I shared a presentation like this almost twenty years ago with a young man. After about an hour of discussing the evidence, he finally suggested (after trying all the other debunked arguments) that maybe aliens had stolen Jesus' body and then impersonated Him to start a world religion. I've told people THAT story many, many times to illustrate two things: 1) the extent to which people will go in their irrationality to deny the clear facts of the resurrection of Jesus; and 2) how strong those facts must be to force people into such ludicrous positions. Christ is risen!
You know, that's just one more example of the fact that this "war" in deeper level is the war between atheism and truth, between Satan and God. Atheism is a godless religion and you can not convince an atheist with any facts. We should remember that after all the miracles Jesus did while He was dwelling on earth, the pharisees still demanded from Him "a sign" as if any sign could change their denialist mind.
I couldn't accept Christianity as the true word of God until I looked into the historical accountability of the resurrection of Jesus but I always had some sense or dare I say belief in a higher omniscient god and now this TRUE FACT that Jesus was resurrected by God on the third day, after he had died for our mortal sins, now stands as my foundation for my belief in the true god and the holy spirit, this is only the beginning and I have much to learn but I am grateful for this knowledge of the truth of Jesus 🙏
@kst kst Not sure what you mean my dude, sorry but I don't understand your issue. You don't know me or what I have searched for. What does any of what you said have to do with whether or not Christianity is true? I am not sure what your beef is bro.
@kst kst Shut up you idiot you dont know anything about the Truth you moron haha hahha you hellbound moron you promote no religion and wishful thinking m.. hahah truth , you dont even know Jacksh*t about the Bible lol and you're trying to lecture others on here, you're nothing but a moron we all just found out after talking to your dumbass
@@josephtattum6365 Don't listen to that idiot, he has no clue where he is going in the afterlife, he dont believe in none of the sh*t he preaches, after talking to him, we found out he's nothing but a confused idiot, using the Bible to prove there is no God hahahahhahaha how logical does that sound
@kst kst Nope, Im a former Christian and I'm an American you stupid ass prejudice bigot, we're all from a third world country to your swine eating stupid ass LoL shows how Ignorant you are.
Jesus Sotelo I mean his main source is the Bible. It’s easy to Mark it as evidence when it says it’s inspired by God. How do you know the Bible is inspired by God. Because the Bible says so?
The bit at the beginning about his parents really struck a chord for me. This past February I went to Kansas for my grandfather's funeral. I realized that this was the first time anyone close to me had passed away. I was really hit with a profound sense of loss. Being in that house without grandpa around was very sad. And like Dr. Craig, on my 12 hour drive home, it made me long ever more for the resurrection.
It’s the same for me. My grandfather died because someone killed him and it was also almost 8 months ago and my first loss (I’m 23). And it made me overthink everything but I was a Christian who blindly believed and his death shattered my whole view of a loving God because he didn’t hear my prayers to save my grandfather (he was in hospital for 10 days prior to his death and there was a 50% chance of surviving the incident which caused his death). But now, reading and informing myself about Christianity, I came to long the resurrection to be true.
@@yumeniya My grandpa (the most of a father figure I’ll probably ever have) passed away 10, almost 11 months ago. He passed unexpectedly. I’ll be praying for you and your family 🙏❤️
I too long for a resurrection. Who wouldn't? However, being an adult, I have to deal with reality as it is. I would rather deal with a sad truth than a comforting lie. This life is all we have and...it's glorious and should be enough.
@@jaynerulo6785 while I would agree I hope you don’t mean Christianity as the comfortable lie. A lot of anti theist would disagree that it’s comfortable they believe it’s even immoral but have no standard to judge it.
@@andrewmeawad1111 "To know Christ , The divine God , Christ blood made the Gentile sons of God" You "know" your interpretation based on your favorite version of a badly written book.
Ha..what a load of Bullshit from a big Liar th-cam.com/video/uLcK3Up8z7c/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/bQmMFQzrEsc/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/mwUZOZN-9dc/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/qDt7wc5nn7E/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/79UAYyMYk7I/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/28PjVaW4kKI/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/NsJJ56fyiSA/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/QaENP1R-lbY/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/mL1eYhJcOsI/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/kbx8XOKVqn0/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/kn7TEoA9ark/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/LTllC7TbM8M/w-d-xo.html
@@rationalsceptic7634 Unfortunately for you, Colin, this sort of comment i.e posting multiple sources to mascarade as 'evidence' for the conclusion, which in this case is to suggest that Craig is a "big liar", merely serves as to indicate your inability to express any fortuitous argument for the affirmation. The appeal to authority has gone to show the rather vacuous and complacent attitude you possess.
@@user-gk4gs6sx1t Why don't you take a look at those videos if you have the balls and tell us what you think. Try to use that lonely brain cell of yours for once. WLG is a liar and you are dumb enough to buy his shit, there's no doubt about that.
This teaching is deep and profound. I am convinced beyond every reasonable doubt that Jesus rose triumphantly on the third day and he's seated on the right hand side of God interceding for us. God bless you Dr Craig.
Haven't watched this but you're gullible. Why would mere words whether written or spoken convince you of the supernatural? I've watched/ listened to him and others elsewhere and their "arguments" are puerile.
I could never accept Christianity as the true word of God until I looked into the historical accountability of the resurrection of Jesus and now this TRUE FACT that Jesus was resurrected by God on the third day, after he had died for our mortal sins, now stands as my foundation for my belief in the true god and the holy spirit, this is only the beginning and I have much to learn but I am grateful for this knowledge of the truth of Jesus 🙏
@Duncan Bryson I can use words to convince you of many things in life. It's called logic. I do not need scientific evidence to prove the existence of some things. Sometimes it just takes common sense. You wouldn't need to conduct an experiment to figure out if people are happy when they win the lottery. Your logic and common sense would just tell you that.
@@zweihander7309 Jesus Christ may have existed but only as a human being. There's no evidence of anyone coming back from the dead, only claims. Nor is there any evidence of deities or anything else supernatural.
@@atheistangel007The thing is, no one can "prove God" just like no one can "disprove" God. God is FAR above our finite brains and His Ways are higher than ours. We can't "figure out" God. All of our measly "logical thinking" and arguments can't even scratch the surface of God. God has provided more than enough evidence through His creation, through science, through history and through morality. It's just that some people are too stubborn to acknowledge it as God and are willfully ignorant. Atheists just don't like to accept the truth and don't like the idea of a just and moral God that will one day hold them accountable for their actions. So science is the only option. But as wonderful and powerful as science is, it simply doesn't have all the answers. It can't answer the biggest questions we have as human beings. Such as "Why do we exist"? "What is the origin of life?" "Where did the first self replicating molecule come from?" "How did living matter come from non-living matter?" Scientists still can't even explain what caused the big bang to happen in the first place. Biology still can explain those things and never will because God created life. Evolution may be able to explain what happens when you HAVE life, but it can't explain how life actually BEGAN in the first place. Being an Atheist DOES require faith. Some aspects of science are a leap of faith and in the dark. There are so many big questions left unanswered by science. Science, as wonderful and powerful as it is, simply cannot and will never be able to fully explain everything. Are you expecting God to reveal Himself to YOU? If so, that's NOT gonna happen. It doesn't work that way. You seek after HIM. That's how it works. God is not obligated to reveal Himself to anyone. Even if He did, that still doesn't mean they would submit to Him and want a relationship with Him. But there is a promise. If you truly seek Him with a sincere, honest and pure heart, He WILL reveal Himself to you. See, true Christians aren't Christians because of blind faith or intellectual belief. True Christians are Christians because they sought after God with all of their heart. Who wants to love Him, to know Him and to serve Him. To submit everything to Him 100%. That's why we have a relationship with Him. Because He revealed Himself to us. I think the issue with most Atheists (not all but most) isn't a "lack of evidence" thing. I think the main issue is because they don't WANT God to exist. They simply don't WANT to submit to God if He is real. That would mean they would have to give up a lot of the things they are doing that are wrong. Let me ask you a question, if Christianity was true, would you be a Christian? If God were to appear to you in front of your face in a dramatic display of lighting like the Arnold Schwarzenegger did in the Movie "The Terminator" and said "I'm God. I exist. Here I am." What would you do with that intellectual belief? (If you didn't just brush it off as an hallucination like some said that they would do) Would you sincerely be willing to give up your sins and your way of living for God's Ways? To serve Him and love Him for the rest of your life? Or would your attitude be like "Wow. I was wrong. You really do exist God." Then just go on with your life and operate as if He doesn't exist? If your response would be the second option, then by no means is God going to reveal Himself to you. He doesn't care about someone's intellectual belief. He wants your HEART. He wants a RELATIONSHIP.
The theory of the twin brother of Jesus sound so ridiculous i think even if i were a skeptical i would think that theory so ridiculous. That only shows the desperate way to deny the evidence of resurrection of Jesus Christ.
@@Dr.vonKrankenhausen Isaac Newton, the man who discovered calculus, the primary laws of physics, and considered by many to be the greatest scientist of all time, said: “He who thinks half-heartedly will not believe in God; but he who really thinks has to believe in God.” “I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by those who were inspired. I study the Bible daily.” “In the absence of any other proof, the thumb alone would convince me of God’s existence.” “Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind.” Or how about Galileo Galilei the father of observational astronomy, the father of modern physics, the father of the scientific method, and the father of modern science: “God is known by nature in His works, and by doctrine in His revealed Word.” “Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe.” And one of my favorites, René Descartes, inventor of analytical geometry, father of modern philosophy, early writer of optics, and the very one who introduced skepticism as an essential part of the scientific method: “I see plainly that the certainty and truth of all knowledge depends uniquely on my awareness of the true God, to such an extent that I was incapable of perfect knowledge about anything until I became aware of Him.” Also, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz was a prominent German polymath and one of the most important logicians, mathematicians, and natural philosophers in history. He is also credited with discovering Calculus, and he said: “It is God who is the ultimate reason of things, and the knowledge of God is no less the beginning of science than His essence and will are the beginning of beings.” And just one more example; Sir Francis Bacon was the first to formally put together the scientific method, which is what every scientist has used since the 17th century to collect measurable, empirical evidence of something. Sir Francis Bacon said, “A little knowledge of science makes man an atheist, but an in-depth study of science makes him a believer in God.”
@@GreekOrthodox7 Newton also said that believing in the trinity is idolatry and the worst sin a Christian can commit. And he believed in alchemy and lots of other dumb nonsense but he was pretty smart for his time.
Doubting and asking questions is a sign of intelligence. Rejoice you are not a lost case. Doubt it, ask questions and if it's true, your faith will remain unscathed. Otherwise it was not worth it anyway.
Jesus, i know that you came to save me through your resurrection. When you rose from the dead i was set free. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for me and for the rest of the world. God wins not because He can make it be, yes He do make things happen, but because God is so good and true.
@@louiscyfer6944 Hahaha, you didn’t even watch the video. I know so many people who used to be hardcore atheists and literally became devout Christians after specifically studying the history of the Resurrection of Jesus. You are extremely ignorant and deceived; you know nothing. To say there is no evidence is an extreme display of ignorance.
@@louiscyfer6944 the writings of josephus are compelling considering he lived around the time of Jesus. I'd start there if you want to really find out for yourself instead of just relying on one youtube video and some randy in the comment section
@@skeensmachine597 are you stupid? Josephus lived well after jesus. he was born after jesus died. he recorded what the christians believed, and he doesn't talk about jesus resurrecting. that part is a well known later forgery added. i had 8 years of theology you dumb shit, i am not going off of a youtube video.
