim tradition, he was almost hairless and his face was rosy white
The National Geographic cover does look like Mo.
@@thisisobviouslynotmyrealname But prophet Mohamed was arab Mohamed Salah is egyptian, maybe he has arab ancestors I don't know but he does look more north african than arab
As the gospels were written so late, not written by anyone claiming to be an eyewitness, anonymous authorship, why would we look to the canonical gospels for information about Jesus' appearance? Ummm, growing in stature usually refers to someone's developing reputation or standing (standing being another metaphor).
"The 👑GREATEST MAN in HISTORY"
had no servants, yet they called Him Master. Had no degree, yet they called Him Teacher. Had no medicines, yet they called Him Healer. He had no army, yet kings feared Him. He won no military battles, yet He conquered the world. He did not live in a castle, yet they called Him Lord, He ruled no nations, yet they called Him King, He committed no crime, yet they crucified Him. He was buried in a tomb, yet He lives today!
"His name is JESUS❤"
Many people fit that description of master. No king ever feared him.
He did commit a crime. It was against the law to proclaim yourself a king
That’s why he was crucified. And when he was crucified he proved he was not a god or a prophet.
He proclaimed he would overcome the Roman Empire and free the Jews (that’s what messiah or christ means) within their lifetime, yet he failed. There is zero evidence that he rose from the dead.
Even if you were right that he was some of those things you say, it just means many people believed that. It is in no way evidence of divinity. Most of the world, doesn’t believe those things, so by your logic, that suggests he isn’t those things.
Plus god, according to the Bible, is an immoral monster. Jesus is god, and god ordered and performed the murder of children many times.
You have to have blinders on to think this religion is moral at all, let alone real.
Lol love this question, john was amazing for this interview. I hope to see you guys having another conversation soon!
Jesus was a black man.
Jesus was Batman?
No...that was Bruce Wayne.
Alex I love your content! Disclaimer: I’m a Christian - I don’t know why I feel the need to disclose that. Anyways, it would be cool to see you have Stephen Meyer on your show! Keep up the good work!
As a Christian, I would recommend getting interpretation of Scripture from a Christian -- not an atheist. I've seen many videos where Alex twist Scripture and unless you really know the Bible, I recommend getting information from Christian apologists.
What if Jesus was so ugly that they avoided talking about his looks?
Do you think everyone would be so eager to see him if he was ugly?
Isaiah 53:2-3
"He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
He was despised and rejected by mankind,
a man of suffering, and familiar with pain.
Like one from whom people hide their faces
he was despised, and we held him in low esteem."
@@maggielovegood1667people like Drumph…
@@tcuisixthat is OT, nothing to do with Jesus.
@@tcuisix Nelson mentioned that in the video on relation to a quote from someone from the 2nd century that said Christians remembered him as ugly, and how he thinks Christians believed he was ugly and rejected because of these verses, and not because they saw him or remember him.
Though who knows.
Your recent and not so recent videos about Christianity and the veracity of the Bible/Christian tradition have been more than enjoyable, and are critical to philosophical discourse. However, I think a venture into Eastern philosophy and non-duality through a podcast episode may be useful. Might I suggest Bernardo Kastrup!!!
does it matter?
While it is true that crucifixion was considered a humiliating death, I don't think that it would have been so outlandish for Greco-Romans to worship a character who died in that manner. Just think of Prometheus who was held in very high regard by both Greeks and Romans for bringing the gift of fire to humans. He too was de facto cruxified and like with cruxified people scavenging birds ate him alive.
ssshhh no one is allowed to point out that the narrative is obviously flawed and Jesus is fully fictional.
It's stupid that Christians argue about what did Jesus look like. I'm Christian and to me it's not important what did He look like, was He short, was He middle eastern or white. It's important that He rose from the dead, died for my sins and left the Gospel.
But he was a failed prophet who claimed he would free the Jews from Rome in his lifetime. It didn’t happen.
He was killed because he claimed to be king, which was against the law.
Xtians say he is god, but Yahweh often murder children or ordered the murder of children.
You can’t have it both ways. Jews rejected him, because he failed. They were just in their opinion.
Believing in zombies is childish, believing in a heaven where everything is perfect is childish. Believing that a criminal can say a few words and have his crimes erased is really a terrible belief. If someone killed your child, then begged for forgiveness to someone else, is that fair or moral, for him to be let off, meanwhile a good person who isn’t convinced by this story, goes to hell instead?
It’s all remedial, childish thinking. 1:04:16
Lol he was an Arab.
Enjoy your Arabic religion
As an atheist I would say that it should be important in sense that he did have a concrete physical appearance and that we do not know it. (Unless a time traveler makes a photo.) I'm not saying people coming up with images or descriptions are inherently wrong or bad Christians (not my place to judge), but if they claim certainty they are most likely wrong.
Middle easterners are white , they just aren’t pale blonde people
@@epicchocolate1866 they’re not European.
Great episode!
PhD in what Jesus looks like? Wow. I have nothing to say about that.
And yet you still found the time to say something? It’s a PhD in Biblical Scholarship; the topic was on Jesus’ appearance. Try to learn about what you don’t understand before making ignorant, underhand comments.
What's your PhD in?
PhD in what Jesus boxershorts looks like?
PhD in what Maria Magdalena lingerie looks like?
Wow.
Bragging about your own ignorance?
I do - it’s idiotic.
The private school where I was teaching English in Taiwan had bought a Catholic girls school, and the chapel had to be deconsecrated. After that, my boss and I were cleaning it out, until he turned to me, holding a painting, and asked in a puzzled tone what a Catholic church was doing with a picture of Kuan Yin, the Chinese version of the Buddhist goddess of mercy. I realised it was a Chinese styled depiction of Mary and the Baby Jesus.