“Religions are divisive and quarrelsome. They are a form of one-upmanship because they depend upon separating the “saved” from the “damned,” the true believers from the heretics, the in-group from the out-group… All belief is fervent hope, and thus a cover-up for doubt and uncertainty.” ~ Alan Watts
The irony of such a statement is it’s doing the same thing it criticizes: It’s showing one-upmanship against all religions , and he obviously believes it without fervently. So my question is, is he using it to coverup his own doubts and uncertainties about his own worldview?
@@robertgroen2197 Watts wasn't offering any specific "religion" to replace any, just a way of understanding that we can't understand. But... via self inquiry, we can find peace.
@Yeshua The Only Truth "If you know Judaism , they don't have a concept of dying messiah" Because according to Judaism, the "Christ" was not Jesus. "Even the apostles before crucifixion cannot believed Jesus' prophecy on His death" And how do you know this?
I love the way he itemises his points as “Fact Number 1, Fact Number 2,…3, etc,” when they are arguments, or suggestions in support of a theory, and not fact in any sort of objective way. This shows that he’s creating an argument that is designed to please and comfort those who have already decided or don’t want to think for themselves. Of course preaching to the converted like this is a lucrative proposition. And it’s easy. You don’t need any real intellectual rigour or academic depth. This audience are not asking tough questions. They want easy answers and they’re getting them.
❤No, we are not Saved by His resurrection. We are Saved by Obeying and Doing the WILL of GOD the Father and BELIEVING in the SON OF GOD, JESUS CHRIST. The SHROUD OF JESUS CHRIST PROVES IT!
If Jesus had NOT been raised from the dead, then the last 1,990 years of history would be completely different from what we know! We would not even know He ever lived!! There would have been NO out pouring of the Holy Spirit and therefore no church established. The ripple effect of the resurrection touches everything we know either directly or indirectly! We would have no mention of Jesus in external documents and no New Testament! Btw, it was 33AD, not 30!
@@ramigilneas9274 The point is that without the resurrection, this conversation would not even be taking place. If not for the resurrection, no one would even know who Jesus is or that He ever lived! Without His resurrection, Jesus would have been just another nameless Jew crucified by the Romans. End of story.
@@Halo9K There were hundreds of saviors just like Jesus… and we know the names of some of them. Jesus is just the most famous version… mostly by accident.😉
@@ramigilneas9274 Really??? Just like Jesus??? None are even in the same ballpark, not even close. Have any of the pretenders affected history for the last 2,000 years as Jesus has? Have any of them been even remotely the focus of so much literature, plays, movies? There are bookstores filled with books about, inspired by or influenced by Jesus. There is no other person in history that has so affected the course of that history like Jesus. None. He is the reason that until recently history was divided as BC (Before Christ) and AD (In the year of our Lord)! Sure, there are pretenders but only Jesus conquered death!!! Again, if He hadn’t we wouldn’t be having this conversation. We wouldn’t even know He existed!
The problem with Christianity is not about cohesion in the story. The problem with Christianity, as with all story Religions, is that it is not verifiable. Humans have created stories from their minds and imaginations thru out history. We humans are bad at figuring out what is true or not true from stories. What then is verifiable? Stories from humans in the ancient world are not. How about knowledge? Claiming to be a God of the Universe would mean that person or being has a great deal of knowledge. But we can't just ask for knowledge, because knowledge can be made up human knowledge from other stories that humans created. People make up stories about great knowledge. Such as prophecy, just because someone writes a story about someone fulfilling prophecy, doesn't mean it actually happened that way. If there is a story about someone being born in Bethlehem and then the story creator writes stories about the hero being born in Bethlehem, the story creator created with the book open. They knew what things to write to fulfill the prophecy. Very human. The knowledge that is verifiable is knowledge of the natural world. A God of the Universe would know about: Sanitation, cleanliness, sterilization, inoculation and medications to prevent disease. Miracles that cure disease are easy to make. Actual medical knowledge is difficult. Why is there no references to Jesus of Christianity in a book on the history of medicine? Didn't Jesus of Christianity, God of the Universe, not know anything about medical knowledge? Inventions, technologies and Sciences that might be valuable to humans. Didn't Jesus know about the value of printing presses to make books, magazines and newspapers to spread information and knowledge around the world? Didn't Jesus of Christianity know about the value of investigating nature to develop Physics, Chemistry and Biology? What about a lecture from Jesus of Christianity on the value of economics and business and how it will transform the world for humans? Is selling all that you have and give to the poor better advice that what humans have learned to do in colleges and schools? Do we think that Star Trek is true? There are stories about Warp Drive in Star Ships, Photon Torpedoes and Transfer people from Star Ship to anywhere (except when the Ships Shields are up) with Transporters. Just because the stories are written, does not make it true. The verifiable thing is knowledge. If the writers of the Star Trek stories also had fully working Star Ships with working Warp Drive, that would give the stories some credibility. Consider as well, the atrocities of the stories. How is it that Jesus of Christianity knew, just knew, that when he was born on Earth, 33 years later the Roman Empire military would have Judea under military occupation? What if the Roman Empire military decided to leave, it just wasn't worth the occupation? What if the Eastern Roman Empire collapsed 400 years before it did? But Jesus of Christianity knew that the Roman Empire would still be there to preform the torture and killing of himself. Along with the torturing, killing and murder of the people of Judea. Don't talk to me about a God that walks on water, turns water into wine and tells people to be good to each other. Jesus of Christianity was in collusion with the Roman Empire military to have the people of Judea tortured, killed and murdered.
Ronald Lindeman you need to get on with your ignorance and go troll somewhere else. Why is it you feel you have to click on a video and talk that bullshit when you don’t even believe in God? Seems like you like to talk shit and need your ass handed to you. Leave these God fearing people alone and go troll some where else. You’ll meet Jesus one day though that’s for sure
There are people who comment on videos like this because they have been in the Religious Fictional world that this person describes and got out of it. Consider that Thomas Jefferson who wrote the Declaration of Indepedence, did not think that Christianity was true. He wrote that Governments should be of "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." Which leaves out "Laws of Story God." Which leaves out "Laws of Super Natural God." Story God or Super Natural God. Feeds 5000 with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish. Laws of Nature and Nature's God. Would start an agricultural school and bring intelligent people together and use observation and experiment to understand how crops grow and ways to make them grow better. The Prosperity we have had in the last 400 years is not because of better study and application of Story God ideas and Super Natural ideas, but because we understand the Natural world better.
Humans inspired by divine power accomplish more than ones who are not. Our increasingly modernist, secular, relativist, scientism-driven Western society is becoming more and more isolated, confused and miserable. Families breaking up, people confused about gender identity, less of a feeling of community (which religion provides), drug addiction increasing, architecture art and music going downhill, women reporting they're more unhappy than ever, despite feminism, people worshipping athletes and celebrities instead of God, and so on. Also, whether or not you agree that the resurrection happened, or whether or not you agree that the supernatural exists, the teachings of the New Testament and the Catholic Church on how one should live are sound, even to this day. Science is only valuable when it's used to attain a higher state of being and get closer to God. Otherwise, it's neutral or negative if used for nefarious purposes. Science is just a tool, not an end. The end is God. If science is not grounded in sound philosophy and theology, in the pursuit of the divine, then it can easily lead to the creation of more chaos than it destroys. We made some good scientific advances BECAUSE we were unified as a society under God. That was what gave our societies stability and HOPE. Do you really think people would have gotten through the horrors of the past WITHOUT God? Highly unlikely!
@@RL-es6gg Go to Google, Images and look up Bible Belt. Then look up states by percentage of smoking cigarettes. Kentucky. The states with the least smoking of cigarettes is Utah. Then look up the states by lung cancer rates. Kentucky has the highest lung cancer rate. Utah the lowest. Then look up life expectancy by state. California, New York, Minnesota and Connecticut, people live the longest. Over 81 years. Kentucky, West Virginia, Mississippi and Alabama the shortest. Around 75 years. Look up other social things that can be measured. Crime is generally higher in Bible Belt states. Educations in lower in Bible Belt states. The United States has a country with most Christians, but it also has higher crime rates than countries with less Christianity in it. Japan has 70 people in prison per 100,000 per population. Much of Europe has 120 to 180 people in prison per 100,000 population. Russia has 300 people per 100,000. The United States has 700 per 100,000. Bible Belt states leads the United States in Prison population. Louisiana has 1400 people in prison per 100,000 population. Other Bible Belt states over 700. California and New York, in the 200's.
At 6:36, he says if an event is attested to by multiple sources that are independent of each other it is much more probable the event is historical rather than made up. -- The accounts of the resurrection are all by the earliest members of the Christian sect. If a man is horribly murdered and maimed and a few days later 500+ see him alive again and unharmed surely it was the sensational event of the epoch for all Israel. It's odd that Josephus other pagan historians who reference Jesus don't mention it.
I would agree, i would also argue that he never presented anything valid at all. Put i mean what will you expect when you debate the existence of something that doesn´t exist. No matter how smart you are, you will never be able to talk fairytales into existence.
@Hit Man “ i would also argue that he never presented anything valid at all.” To argue is to give evidence, so what evidence do you have to show that his points are invalid?
When Bill said being there made me miss my mom and dad he said it with so much sincerity that he made me miss my dad. Thankfully, as Christians we KNOW WE WILL SEE THEM AGAIN!!!
He does a very good job. He presents his arguments very clearly and gives clear reasons to rebut the counter arguments which he gives. Unfortunately the more familiarity you gain with the counter arguments, the more you will see that Dr Craig avoids the difficult problems, misrepresents the counter arguments and misrepresents the evidence. It would be worthwhile for you to familiarise yourself with the arguments actually made by counter-apologists to see where the gap is. I would be very happy to provide links for recommended places to start. Most likely he does all of this sincerely and prayerfully. However, he is well paid for his appearances, it would be naive to discount the possibility that he is simply dishonest. The most damming evidence for this is not the selection of "facts" he presents which could be just a manifestation of confirmation bias, but the way he appears to carefully word statements in a way that seems to be designed to mislead while not being factually false. This is harder to do by accident.
I’m a 57-year-old Texas man, was a Christian for most of my life, but my beliefs have changed these last few years. I want to have something to believe in, but not just for the sake of believing. I have a question that’s been asked several times in TH-cam, inquiring why God doesn’t appear to us. But the person being addressed will either rephrase the question, or simply dance around it. I get it, no one can legitimately answer that particular question. I don’t know that I am truly an atheist, agnostic, etc - I just don’t know what to believe. I’ve asked these questions several times, and one of the harshest answers I’ve gotten is “if you’re not a believer, then you’ll burn in hell for eternity“. So I have a scenario: Jack and Joe are equally good people. Both of them are selfless, are constantly giving of themselves to help those who are clearly suffering. Even if it’s just a kind word, a hug, words of encouragement and sympathy, they are both quick to do it, without a thought or a request of getting anything in return. Neither of them strike or raise a hand to anyone, nor do they have hurtful words for anyone. Jack is a Christian, while Joe is not. Joe knows there is something powerful and all-knowing out there, but feels strongly that it’s not a god. I’m told that the Christian belief is that Jack will go to his just reward, but what of Joe? I have a very dear friend who is a Christian, and she says Joe will also go to his reward, but she was unable to tell me more than that. I want to genuinely believe something, it’s just that being told to “have faith“ or to “love yourself“ doesn’t quite do it for me. Any thoughts?
Sometimes we don't even have the right to say anyone is a good person. You can do good but maybe you aren't good. Joe is making a choice just as Jack. Jack chose to recognize his creator and worship him whilst continuing his selfless activities. And in recognition of his creator, Jack tends to listen to his creator and act according to what his creator demands and limit himself unto things he ought to. But Joe on the other hand doesn't recognize his creator. He has the impression that 'well there is a creator but I don't know him'. So Joe goes about his normal works and doesn't know what is good in the eyes of the creator or what is bad. He acts just like he wants. Who will get a reward if put in your judgment scale?
Both Jack and Joe are sinners. No man is good. They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Psalm 14:3 Their good deeds won't do them any good. But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. Isaiah 64:6 If you go to court here on earth, your good deeds won't save you. You get punished for your crimes. Same thing in God's court. You need a Saviour - Jesus. God offers salvation from death, redemption from sin and eternal life as a FREE GIFT. You can't earn it with good works. Any attempt to do so would be insulting. Imagine you gave your son a new car and he gave you ten bucks and said "we're even". The one who believes in Jesus, calls on His name and has a relationship with Him is going to heaven. The other one is going to hell.
" That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the { Spirit } is spirit. " Genuinely saved persons have been, Born of the Spirit. Born again. Born from above. " Do not be deceived my beloved brethren. Every good and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning. " " Whenever you meet a genuinely saved Christian, you are meeting someone in whom Christ lives. " Whenever you meet an unregenerate person, you are meeting someone in whom He ----- does not. I'm sure that no one's personal opinion can ever change this fact, try as they might. Unregenerate Heathen folk have been trying as they might for some 2,024 years now to no avail.
Not a mention of the true gift from Jesus resurrection. The giving of the Holy Spirit on that first Pentecost so we can talk to the living Jesus. Maybe that is where Christians get their faith, in prayer to Jesus and asking him to transform our ways. Asking for wisdom, understanding and compassion man is blessed. Using the Holy Spirit we can fight the good fight.
Dr Craig mentioned right up front that the internal witness is a fine reason for believing in Jesus. Here he is making an evidential argument rather than an experiential argument.
@@walkergarya but when Richard. Dawkins said, aliens, made the first self _replicating molecule that is acceptable that is not fairy tales God bless you. And he may open your eyes for his own glory in Jesus mighty name
@@savedbymylovegodthelordjes8394 No he did not. He accepts it as a very remote possibility, not a fact. Do not lie to me. "Jesus mighty name"?!? Nope. I am not interested in your fairy tales.
25:08 "Jewish beliefs about the afterlife precluded anyone's rising from the dead to glory and immortality before the general resurrection at the end of the world." WLC sounds very confident about that, but the gospels tell a different story. In several places, it is clear that belief in resurrection was pretty common at the time. King Herod, a practicing Jew, thought that Jesus was John the Baptist risen from the dead. (Mark 14:1-2) When Jesus asked his disciples what the people thought about him, his disciples reported that they likewise thought he was the resurrected John the Baptist or one of the prophets, possibly Elijah. (Mark 8:27-28) Finally, according to Mark, Jesus predicted his own death and resurrection 3 different times. (Mark 8:31-33 Mark 9:30-32 Mark 10:32-34) Similar passages appear in Luke and Matthew. Now Craig is certainly familiar with all these passages, so why is he making pronouncements that fly in the face of them?
A few seconds later Craig stated the general resurrection at the end of the world . That view would be correct for the Pharisee. They believed a resurrection.
I made that very point at last week's housegroup, based on Acts 15 vv 13-21. In the debate about how to treat the Gentiles, James says the apostles should write a letter explaining what the Gentiles should do, everyone agreed, and that's what they did. The ISV translates James' words in v 19 as "I have decided". He decided what should be done and the early church did it. He exercised the authority of the pre-eminent position he occupied. If you're looking for a first pope, James is he.
@@stuartofblyth Agreed, although some scholars think that the Jerusalem congregation was possibly co-lead by James and Peter. Whatever the case, there is no evidence that either James or Peter ever visited Rome. The first account of Peter being in Rome is a letter from a Christian deacon named Gaius. Writing probably toward the end of the second century C.E around 170 or 180 C.E.
@@paulustarsus 1st off, I thought Xtians weren't supposed to "judge". 2nd, it is clear that your judgement is as flawed as Craig's argument. 3rd, what is it you have concluded I am supposedly "searching" for? 4th, you suggest that I'll "get there", seeing as how there are over 40,000 denominations of Christianity alone, which of them in your _judgmental_ opinion is the one that "got there"? 5th, what makes you assume I'm your "Bro"? 6, why so many emoticons, are you 12?
I feel sorry for the people that spend all their lives trying to dis prove Jesus because when they pass and meet him in Judgement...They will hear the words..: You Never Knew ME....Depart From Me :"
@@exilfromsanity People like you are so stupid. he barely even talked about the bible. tell me a better explanation for his empty tomb, then I will listen
@@aidank2108 He bases all of his claims of "facts" on the bible. First you have to prove there was a Jesus, and that he was crucified, and that he was buried, then you can try to prove the tomb was empty. None of this crap is supported by extra biblical accounts, the bible is all there is. If you believe the bible none of these arguments are necessary, if you don't believe in fairy tales none of this crap is convincing.
@@exilfromsanity You should study some history because it is a well established fact that jesus lived and was crucified. any historian would not deny that. so it is not based on the bible, but on historians accounts. you shouldn't add comments if you dont even know basic facts like that.
To begin, my life has been one of creativity. It is that through creating I came to know of Love and through Love did I come to create. The dynamic at work in it all for me has been my imagination, and that my work as a composer serves as testament to my Faith in God, given that I consider God to be my imagination. Some thoughts worth considering if I may, in light of the above, and the creative spirit that has gifted this world so many things at which we marvel, and that more often than not serve to sustain us as a species: Consider if you will, a mind whose imagination knew no bounds in tailoring such spectacles as 'The Taming of the Shrew'; who penned tales of truth and treachery, benevolence and betrayal, love and death, and death as sacrifice in honour of love; dualities within a state to tax even the greatest of truths, the likes of which the world will never bear witness to again. A man whose mind sustained him; in whom the rhythm and texture of words found no other counterpart within the genre of his expression, neither before or after the advent of his being; not in any penned history, tragedy or comedy, neither poem nor varied part that saw his art adapted by way of experimental variance to the contemporary so as to appeal more simply to the herds that otherwise might not have heard his "teachings" for what they were. Where it could well be argued that the canon of works comprising thirty-seven plays, two narrative poems and a collection of sonnets Shakespeare presented to the world "says it all", did not Jesus say it all too, but more precisely, and with no less poetry at play by way of The Sermon on the Mount, and has not The Sermon on the Mount stood the greater test of time? Not that it can be held true, nor even refuted, for we will never surely know, but how much of Shakespeare's work, if we consider it in just proportion to the highest of ideals, could be aligned to the allure of such a sermon that might have served as serum for the sorrows of his own personal life, the death of his son in 1596, his father in 1601 and his mother seven years later in 1608, not to mention the approach of his own passing in 1616, the cause of which is not known ... What frailties of the human experience does Shakespeare touch upon that Jesus did not to divine the way? Against the arras that was to become the backdrop for all subsequent literary endeavours by poets and playwrights alike, being of expression the most ideal, let us now consider The Holy Scriptures, penned as they were so many centuries before, believed by the devout to be a matter of fact, and the "in doubt" a moment of mere fiction; how in light of love their provenance matters little but for the friction that is of this: * For any mind to imagine the coming of a Messiah; the presence of a divinity in human form, that such a form as was Jesus became The Christ who made the blind to see and the lame to walk; who removed illness and raised the dead but to be sacrificed for the sins of the world as was he so humbled before the face of humankind at its most cruel, and then to be resurrected, suggests that within the scribes who had not the inherent styling of speech as did Shakespeare, but whose servitude was such in purity to possibly surpass him - each purity of thought being a pause for thought - was the presence of The Divine, a consummate spirit that was itself both the creator and the creation of His Story: History. How could they have been "imagined" otherwise? How can you first imagine God without God first being present within you? How does any artist imagine their ideal without that ideal first being present in his or her being, or is that where our humility draws the line, at any hint we should so honour the power that first bestowed upon us that by which we ourselves are honoured? To that must then be considered this: how can you first imagine evil without evil first being present within you? How could even Shakespeare first imagine treachery without treachery first being present in him? But then, things can be consciously willed and that they be so willed does not imply one necessarily has the want to occasion them. Conversely, you do not have to be present in God for God to be present within you, and is that not the divine mercy of God, that his love is so to remain present and regardless? It is that whatever tale you tell should adhere to the highest tenet of truth any legalism or casuistry can ever admit, the truth that saw jealousy kill Jesus. And what about the music of Bach, a voice "not quite God" but near enough to at least make you want to believe in the Almighty, and at most exclaims : "I do!" And for that matter, what of the matter that is of you? If The Bible is the sum total of its contradictions, is that not Life? Is that not Love? Is not the greater question one of acceptance? Are we not all, as is Life and Love, the sum total of our contradictions? Therefore, is not The Bible a testament of Life and the treasury of Love one's faith requires of it to be - whatever your belief - if in what you believe there is the presence/prayer-sense of Love? Why bother to debunk or even approve of it, after all, are we not ourselves the greatest piece of fiction before the reality that will be our fate! Is that anything to shake a spear at?
Another overlooked proof is that the reality of the Pentecostal infilling and gift of the Holy Spirit in salvation, could not have happened until after Christ's resurrection {Acts CHS.1&2}. Christ's resurrection was necessary to inaugurate the birth of the new covenant church. Are you Born Again of Water and of the Holy Spirit {John 3vs3,5}?
Praise the lord !!! Amazing and outstanding explanation using the scriptures as a historical tool and foundation to demonstrate the evidences and undeniable proofs of the resurrection of Jesus. Although a few external witnesses have been mentioned , the way this analysis has been carried out is pretty authoritative in itself !! The skeptical scholars are bound to be consistent, fair and reasonable their approach with any other ancient documents or manuscripts.
@The Truth Your ignorance is flagrant ! The prophecies in the Old Testament about Jesus have been fulfilled to the letter. The new testament manuscripts are way superior to any other ancient writings in number as well as in accuracy. Dr William Craig lane is not the only person who knows the scriptures and the history of the church. There are countless number of Christians who not scholars though but are well documented about Christianity.
@The Truth Do you have any substantial proof or evidence supporting your opinions since you do not have any argument but bla bla bla.. Sorry man you are only a babe !!!
He says that Jesus was crucified in AD 30. Does that mean he also believes that Jesus was born in 3 BC?. I've heard a lot of people say that he was crucified in 33 AD.
@@DaveyKanabus I watched a video a while ago of someone making the case that He may have been born around 4 BC. Is King Herod that died in 4 BC the same one from the bible whom ordered the slaughtering of male children from the ages of 2 and under? I need to do some research.
One strong thought is that the disciple said G'd reised Jesus from the dead. In this way they accept that normal people do not raised from the dead by itself. Something they thought was the situation, but what they exprience was that; this must be G'd.
There is only one day that fits the crucifixion narrative. We must consider that there was more than one sabbath that week, the yearly Passover on Wednesday, 25 April 31 A. D. and the weekly sabbath on the 7th day of that week. Jews counted the days from sunset to sunset. This is the olny way you can have 3 days and 3 noghts from death to resurection. The resurection ocurred after sundown on Saturday night, the third day which began at sunset.