Really Great Convo
Like a guy from the middle east.
Nah it's not from Syria it's from Iraq not because I'm from Iraq but because it's the oldest country@user-jt8vj1vm6y
Yep he most likely would have looked like an average man in the Middle East/Levant at that time. I’m pretty sure he was described in the Bible is not remarkable or noticeably distinct in anyway from the people of Roman Judea.
So most likely tan/olive skin, black/dark brown hair and brown eyes. But it’s impossible to know for sure
This turned out much more interesting that I thought
what is wrong with the comments? Why are they so triggert lol
Great discussion. Thanks.
I'm no PhD philosopher but it seems to me "the significance of depicting Jesus as male" is that everything written about him describes him as male.
He was Easternern Mediterranean. Would look like today's lsraelis
That doesn't help at all considering how diverse the modern Israelis are. Doubtful that he looks like the European Isreali Settlers, but he'd probably look like an Arab Isreali.
Finally , the deciding factor that could prove the existence of an objective supernatural being !!!
I ship them
same
I see his appearance every morning, sometimes he's coming in the clouds, sometimes he's the bright morning star, but he's always been the light of the world, our risen savior, the sun of god, and the sun of man.
He's a middle eastern man. Is it okay that you are worshipping a middle eastern man? The same race of people who are allegedly currently "invading" and islamizing Europe?
Did Jesus even exist?
Yes, he likely did!
That's false. Those creedences are not even close to equal @SamoaVsEverybody814
Yes there is some evidence to support that Jesus was indeed a historical figure given that historians have a few neutral based textual sources that reference him like Tacitus and Josephus. However, any story referencing his miracles and resurrection are likely just legendary.
Jesus existed: 99%
Jesus rose again: > 1%
Nah, its way more likely that these first century Jews actually believed the crucifixion took place in outer space /s *cries in Richard Carrier*
He says John might have been a witness, but literary critics like Ehrman says John is way later, and is building upon the others. There is a evolution of theology starting with Mark and ending with John, having changed the character and message of jesus profoundly.
John was a Galillean rebel leader spared by Titus. His new aesthetic look was a joke making fun of his decreased status as a slave and writer for Rome's psychological war campaign. His title is also meant to ridicule the sea battle in which his troops were "baptized" and his men literally fished out of the water to be chopped up like fish too. All the gospel material is written "late" since it satirizes the Roman Judean war. The gospel characters are given a fictional timeline so as to present Titus' destruction of Jerusalem as the returning vengeful Messiah.
@@booksquid856 Wow what a load of bull. You are drinking the kool-aid
There is the shroud of Turin, so there’s an idea what Jesus looked like.
Wasn't that outed as a much, much later fabrication ?
No there is much debate over it @@bertrandrussell894
The shroud is a fake, just like the religion that inspired it.
Yeah, the linen was determined to be produced somewhere around 1260 CE -1390 CE, and the appearance of the body was painted using a red and green pigment. The idea of the shroud is super fascinating, but unfortunately it seems fairly unlikely that we will find something we can verify as belonging to the dead Jesus
Hoax
Lord Jesus bless you all!
Jesus was pale, the sun made his skin a bit darker. You would still consider him white, but when standing next to an actual european it would become quickly apparent that he is of the semetic people. That being said, this is Jesus, its no surprise that the being of which everyone was created through would actually be a remarkable summarization of the entire human race. He has aspects of all in him. Personality and looks included.
There would be no good reason for God in human nature not to be beautiful.
@@PrinceTerrien Until you understand that the Bible is really about a genetic war that's been going on for thousands of years. Judging by your name, I know which side you're on. The meek shall inherit the Earth- as Jesus _prophesized_ .
@@PrinceTerrien The meek shall inherit the Earth. The Bible is very much about a genetic war. A battle between _species_ (not black and white, Nephilim and human). I quite like being human in the way God created me. The genetic engineering, sinful dating practices, technology altering the body, between all these things its aim is to create what _you_ want. A "beautiful" God. But really, you want the Übermensch.
@@PrinceTerrien The meek shall inherit the Earth. TH-cam keeps taking down the Truth of what I say.
@@PrinceTerrienthere is no good reason to think there is gods, so what…
It is an impossibility in the reality that we know or any other reality for Jesus to be God the Father.
I feel like this much focus on Christianity is a bit of a waste of the potential of this channel.
@SolvedEnglish more like UnsolvedEnglish
"Waist"?
@@cokguzeladam It's solved now 😂
Alex avoids islam because he doesn't want his head to be cut off by some radical muslims
Thanks for sharing your feelings.
Alex positing that early Christian writers were not describing Jesus so that readers could "see themselves" in Jesus is practically anthropomorphic. He's mapping 21st century ideas and sensibilities onto folks from 2,000 years ago. An odd bit of protection from an others super clever fellow.
Fun discussion overall, though. Thanks!
Is it me or were they flirting
I agree! They were flirting! I felt I was intruding.
Wtf🧐
And now for something completely different....Jesus brings us comfort. Jesus brings us joy and hope, knowing that He removed all of our sins at Calvary. If you need some teaching on the matter, the you tube channel, 'faith cometh by hearing' has a fine teaching series titled, 'change of mind' which helped me understand the matter.
7:50 When I date ethnic girls I often ask them if they are "dark honey in [their] complexion". /s Actually I usually say "are you a caramel person".
I think they were referred to as Carmelites.
Its wild people are so caught up on how Christ looked.