An idea that might help others here, regardless of what side you're on, as it relates to the question "did Jesus exist"? Establish a set of criteria, a test of sorts, say archaeological evidence, eyewitness testimony, written accounts, etc., and then apply that standard to any number of figures from antiquity and look at the results. You could start with Hannibal, Plato, Alexander the Great, and others....
@Marcus Freebody So on what grounds, historically or scientifically, do you base your claim "Jesus didn't exist"? Also, what "tons of evidence" exist for the three people you mentioned? Finally, I think you're a little confused over Jesus as an historical personage vs. whether or not he was "supernatural"; are you aware of that distinction?
@Marcus Freebody The only "pure bullshit", is you and what you are saying; if you don't think Jesus existed, that places you in the category of a "crank". Even better, I'd say that your training/background in history amounts to a TH-cam account. How close is that? You are obviously an idiot, not capable of an honest, informed, intelligent debate; so run along back to fantasy world...:). But again, apply a standard of evidence to each of the figures you mentioned, as a test, and see what you get. What "archaeological evidence is there for Hannibal, by the way?
@Marcus Freebody "...Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed historically..."- Wikipedia. Now, moron, ask yourself a simply question; what is it that modern scholars know that a low IQ youtuber like you doesn't? Correct. They are educated, and you're not. Do yourself a favor, go to college and get educated...
Or the jew's saying the apostles stoled the body could be looked at 3 ways. 1 the jew's did do it and was called out so they tried to put the blame on the apostles. 2 the apostles did steal the body and was trying to blame the jew's. 3 neither the jew's nor apostles stole the body and someone else did.
Perhaps, since Pilate found no fault in Jesus; because he was not fomenting rebellion against the Romans, was simply, as it seems was the case, indifferent to Jesus' crucifixion and allowed the burial. Rome didn't fear Jesus, Jerusalem did. The Sanhedrin did not have possession of the body, the Roman's did. I am far from an expert in the matter, but neither do I presume to know what was in Pilate's mind. Just a possibility.
Reasonable enough, though i doubt his mom and closest ones would be crying infront a man being tortured and killed that they doubted at any level and moment, was their beloved Jesus.
The fact is Jesus' body was gone. If by Romans or Sanhedrin they would have produced it when Faith began to spread. Historical evidence exists that The Faith spread during the lifetime of eyewitnesses & opposition. Not plausible to suddenly appear after death of Apostles.
I don't think we can assume Pilate found no fault in Jesus -- certainly the gospel writers wanted everyone to believe that in order to get the Romans off their backs. Jesus was crucified for leading a rebellion against Rome, claiming to be king of the Jews. Odds are that is exactly what he did.
@@AllThroughALife The reason why you are saying I'm wrong is that you consider Paul's letter to the church in Corinth as the independent verification he was referring to, but that is not so. Paul himself QUOTED an early creed which he says was passed on to him.. "I deliver to you that which I have received'.. says Paul. Analysis of this said creed indicates (as agreed on by most historical Jesus scholars, both Christians and skeptics) as going back as far as within months of Jesus' resurrection. In fact, the letter claimed that most of those among the 500 who he appeared to at once after his resurrection were alive. In other words, 'you can go to Jerusalem and ask them'.. implied Paul. It is simply wrong to consider the independent verification Dr. Craig was referring to as Paul's letter.. We can find a similar creed in Paul's letter to the Philippians... that creed was clearly being quoted by Paul.. it was not his invention. I am however very interested in listening to why you claim I'm wrong. Kindly put forth your reasons and let's discuss.
Whatever else the NT scriptures are, they certainly are a collection of Ancient Greek documents that come down us from a specific time and culture through the prism of millennia of transcription and translation and interpretation. This is objective fact and, however inspired we think they are, if we loose sight of their human history, we run the risk of creating our own myth and making God in our own immage.
Jesus was executed as a young guy, only 30. Then he came back to life. But there is no record of him anywhere? Wouldn't someone say they saw him or heard him speak other then those that believed in him.
The thing is, no one can "prove God" just like no one can "disprove" God. God is FAR above our finite brains and His Ways are higher than ours. We can't "figure out" God. All of our measly "logical thinking" and arguments can't even scratch the surface of God. God has provided more than enough evidence through His creation, through science, through history and through morality. It's just that some people are too stubborn to acknowledge it as God and are willfully ignorant. Atheists just don't like to accept the truth and don't like the idea of a just and moral God that will one day hold them accountable for their actions. So science is the only option. But as wonderful and powerful as science is, it simply doesn't have all the answers. It can't answer the biggest questions we have as human beings. Such as "Why do we exist"? "What is the origin of life?" "Where did the first self replicating molecule come from?" "How did living matter come from non-living matter?" Scientists still can't even explain what caused the big bang to happen in the first place. Biology still can explain those things and never will because God created life. Evolution may be able to explain what happens when you HAVE life, but it can't explain how life actually BEGAN in the first place. Being an Atheist DOES require faith. Some aspects of science are a leap of faith and in the dark. There are so many big questions left unanswered by science. Science, as wonderful and powerful as it is, simply cannot and will never be able to fully explain everything. Are you expecting God to reveal Himself to YOU? If so, that's NOT gonna happen. It doesn't work that way. You seek after HIM. That's how it works. God is not obligated to reveal Himself to anyone. Even if He did, that still doesn't mean they would submit to Him and want a relationship with Him. But there is a promise. If you truly seek Him with a sincere, honest and pure heart, He WILL reveal Himself to you. See, true Christians aren't Christians because of blind faith or intellectual belief. True Christians are Christians because they sought after God with all of their heart. Who wants to love Him, to know Him and to serve Him. To submit everything to Him 100%. That's why we have a relationship with Him. Because He revealed Himself to us. I think the issue with most Atheists (not all but most) isn't a "lack of evidence" thing. I think the main issue is because they don't WANT God to exist. They simply don't WANT to submit to God if He is real. That would mean they would have to give up a lot of the things they are doing that are wrong. Let me ask you a question, if Christianity was true, would you be a Christian? If God were to appear to you in front of your face in a dramatic display of lighting like the Arnold Schwarzenegger did in the Movie "The Terminator" and said "I'm God. I exist. Here I am." What would you do with that intellectual belief? (If you didn't just brush it off as an hallucination like some said that they would do) Would you sincerely be willing to give up your sins and your way of living for God's Ways? To serve Him and love Him for the rest of your life? Or would your attitude be like "Wow. I was wrong. You really do exist God." Then just go on with your life and operate as if He doesn't exist? If your response would be the second option, then by no means is God going to reveal Himself to you. He doesn't care about someone's intellectual belief. He wants your HEART. He wants a RELATIONSHIP.
Thank God for a man who has casually defeated all comers in the debating arena. The best anyone can say is Kalams argument makes no sense. Of course it makes no sense when you believe there is no Yahweh and Jesus was just an itinerant Rabbi who was killed for being a rabble rouser. Sad..
In Acts the Jewish leaders reportedly say, “The disciples came and stole away the body”, by way of explaining away the empty tomb. This is the argument that I find the most convincing for the empty tomb. The main weakness with this argument is that we are still required to take Luke’s word for it. It’s not proof in any legal or scientific way. It’s not evidence of anything other than what a man wrote on a piece of papyrus. A man who invented a spurious genealogy and fanciful birth account at the beginning of his gospel, is certainly capable of inventing logical reasons to support the empty tomb.
5:35 .. i have to stop you there Dr Craig, how can you factually claim that Jesus was buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea. The only references we have to this are in the New Testament, just because something is written in the NT does not make it true. It's a claim, not a fact.
@Juicelad There are lots of mentions of Julius Caesar from historians who were around at the time, we know the exact day of his birth and death, we have coins minted with his face on, statues of him, we know exactly what he looked like, we know who he succeeded, we know who succeeded him, there would be an enormous gap in history if you took Julius Caesar out of the picture. And, his supporters didn't make any claims about him doing incredible feats of magic, or flying up into the sky and into the clouds after his death. And he certainly didn't claim to be the son of God.
@J w The case against the existence of the empty tomb: -no mention of the empty tomb outside of the gospels. -no mention of Joseph or Arimathea outside of the gospels. -no mention of the town of Arimathea outside of the gospels and no archaeological evidence that this place ever existed. -the romans crucified hundreds of people each week. Usually they were left to rot on the cross and then ditched in a mass grave, so they would most likely not allow that Jesus was placed in a tomb. That was part of the punishment and there is not a single recorded exception for insurrectionists like Jesus. -Paul, our earliest source doesn’t mention the empty tomb or Joseph or Aramithea. -the story looks like it was invented to fulfill a prophecy "Jesus is buried with the rich“. -the character of Joseph of Arimathea enters the story just to provide an empty tomb, then immediately leaves the story to be never heard of again. Sounds like something written by JJ Abrams.😉 -in the beginning of the life of Jesus there were Joseph and Mary... and in the end of his life there were different people called Joseph and Mary. Sounds like something George Lucas would write... it’s like poetry, it rhymes.😉 -the empty tomb is probably the most important place ever for Christians... but somehow they immediately forgot where it was. And it has never been found.😂
What kind of proof are you looking for ? Is he supposed to come to earth with each new generation of people . And say here I am now you can believe in me .the word has been given it is faith in him that has to come from you . That makes it all the more special and righteous. He doesn’t do parlor tricks , stick his face in the clouds to make it easy for you . He is there you just have to open your eyes and heart and accept him . God bless ✝️
@@22julip Yes, why cant he? You notice he never appears when in a modern age were we can observe him? Faith, because there is no proof. He doesn’t do any tricks.
@@ericbell940 I have the proof here 4 reasons Jesus burial the discovery of his empty tomb. His post Mortem appearances and the origin of the disciples belief in his resurrection, plus one more that sealed the deal for me , the people who died rather than renounce their belief in him . No one dies for a lie . Put that in your pipe and smoke it ! As Bill Buckley once told Peter Atkins who tried to challenge Bill Craig , to give reasons for belief in Jesus Resurrection . Peace my friend and God bless
@@22julip 1. So a empty tomb is proof? 2. Belief is not proof. 3. What about moslems who die for there faith? 4. Boy you certainly put me in my place with the pipe comment, I have am question about prayer if you are interested.
@@ericbell940 I didn’t expect you to have an open mind and understand how those things I listed were facts historical facts . You don’t have to take my word but they are facts . Also you said many people died for their faith , that’s true but It’s a totally different thing to be killed for a false belief, lastly the church the Catholic Church has been around for over 2.000 years that’s a long time to worship a made up God . Hopefully someday you’ll open your eyes and heart and understand the truth. Be well !
"the moon shall not give her light and the stars shall fall from Heaven" I wonder what Professor Brian Cox thinks about that prediction. (Matthew 24:29)
Yeah, let's wonder what Brian Cox (who doesn't have any relation to Biblical or Historical studies) thinks about Jesus using apocalyptic language, which is also used in Joel, Daniel, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. It's irrelevant what he thinks. That's like saying "I wonder what Barack Obama would say about the Chicago Blackhawks making the NHL playoffs".
@@100_1OO________1 "Thou shalt buy thy slaves from the heathen around you". I wonder what Barack Obama thinks about that commandment. (Leviticus 25:44))
@@mccaboy Sure. Do the carbon dating again. If it again comes back circa 1350 ad will u admit the Shroud is a 'work of art' as it was called when the local Bishop accepted it? Also, provide the 1300 years of provenance to prove it is circa 35 ad.
I don't quite understand this guy. He defends the resurrection of Jesus but he says that Jesus understanding of the cosmos while he was on earth was primitive. In the time of Jesus people believed the earth was flat, was fixed, and the sun revolved around the earth. He says that Jesus got it wrong when he referred to Adam and Eve, Noah and the flood, and Jonah. Since Craig believes that Genesis is not history but allegory he says that Jesus because of his primitive knowledge of the origin of creation wrongly believed that Genesis was a real history. So here we have Jesus who was fully God and fully man through whom all creation was spoken into existence did not realize that the events of Genesis were just allegory. I wonder was the God in Genesis a fictional character also. All I can say is people like Craig who are considered great philosophers must lose common sense in the midst of their brain storms of philosophizing. If you find this hard to believe look up creation.com/craig-genesis-account
I might be able to partly address one of these objections. Jesus having "primitive" understanding of the cosmos is not a viable objection because 1. that's an anachronistic arbitrary label, and 2. inconsistent with the character put forward in the story. The Jesus of the Gospels may or may not have had special knowledge of the material aspects of reality, but it is certain he did not care. Dr. Craig's assertion is consistent because God incarnate or not, a core aspect of Jesus' character was that he never addressed anything outside the Kingdom of Heaven. It was irrelevant to him. So if he didn't know the earth was round, it was because he didn't care.
The scientific fact that the earth is round was derived by Eratosthenes at least 2 centuries before Christ, please do your research before commenting such naivety.
Already at the 5:32 second mark WLC made a huge mistake and it's how many people believe the resurrection happened. I know plenty of biblical scholars who have admitted they do not believe such a thing happened. One example would be Bart Erhman and I could list plenty more. Point in case the resurrection of Jesus is not a universal agreed upon fact by historian's.
This strikes me as an excellent synopsis of the historical arguments for the resurrection. Probably the weakest part of the presentation is in the last six minutes, where Craig states that God raising Jesus from the dead meets all six criteria for the plausibility of a historical explanation. In most cases, I think we would be inclined to say that positing the supernatural is a rather strong strike against the hypothesis in question. So...imagine the following response: "Yeah, something weird happened alright. Maybe it was Jesus' twin brother doing some weird posturing (as Craig describes one of his opponents implausibly suggesting), or some other weird, freaky thing. But freaky things do happen in the course of natural history, and I'd rather go for the freaky *natural* thing over the freaky *supernatural* thing you're describing." I could certainly understand this response. On the other hand...it's worth noting what the response would amount to: the antecedent naturalistic metaphysics would be driving the historical analysis. It seems that someone who was *neutral* on the metaphysic would be tempted by Craig's account.
When you have more than 500 witnesses saying they saw Jesus, is not unreasonable to conclude the supernatural event at hand. The question becomes then about the reliability of 1 Corinthians in which Paul states that claim about 500 witnesses. So you must deal with the credibility of the new testament as a historical account written in Paul's case about 3 decades after the resurrection. If you have an event is not practical to assume the supernatural but if you have multiple witnesses saying it was supernatural you have to consider the possibility of the supernatural
@@RagingBlast2Fan Well, assuming that Craig has done his homework correctly (and I rather suspect he has), then the choice is between giving an implausible naturalistic explanation or a supernaturalistic one. For most of us in the 21st century, a supernaturalistic explanation carries the aura of implausibility as well. (Think of our first reaction to weird supernatural-ish stuff that a stranger might say which doesn't conform to our antecedent religious biases.) Of course, there are a lot of different implausible naturalistic hypotheses out there (swoon theory, a body swap, etc.), and so if I were a skeptic on this thing, I wouldn't commit to any of them. I'd commit to some *one* of them being right, and just insist that my position is a big disjunction of all of them. So, let "INE" mean "implausible naturalistic explanation" and let "ISE" mean "implausible supernaturalistic explanation." The choice you're looking at is between the following: Skeptical Claim: (INE1 v INE2 v INE3 v ...) Believer's Claim: ISE Now...which of these is more probable? That's our little quandary. If I were playing the skeptical game, I would harp on the fact that the big disjunction of all the INEs out there would improve the overall probability as more disjuncts are added. Obviously any one INE on its own would look pretty stupid. (Swoon theory? Really?) A big disjunction of all of them is less so. And since the believer's claim (implausibly) invokes the supernatural, the skeptical approach is more plausible overall. If I were playing the believer's game, I would attempt to provide arguments that invoking the supernatural really isn't so implausible after all--which of course takes us into the heart of a metaphysical dispute. Three observations: 1. The skeptical game is old school--it's really just a gloss on David Hume's argument against miracles (although really Hume borrowed that argument from the deists of his day). 2. At some point, the decision about the historicity of the resurrection ceases to be about history and starts being about metaphysics. 3. I think Craig knows all of this, and to his credit (and the credit of others like him), he takes on the Humean approach while venturing into the metaphysical dispute. But RagingBlast2Fan, to answer your question, I prefer to play the believer's game.
Stop exaggerating and pretending like you were a true Christian. You never had a real relationship with Jesus Christ, you never really knew Him, and you never knew His Word. 1 John 2:19-21 “These people left the faith, but they never really belonged with us; otherwise they would have stayed with us. When they left, it proved that they did not belong with us. But you who believe are not like that, for the Holy One has given you His Spirit, and all of you know the truth. So I am writing to you not because you don’t know the truth but because you know the difference between truth and lies.”
I shared a presentation like this almost twenty years ago with a young man. After about an hour of discussing the evidence, he finally suggested (after trying all the other debunked arguments) that maybe aliens had stolen Jesus' body and then impersonated Him to start a world religion.
I've told people THAT story many, many times to illustrate two things: 1) the extent to which people will go in their irrationality to deny the clear facts of the resurrection of Jesus; and 2) how strong those facts must be to force people into such ludicrous positions.
Christ is risen!
You know, that's just one more example of the fact that this "war" in deeper level is the war between atheism and truth, between Satan and God. Atheism is a godless religion and you can not convince an atheist with any facts. We should remember that after all the miracles Jesus did while He was dwelling on earth, the pharisees still demanded from Him "a sign" as if any sign could change their denialist mind.
"the clear facts of the resurrection of Jesus"
Yeah...except there are none.
He is Risen INDEED
@@Matthewa0227 Viagra works!
Or… the gospels are mostly fiction…
I couldn't accept Christianity as the true word of God until I looked into the historical accountability of the resurrection of Jesus but I always had some sense or dare I say belief in a higher omniscient god and now this TRUE FACT that Jesus was resurrected by God on the third day, after he had died for our mortal sins, now stands as my foundation for my belief in the true god and the holy spirit, this is only the beginning and I have much to learn but I am grateful for this knowledge of the truth of Jesus 🙏
Praise God.
According to legend, Jesus got so blasted that he woke up 3 days later in a cave not remembering how he got there.
A clear, reasoned, and concise argument for the historic resurrection of Christ! Truly enjoyed it. Thanks Dr. Craig!
And completely full of shit.
According to legend, Jesus got so blasted that he woke up 3 days later in a cave not remembering how he got there.
Finally, after many years of searching for truth, I have become a Christian. It just makes sense. The end.
One of the funnier comments out there, simple as.
@kst kst Not sure what you mean my dude, sorry but I don't understand your issue. You don't know me or what I have searched for. What does any of what you said have to do with whether or not Christianity is true? I am not sure what your beef is bro.
@kst kst Shut up you idiot you dont know anything about the Truth you moron haha hahha you hellbound moron you promote no religion and wishful thinking m.. hahah truth , you dont even know Jacksh*t about the Bible lol and you're trying to lecture others on here, you're nothing but a moron we all just found out after talking to your dumbass
@@josephtattum6365 Don't listen to that idiot, he has no clue where he is going in the afterlife, he dont believe in none of the sh*t he preaches, after talking to him, we found out he's nothing but a confused idiot, using the Bible to prove there is no God hahahahhahaha how logical does that sound
@kst kst Nope, Im a former Christian and I'm an American you stupid ass prejudice bigot, we're all from a third world country to your swine eating stupid ass LoL shows how Ignorant you are.
I lived a very wretched life before I knew Jesus. But Jesus came into my life and he changed me and gave me peace that surpasses all understanding.
Praise God! Your story should be told to so many people.
I say, praise God for saving you. Rejoice that your name is written in Heaven.
Turu Turu Turu ae Turu tu tata ta 😂 love bro live from india
This brought tears to my eyes! Amen, Come Lord Jesus!
@Greg W Just to let you know.... I am Still HERE! Haven't been hit by a Bolt of Lightning.... ... ... ... YET!!!!!!!!
Greetings from Pakistan.
Dr Lane Crage you are an inspiration. Your messages touched my heart and mind. thank you !
Bruh, I've seen you everywhere , I can guarantee that you are a certified Islamophobe 🤣.
Study Vlog
th-cam.com/video/4of-PbRvdqo/w-d-xo.html
Watch it.
@@emkfenboi Read carefully. He didn't mention Islam in this comment of his.
We have same name and im from Pakistan too
@@amenjamal8454 me too from Pakistan ❤️
"Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool." *Voltaire*
William Lane Craig is an absolute soldier of Jesus Christ our lord and savior, God bless this man.
Jesus Sotelo His main evidence is from people who were members of the Christian cult. 🤦♂️
@@dallasburns7806 what constitutes a Christian "cult"?
Jesus Sotelo I mean his main source is the Bible. It’s easy to Mark it as evidence when it says it’s inspired by God. How do you know the Bible is inspired by God. Because the Bible says so?
@@dallasburns7806 let's remove theology for a moment, do you believe in some sort of God or higher power?
Jesus Sotelo I was a Christian for around 30 years. Now I would argue that I’m quite agnostic on that point of a “higher power”
The bit at the beginning about his parents really struck a chord for me. This past February I went to Kansas for my grandfather's funeral. I realized that this was the first time anyone close to me had passed away. I was really hit with a profound sense of loss. Being in that house without grandpa around was very sad. And like Dr. Craig, on my 12 hour drive home, it made me long ever more for the resurrection.
Jesus bless you. I know it's been 5 months, but I pray your pain has grown easier to carry.
It’s the same for me. My grandfather died because someone killed him and it was also almost 8 months ago and my first loss (I’m 23). And it made me overthink everything but I was a Christian who blindly believed and his death shattered my whole view of a loving God because he didn’t hear my prayers to save my grandfather (he was in hospital for 10 days prior to his death and there was a 50% chance of surviving the incident which caused his death). But now, reading and informing myself about Christianity, I came to long the resurrection to be true.
@@yumeniya My grandpa (the most of a father figure I’ll probably ever have) passed away 10, almost 11 months ago. He passed unexpectedly.
I’ll be praying for you and your family 🙏❤️
I too long for a resurrection. Who wouldn't? However, being an adult, I have to deal with reality as it is. I would rather deal with a sad truth than a comforting lie. This life is all we have and...it's glorious and should be enough.
@@jaynerulo6785 while I would agree I hope you don’t mean Christianity as the comfortable lie. A lot of anti theist would disagree that it’s comfortable they believe it’s even immoral but have no standard to judge it.
Well done! Praise Christ and our Holy Father and Holy Spirit!
This is a great watch/listen. Packed with an incredible amount of information, which makes a half an hour video feel like a few minutes.
He is risen ! ☺️
Really? Where?
@@atheistangel007 i pray for you .for open your eyes.
@@solomonyiheyis1623 "i pray for you .for open your eyes"
To what exactly?
@@andrewmeawad1111 "Truly HE is risen"
In what way exactly?
@@andrewmeawad1111 "To know Christ , The divine God , Christ blood made the Gentile sons of God"
You "know" your interpretation based on your favorite version of a badly written book.
Thank God Dr. Craig! Keep sharing the Word of God! You are such a blessing to people in all walks of life.🙌🏼❤️😊😇🙏🏼☝🏼
Ha..what a load of Bullshit from a big Liar
th-cam.com/video/uLcK3Up8z7c/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/bQmMFQzrEsc/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/mwUZOZN-9dc/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/qDt7wc5nn7E/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/79UAYyMYk7I/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/28PjVaW4kKI/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/NsJJ56fyiSA/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/QaENP1R-lbY/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/mL1eYhJcOsI/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/kbx8XOKVqn0/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/kn7TEoA9ark/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/LTllC7TbM8M/w-d-xo.html
@@rationalsceptic7634 Unfortunately for you, Colin, this sort of comment i.e posting multiple sources to mascarade as 'evidence' for the conclusion, which in this case is to suggest that Craig is a "big liar", merely serves as to indicate your inability to express any fortuitous argument for the affirmation. The appeal to authority has gone to show the rather vacuous and complacent attitude you possess.
@@user-gk4gs6sx1t Yeah what a loser
@@user-gk4gs6sx1t Why don't you take a look at those videos if you have the balls and tell us what you think. Try to use that lonely brain cell of yours for once. WLG is a liar and you are dumb enough to buy his shit, there's no doubt about that.
@@aidank2108 found a friend moron 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 you really are the most pathetic troll ever.
This teaching is deep and profound. I am convinced beyond every reasonable doubt that Jesus rose triumphantly on the third day and he's seated on the right hand side of God interceding for us. God bless you Dr Craig.
Haven't watched this but you're gullible. Why would mere words whether written or spoken convince you of the supernatural?
I've watched/ listened to him and others elsewhere and their "arguments" are puerile.
Blessings Jonah
I could never accept Christianity as the true word of God until I looked into the historical accountability of the resurrection of Jesus and now this TRUE FACT that Jesus was resurrected by God on the third day, after he had died for our mortal sins, now stands as my foundation for my belief in the true god and the holy spirit, this is only the beginning and I have much to learn but I am grateful for this knowledge of the truth of Jesus 🙏
@Duncan Bryson I can use words to convince you of many things in life. It's called logic. I do not need scientific evidence to prove the existence of some things. Sometimes it just takes common sense. You wouldn't need to conduct an experiment to figure out if people are happy when they win the lottery. Your logic and common sense would just tell you that.
@@zweihander7309
Jesus Christ may have existed but only as a human being. There's no evidence of anyone coming back from the dead, only claims. Nor is there any evidence of deities or anything else supernatural.
Jesus lives!
@PLAIN AS PLANE he does indeed!
"Jesus lives!"
...only in the minds of those that believe it.
"Jesus saves. Moses invests".
@@atheistangel007The thing is, no one can "prove God" just like no one can "disprove" God. God is FAR above our finite brains and His Ways are higher than ours. We can't "figure out" God. All of our measly "logical thinking" and arguments can't even scratch the surface of God. God has provided more than enough evidence through His creation, through science, through history and through morality. It's just that some people are too stubborn to acknowledge it as God and are willfully ignorant. Atheists just don't like to accept the truth and don't like the idea of a just and moral God that will one day hold them accountable for their actions. So science is the only option. But as wonderful and powerful as science is, it simply doesn't have all the answers. It can't answer the biggest questions we have as human beings. Such as "Why do we exist"? "What is the origin of life?" "Where did the first self replicating molecule come from?" "How did living matter come from non-living matter?" Scientists still can't even explain what caused the big bang to happen in the first place. Biology still can explain those things and never will because God created life. Evolution may be able to explain what happens when you HAVE life, but it can't explain how life actually BEGAN in the first place. Being an Atheist DOES require faith. Some aspects of science are a leap of faith and in the dark. There are so many big questions left unanswered by science. Science, as wonderful and powerful as it is, simply cannot and will never be able to fully explain everything. Are you expecting God to reveal Himself to YOU? If so, that's NOT gonna happen. It doesn't work that way. You seek after HIM. That's how it works. God is not obligated to reveal Himself to anyone. Even if He did, that still doesn't mean they would submit to Him and want a relationship with Him. But there is a promise. If you truly seek Him with a sincere, honest and pure heart, He WILL reveal Himself to you. See, true Christians aren't Christians because of blind faith or intellectual belief. True Christians are Christians because they sought after God with all of their heart. Who wants to love Him, to know Him and to serve Him. To submit everything to Him 100%. That's why we have a relationship with Him. Because He revealed Himself to us. I think the issue with most Atheists (not all but most) isn't a "lack of evidence" thing. I think the main issue is because they don't WANT God to exist. They simply don't WANT to submit to God if He is real. That would mean they would have to give up a lot of the things they are doing that are wrong. Let me ask you a question, if Christianity was true, would you be a Christian? If God were to appear to you in front of your face in a dramatic display of lighting like the Arnold Schwarzenegger did in the Movie "The Terminator" and said "I'm God. I exist. Here I am." What would you do with that intellectual belief? (If you didn't just brush it off as an hallucination like some said that they would do) Would you sincerely be willing to give up your sins and your way of living for God's Ways? To serve Him and love Him for the rest of your life? Or would your attitude be like "Wow. I was wrong. You really do exist God." Then just go on with your life and operate as if He doesn't exist? If your response would be the second option, then by no means is God going to reveal Himself to you. He doesn't care about someone's intellectual belief. He wants your HEART. He wants a RELATIONSHIP.
Amen
The theory of the twin brother of Jesus sound so ridiculous i think even if i were a skeptical i would think that theory so ridiculous. That only shows the desperate way to deny the evidence of resurrection of Jesus Christ.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 sure, desperate to deny something that has never been proven in the first place.
@@Dr.vonKrankenhausen
Isaac Newton, the man who discovered calculus, the primary laws of physics, and considered by many to be the greatest scientist of all time, said:
“He who thinks half-heartedly will not believe in God; but he who really thinks has to believe in God.”
“I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by those who were inspired. I study the Bible daily.”
“In the absence of any other proof, the thumb alone would convince me of God’s existence.”
“Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind.”
Or how about Galileo Galilei the father of observational astronomy, the father of modern physics, the father of the scientific method, and the father of modern science:
“God is known by nature in His works, and by doctrine in His revealed Word.”
“Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe.”
And one of my favorites, René Descartes, inventor of analytical geometry, father of modern philosophy, early writer of optics, and the very one who introduced skepticism as an essential part of the scientific method:
“I see plainly that the certainty and truth of all knowledge depends uniquely on my awareness of the true God, to such an extent that I was incapable of perfect knowledge about anything until I became aware of Him.”
Also, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz was a prominent German polymath and one of the most important logicians, mathematicians, and natural philosophers in history. He is also credited with discovering Calculus, and he said:
“It is God who is the ultimate reason of things, and the knowledge of God is no less the beginning of science than His essence and will are the beginning of beings.”
And just one more example; Sir Francis Bacon was the first to formally put together the scientific method, which is what every scientist has used since the 17th century to collect measurable, empirical evidence of something. Sir Francis Bacon said,
“A little knowledge of science makes man an atheist, but an in-depth study of science makes him a believer in God.”
@@GreekOrthodox7
Newton also said that believing in the trinity is idolatry and the worst sin a Christian can commit.
And he believed in alchemy and lots of other dumb nonsense but he was pretty smart for his time.
@@GreekOrthodox7 Oh that is so good! Thank you!
@@Dr.vonKrankenhausen Desperate enough to make bogus claims with less credibility.
“Brian, pray us out” is the greatest way of ending a sermon ever. I’m stealing this.
I just love how casually he says it
he could have prayed himself
Please Pray for me because i am doubting :(
If your belief can't stand up to a little doubt then you don't have good reason for it. You should be doubting it.
Doubting and asking questions is a sign of intelligence. Rejoice you are not a lost case.
Doubt it, ask questions and if it's true, your faith will remain unscathed. Otherwise it was not worth it anyway.
Please don't bother praying for me because I am doubting.
@@kevinroum9343 you still deserve some prayers. But it's your choice
@@orbitamusic316 i dont want prayers that I didn't ask for. I find it intrusive and condescending
I love this ❤❤.
He's Risen.
Excellent !
Jesus, i know that you came to save me through your resurrection. When you rose from the dead i was set free. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for me and for the rest of the world. God wins not because He can make it be, yes He do make things happen, but because God is so good and true.
there is no evidence for the resurrection. you are just making stupid assertions.
@@louiscyfer6944 Hahaha, you didn’t even watch the video. I know so many people who used to be hardcore atheists and literally became devout Christians after specifically studying the history of the Resurrection of Jesus. You are extremely ignorant and deceived; you know nothing. To say there is no evidence is an extreme display of ignorance.
@@GreekOrthodox7 well then present the evidence. assertions are not evidence. i watched the video, it didn't contain evidence.
@@louiscyfer6944 the writings of josephus are compelling considering he lived around the time of Jesus. I'd start there if you want to really find out for yourself instead of just relying on one youtube video and some randy in the comment section
@@skeensmachine597 are you stupid? Josephus lived well after jesus. he was born after jesus died. he recorded what the christians believed, and he doesn't talk about jesus resurrecting. that part is a well known later forgery added. i had 8 years of theology you dumb shit, i am not going off of a youtube video.
“Religions are divisive and quarrelsome. They are a form of one-upmanship because they depend upon separating the “saved” from the “damned,” the true believers from the heretics, the in-group from the out-group… All belief is fervent hope, and thus a cover-up for doubt and uncertainty.”
~ Alan Watts
The irony of such a statement is it’s doing the same thing it criticizes:
It’s showing one-upmanship against all religions , and he obviously believes it without fervently. So my question is, is he using it to coverup his own doubts and uncertainties about his own worldview?
*believes it believes it fervently
@@robertgroen2197 no. He's saying EVERYTHING is OK, no worries, no one is saved or damned... things just are. Enjoy the ride. It's eternal.
@@robertgroen2197 Watts wasn't offering any specific "religion" to replace any, just a way of understanding that we can't understand. But... via self inquiry, we can find peace.
Praise the Lord!😍
Praise Zeus!
@@busterbiloxi3833 Praise a false god if you really want to
@Dd S Praise a false god if you really want to
@Dd S Not according to evidence!
@Dd S War god?You May have mixed something up...But ok...Do you know that infinite regression is scientifically impossible?
Dr. William Lane Craig, thank you very much. Great stuff you are giving us here. 🙏🙏👏💐
If by "great stuff" you mean _"a whole lotta nonsense",_ then yeah I agree with you.
@Yeshua The Only Truth "The history" of what exactly?
@Yeshua The Only Truth Ah, so please tell us what evidence OUTSIDE of the Bible proves that a man came back to live after being dead?
@Yeshua The Only Truth "the coward disciples became brave when they saw their Master risen from the dead"
And how do you know this happened?
@Yeshua The Only Truth "If you know Judaism , they don't have a concept of dying messiah"
Because according to Judaism, the "Christ" was not Jesus.
"Even the apostles before crucifixion cannot believed Jesus' prophecy on His death"
And how do you know this?
آمين😘
Thank you GracePres for supporting WLC's ministry and also for uploading this video.
The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple
I love the way he itemises his points as “Fact Number 1, Fact Number 2,…3, etc,” when they are arguments, or suggestions in support of a theory, and not fact in any sort of objective way.
This shows that he’s creating an argument that is designed to please and comfort those who have already decided or don’t want to think for themselves. Of course preaching to the converted like this is a lucrative proposition. And it’s easy. You don’t need any real intellectual rigour or academic depth. This audience are not asking tough questions. They want easy answers and they’re getting them.
❤No, we are not Saved by His resurrection. We are Saved by Obeying and Doing the WILL of GOD the Father and BELIEVING in the SON OF GOD, JESUS CHRIST. The SHROUD OF JESUS CHRIST PROVES IT!
If Jesus had NOT been raised from the dead, then the last 1,990 years of history would be completely different from what we know! We would not even know He ever lived!! There would have been NO out pouring of the Holy Spirit and therefore no church established. The ripple effect of the resurrection touches everything we know either directly or indirectly! We would have no mention of Jesus in external documents and no New Testament! Btw, it was 33AD, not 30!
The effect from a resurrection is indistinguishable from the effect of a belief in a resurrection.
@@ramigilneas9274 We’ll see, won’t we?
@@ramigilneas9274 The point is that without the resurrection, this conversation would not even be taking place. If not for the resurrection, no one would even know who Jesus is or that He ever lived! Without His resurrection, Jesus would have been just another nameless Jew crucified by the Romans. End of story.
@@Halo9K There were hundreds of saviors just like Jesus… and we know the names of some of them. Jesus is just the most famous version… mostly by accident.😉
@@ramigilneas9274 Really??? Just like Jesus??? None are even in the same ballpark, not even close. Have any of the pretenders affected history for the last 2,000 years as Jesus has? Have any of them been even remotely the focus of so much literature, plays, movies? There are bookstores filled with books about, inspired by or influenced by Jesus. There is no other person in history that has so affected the course of that history like Jesus. None. He is the reason that until recently history was divided as BC (Before Christ) and AD (In the year of our Lord)! Sure, there are pretenders but only Jesus conquered death!!! Again, if He hadn’t we wouldn’t be having this conversation. We wouldn’t even know He existed!
The problem with Christianity is not about cohesion in the story. The problem with Christianity, as with all story Religions, is that it is not verifiable. Humans have created stories from their minds and imaginations thru out history. We humans are bad at figuring out what is true or not true from stories.
What then is verifiable? Stories from humans in the ancient world are not. How about knowledge? Claiming to be a God of the Universe would mean that person or being has a great deal of knowledge. But we can't just ask for knowledge, because knowledge can be made up human knowledge from other stories that humans created. People make up stories about great knowledge. Such as prophecy, just because someone writes a story about someone fulfilling prophecy, doesn't mean it actually happened that way. If there is a story about someone being born in Bethlehem and then the story creator writes stories about the hero being born in Bethlehem, the story creator created with the book open. They knew what things to write to fulfill the prophecy. Very human.
The knowledge that is verifiable is knowledge of the natural world. A God of the Universe would know about:
Sanitation, cleanliness, sterilization, inoculation and medications to prevent disease. Miracles that cure disease are easy to make. Actual medical knowledge is difficult. Why is there no references to Jesus of Christianity in a book on the history of medicine? Didn't Jesus of Christianity, God of the Universe, not know anything about medical knowledge?
Inventions, technologies and Sciences that might be valuable to humans. Didn't Jesus know about the value of printing presses to make books, magazines and newspapers to spread information and knowledge around the world? Didn't Jesus of Christianity know about the value of investigating nature to develop Physics, Chemistry and Biology?
What about a lecture from Jesus of Christianity on the value of economics and business and how it will transform the world for humans? Is selling all that you have and give to the poor better advice that what humans have learned to do in colleges and schools?
Do we think that Star Trek is true? There are stories about Warp Drive in Star Ships, Photon Torpedoes and Transfer people from Star Ship to anywhere (except when the Ships Shields are up) with Transporters. Just because the stories are written, does not make it true. The verifiable thing is knowledge. If the writers of the Star Trek stories also had fully working Star Ships with working Warp Drive, that would give the stories some credibility.
Consider as well, the atrocities of the stories. How is it that Jesus of Christianity knew, just knew, that when he was born on Earth, 33 years later the Roman Empire military would have Judea under military occupation? What if the Roman Empire military decided to leave, it just wasn't worth the occupation? What if the Eastern Roman Empire collapsed 400 years before it did? But Jesus of Christianity knew that the Roman Empire would still be there to preform the torture and killing of himself. Along with the torturing, killing and murder of the people of Judea.
Don't talk to me about a God that walks on water, turns water into wine and tells people to be good to each other. Jesus of Christianity was in collusion with the Roman Empire military to have the people of Judea tortured, killed and murdered.
Ronald Lindeman you need to get on with your ignorance and go troll somewhere else. Why is it you feel you have to click on a video and talk that bullshit when you don’t even believe in God? Seems like you like to talk shit and need your ass handed to you. Leave these God fearing people alone and go troll some where else. You’ll meet Jesus one day though that’s for sure
There are people who comment on videos like this because they have been in the Religious Fictional world that this person describes and got out of it.
Consider that Thomas Jefferson who wrote the Declaration of Indepedence, did not think that Christianity was true. He wrote that Governments should be of "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." Which leaves out "Laws of Story God." Which leaves out "Laws of Super Natural God."
Story God or Super Natural God.
Feeds 5000 with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish.
Laws of Nature and Nature's God.
Would start an agricultural school and bring intelligent people together and use observation and experiment to understand how crops grow and ways to make them grow better.
The Prosperity we have had in the last 400 years is not because of better study and application of Story God ideas and Super Natural ideas, but because we understand the Natural world better.
Humans inspired by divine power accomplish more than ones who are not.
Our increasingly modernist, secular, relativist, scientism-driven Western society is becoming more and more isolated, confused and miserable. Families breaking up, people confused about gender identity, less of a feeling of community (which religion provides), drug addiction increasing, architecture art and music going downhill, women reporting they're more unhappy than ever, despite feminism, people worshipping athletes and celebrities instead of God, and so on.
Also, whether or not you agree that the resurrection happened, or whether or not you agree that the supernatural exists, the teachings of the New Testament and the Catholic Church on how one should live are sound, even to this day.
Science is only valuable when it's used to attain a higher state of being and get closer to God. Otherwise, it's neutral or negative if used for nefarious purposes. Science is just a tool, not an end. The end is God. If science is not grounded in sound philosophy and theology, in the pursuit of the divine, then it can easily lead to the creation of more chaos than it destroys.
We made some good scientific advances BECAUSE we were unified as a society under God. That was what gave our societies stability and HOPE. Do you really think people would have gotten through the horrors of the past WITHOUT God? Highly unlikely!
@@RL-es6gg Go to Google, Images and look up Bible Belt.
Then look up states by percentage of smoking cigarettes. Kentucky.
The states with the least smoking of cigarettes is Utah.
Then look up the states by lung cancer rates. Kentucky has the highest lung cancer rate. Utah the lowest.
Then look up life expectancy by state. California, New York, Minnesota and Connecticut, people live the longest. Over 81 years.
Kentucky, West Virginia, Mississippi and Alabama the shortest. Around 75 years.
Look up other social things that can be measured. Crime is generally higher in Bible Belt states. Educations in lower in Bible Belt states.
The United States has a country with most Christians, but it also has higher crime rates than countries with less Christianity in it. Japan has 70 people in prison per 100,000 per population. Much of Europe has 120 to 180 people in prison per 100,000 population. Russia has 300 people per 100,000. The United States has 700 per 100,000.
Bible Belt states leads the United States in Prison population. Louisiana has 1400 people in prison per 100,000 population. Other Bible Belt states over 700. California and New York, in the 200's.
According to legend, Jesus got so blasted that he woke up 3 days later in a cave not remembering how he got there.
🙏🙏🙏AMEN.
At 6:36, he says if an event is attested to by multiple sources that are independent of each other it is much more probable the event is historical rather than made up. -- The accounts of the
resurrection are all by the earliest members of the Christian sect. If a man is horribly murdered and maimed and a few days later 500+ see him alive again and unharmed surely it was the sensational event of the epoch for all Israel. It's odd that Josephus other pagan historians who reference Jesus don't mention it.
This is dope yeet yolo sauce
Lol, what's that? 😆
I'm afraid, that object or thing, might not exist lol 😆😆
Peace bradah!
That’s a gorgeous tie 🦋😊
Please share my two brief videos with other people. Thank you!
Dr. Craig is one of the best apologists for the Christian faith !!!
Which isn't saying much.
We have a God that is Wonderful. 👍
@@randypacchioli2933 Then your standards must be extremely low and you are clearly morally and intellectually bankrupt.
I would agree, i would also argue that he never presented anything valid at all. Put i mean what will you expect when you debate the existence of something that doesn´t exist. No matter how smart you are, you will never be able to talk fairytales into existence.
@Hit Man
“ i would also argue that he never presented anything valid at all.”
To argue is to give evidence, so what evidence do you have to show that his points are invalid?
When Bill said being there made me miss my mom and dad he said it with so much sincerity that he made me miss my dad. Thankfully, as Christians we KNOW WE WILL SEE THEM AGAIN!!!
DO WE?
God bless dr. Craig god bless jesus
where can I buy his tie? It's amazing.
Thank you Dr. Craig. This is incredible the way you present the problems and the solutions to each. Wow I'm amazed by this.
He does a very good job. He presents his arguments very clearly and gives clear reasons to rebut the counter arguments which he gives.
Unfortunately the more familiarity you gain with the counter arguments, the more you will see that Dr Craig avoids the difficult problems, misrepresents the counter arguments and misrepresents the evidence.
It would be worthwhile for you to familiarise yourself with the arguments actually made by counter-apologists to see where the gap is. I would be very happy to provide links for recommended places to start.
Most likely he does all of this sincerely and prayerfully. However, he is well paid for his appearances, it would be naive to discount the possibility that he is simply dishonest. The most damming evidence for this is not the selection of "facts" he presents which could be just a manifestation of confirmation bias, but the way he appears to carefully word statements in a way that seems to be designed to mislead while not being factually false. This is harder to do by accident.
Aren't apologetics _wonderful?_
I’m a 57-year-old Texas man, was a Christian for most of my life, but my beliefs have changed these last few years. I want to have something to believe in, but not just for the sake of believing. I have a question that’s been asked several times in TH-cam, inquiring why God doesn’t appear to us. But the person being addressed will either rephrase the question, or simply dance around it. I get it, no one can legitimately answer that particular question. I don’t know that I am truly an atheist, agnostic, etc - I just don’t know what to believe. I’ve asked these questions several times, and one of the harshest answers I’ve gotten is “if you’re not a believer, then you’ll burn in hell for eternity“.
So I have a scenario: Jack and Joe are equally good people. Both of them are selfless, are constantly giving of themselves to help those who are clearly suffering. Even if it’s just a kind word, a hug, words of encouragement and sympathy, they are both quick to do it, without a thought or a request of getting anything in return. Neither of them strike or raise a hand to anyone, nor do they have hurtful words for anyone.
Jack is a Christian, while Joe is not. Joe knows there is something powerful and all-knowing out there, but feels strongly that it’s not a god. I’m told that the Christian belief is that Jack will go to his just reward, but what of Joe? I have a very dear friend who is a Christian, and she says Joe will also go to his reward, but she was unable to tell me more than that.
I want to genuinely believe something, it’s just that being told to “have faith“ or to “love yourself“ doesn’t quite do it for me.
Any thoughts?
Sometimes we don't even have the right to say anyone is a good person. You can do good but maybe you aren't good. Joe is making a choice just as Jack. Jack chose to recognize his creator and worship him whilst continuing his selfless activities. And in recognition of his creator, Jack tends to listen to his creator and act according to what his creator demands and limit himself unto things he ought to. But Joe on the other hand doesn't recognize his creator. He has the impression that 'well there is a creator but I don't know him'. So Joe goes about his normal works and doesn't know what is good in the eyes of the creator or what is bad. He acts just like he wants. Who will get a reward if put in your judgment scale?
@@orbitamusic316 If you’re mincing what I meant between good and bad, then you totally missed my point.
@@acp865 totally unrelated to my comments please. I have no intentions whatsoever to portray morality here. I just answered your scenario
@@orbitamusic316 No you just totally missed his point and didn't answer his question
Both Jack and Joe are sinners. No man is good.
They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Psalm 14:3
Their good deeds won't do them any good.
But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
Isaiah 64:6
If you go to court here on earth, your good deeds won't save you. You get punished for your crimes. Same thing in God's court. You need a Saviour - Jesus.
God offers salvation from death, redemption from sin and eternal life as a FREE GIFT. You can't earn it with good works. Any attempt to do so would be insulting. Imagine you gave your son a new car and he gave you ten bucks and said "we're even".
The one who believes in Jesus, calls on His name and has a relationship with Him is going to heaven. The other one is going to hell.
" That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the { Spirit } is spirit. "
Genuinely saved persons have been,
Born of the Spirit.
Born again.
Born from above.
" Do not be deceived my beloved brethren. Every good and every perfect gift is from above,
and comes down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning. "
" Whenever you meet a genuinely saved Christian,
you are meeting someone in whom Christ lives. "
Whenever you meet an unregenerate person,
you are meeting someone in whom He ----- does not.
I'm sure that no one's personal opinion can ever change this fact, try as they might.
Unregenerate Heathen folk have been trying as they might for some 2,024 years now
to no avail.
The resurrection hypothesis!!!! I love It. Adding a scientific coat on man made stories.
Not a mention of the true gift from Jesus resurrection. The giving of the Holy Spirit on that first Pentecost so we can talk to the living Jesus. Maybe that is where Christians get their faith, in prayer to Jesus and asking him to transform our ways. Asking for wisdom, understanding and compassion man is blessed. Using the Holy Spirit we can fight the good fight.
Dr Craig mentioned right up front that the internal witness is a fine reason for believing in Jesus. Here he is making an evidential argument rather than an experiential argument.
praise the Lord and God bless you
Utter nonsense and fairy tales.
@@walkergarya but when Richard. Dawkins said, aliens, made the first self _replicating molecule that is acceptable that is not fairy tales God bless you. And he may open your eyes for his own glory in Jesus mighty name
@@savedbymylovegodthelordjes8394 No he did not. He accepts it as a very remote possibility, not a fact. Do not lie to me.
"Jesus mighty name"?!?
Nope. I am not interested in your fairy tales.
@@walkergarya ok God bless you
@@savedbymylovegodthelordjes8394 I have no interest in any blessings from your fairy tale friend.
Shalom
Amen
25:08 "Jewish beliefs about the afterlife precluded anyone's rising from the dead to glory and immortality before the general resurrection at the end of the world."
WLC sounds very confident about that, but the gospels tell a different story. In several places, it is clear that belief in resurrection was pretty common at the time. King Herod, a practicing Jew, thought that Jesus was John the Baptist risen from the dead. (Mark 14:1-2) When Jesus asked his disciples what the people thought about him, his disciples reported that they likewise thought he was the resurrected John the Baptist or one of the prophets, possibly Elijah. (Mark 8:27-28) Finally, according to Mark, Jesus predicted his own death and resurrection 3 different times. (Mark 8:31-33 Mark 9:30-32 Mark 10:32-34) Similar passages appear in Luke and Matthew.
Now Craig is certainly familiar with all these passages, so why is he making pronouncements that fly in the face of them?
Because it's all good as long as he gets paid.
A few seconds later Craig stated the general resurrection at the end of the world . That view would be correct for the Pharisee. They believed a resurrection.
22:08 Interesting, wouldn't the position of the Pope of the Catholic Church better be founded on James, instead of Peter?
I made that very point at last week's housegroup, based on Acts 15 vv 13-21. In the debate about how to treat the Gentiles, James says the apostles should write a letter explaining what the Gentiles should do, everyone agreed, and that's what they did. The ISV translates James' words in v 19 as "I have decided". He decided what should be done and the early church did it. He exercised the authority of the pre-eminent position he occupied. If you're looking for a first pope, James is he.
@@stuartofblyth Agreed, although some scholars think that the Jerusalem congregation was possibly co-lead by James and Peter. Whatever the case, there is no evidence that either James or Peter ever visited Rome. The first account of Peter being in Rome is a letter from a Christian deacon named Gaius. Writing probably toward the end of the second century C.E around 170 or 180 C.E.
Can anyone list the scholars he mentioned? Im having a hard time spelling their names.
John Arthur Thomas Robinson
I caught this one. This name was mentioned regarding the burial.
Pinchas Lapide
Gerd Ludemann
N.T Wright were amongst of those he mentioned.
There is a difference between stories and demonstrable evidence for a claim. Try again, that was nothing.
Are you going to stop believing all ancient history that does not have modern aspects?
@@Becca_Lynn If it includes braindead nonsense like worldwide floods, talking animals, zombies, and people that live in fish, yeah sure.
A Flawless and Spectacular Lecture. 👏👏👏👏✝️🇮🇪
"Flawless" only to the clueless.
@@atheistangel007 Oh! Not another member of the Negativity Brigade. 🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@paulustarsus Like I said...
@@atheistangel007 Judging by your other comments on this thread, you're still searching, but don't worry Bro', you'll get there. ✌️🔥✝️
@@paulustarsus 1st off, I thought Xtians weren't supposed to "judge". 2nd, it is clear that your judgement is as flawed as Craig's argument. 3rd, what is it you have concluded I am supposedly "searching" for? 4th, you suggest that I'll "get there", seeing as how there are over 40,000 denominations of Christianity alone, which of them in your _judgmental_ opinion is the one that "got there"? 5th, what makes you assume I'm your "Bro"? 6, why so many emoticons, are you 12?
I feel sorry for the people that spend all their lives trying to dis prove Jesus because when they pass and meet him in Judgement...They will hear the words..: You Never Knew ME....Depart From Me :"
Almost all Christians will hear the same words.
Most of the people who are convinced that they are saved are heretics who will burn.🔥🔥🔥
😮no one cant denied that argument
Based on this evidence, the conclusion is undeniable; Jesus rose from the dead.
What evidence??? There is nothing presented here but bare assertions from the bible.
@@exilfromsanity People like you are so stupid. he barely even talked about the bible. tell me a better explanation for his empty tomb, then I will listen
@@aidank2108 He bases all of his claims of "facts" on the bible. First you have to prove there was a Jesus, and that he was crucified, and that he was buried, then you can try to prove the tomb was empty. None of this crap is supported by extra biblical accounts, the bible is all there is. If you believe the bible none of these arguments are necessary, if you don't believe in fairy tales none of this crap is convincing.
@@exilfromsanity You should study some history because it is a well established fact that jesus lived and was crucified. any historian would not deny that. so it is not based on the bible, but on historians accounts. you shouldn't add comments if you dont even know basic facts like that.
@@aidank2108; A well established "fact"?? Really? Cite you sources for that "fact".
I love it
I waited the whole video for evidence, 33:58 minutes I'm never getting back. People, really, snap out of it.
To begin, my life has been one of creativity. It is that through creating I came to know of Love and through Love did I come to create. The dynamic at work in it all for me has been my imagination, and that my work as a composer serves as testament to my Faith in God, given that I consider God to be my imagination.
Some thoughts worth considering if I may, in light of the above, and the creative spirit that has gifted this world so many things at which we marvel, and that more often than not serve to sustain us as a species:
Consider if you will, a mind whose imagination knew no bounds in tailoring such spectacles as 'The Taming of the Shrew'; who penned tales of truth and treachery, benevolence and betrayal, love and death, and death as sacrifice in honour of love; dualities within a state to tax even the greatest of truths, the likes of which the world will never bear witness to again.
A man whose mind sustained him; in whom the rhythm and texture of words found no other counterpart within the genre of his expression, neither before or after the advent of his being; not in any penned history, tragedy or comedy, neither poem nor varied part that saw his art adapted by way of experimental variance to the contemporary so as to appeal more simply to the herds that otherwise might not have heard his "teachings" for what they were.
Where it could well be argued that the canon of works comprising thirty-seven plays, two narrative poems and a collection of sonnets Shakespeare presented to the world "says it all", did not Jesus say it all too, but more precisely, and with no less poetry at play by way of The Sermon on the Mount, and has not The Sermon on the Mount stood the greater test of time?
Not that it can be held true, nor even refuted, for we will never surely know, but how much of Shakespeare's work, if we consider it in just proportion to the highest of ideals, could be aligned to the allure of such a sermon that might have served as serum for the sorrows of his own personal life, the death of his son in 1596, his father in 1601 and his mother seven years later in 1608, not to mention the approach of his own passing in 1616, the cause of which is not known ...
What frailties of the human experience does Shakespeare touch upon that Jesus did not to divine the way?
Against the arras that was to become the backdrop for all subsequent literary endeavours by poets and playwrights alike, being of expression the most ideal, let us now consider The Holy Scriptures, penned as they were so many centuries before, believed by the devout to be a matter of fact, and the "in doubt" a moment of mere fiction; how in light of love their provenance matters little but for the friction that is of this:
* For any mind to imagine the coming of a Messiah; the presence of a divinity in human form, that such a form as was Jesus became The Christ who made the blind to see and the lame to walk; who removed illness and raised the dead but to be sacrificed for the sins of the world as was he so humbled before the face of humankind at its most cruel, and then to be resurrected, suggests that within the scribes who had not the inherent styling of speech as did Shakespeare, but whose servitude was such in purity to possibly surpass him - each purity of thought being a pause for thought - was the presence of The Divine, a consummate spirit that was itself both the creator and the creation of His Story: History.
How could they have been "imagined" otherwise?
How can you first imagine God without God first being present within you? How does any artist imagine their ideal without that ideal first being present in his or her being, or is that where our humility draws the line, at any hint we should so honour the power that first bestowed upon us that by which we ourselves are honoured?
To that must then be considered this: how can you first imagine evil without evil first being present within you? How could even Shakespeare first imagine treachery without treachery first being present in him? But then, things can be consciously willed and that they be so willed does not imply one necessarily has the want to occasion them. Conversely, you do not have to be present in God for God to be present within you, and is that not the divine mercy of God, that his love is so to remain present and regardless?
It is that whatever tale you tell should adhere to the highest tenet of truth any legalism or casuistry can ever admit, the truth that saw jealousy kill Jesus.
And what about the music of Bach, a voice "not quite God" but near enough to at least make you want to believe in the Almighty, and at most exclaims : "I do!"
And for that matter, what of the matter that is of you?
If The Bible is the sum total of its contradictions, is that not Life? Is that not Love?
Is not the greater question one of acceptance?
Are we not all, as is Life and Love, the sum total of our contradictions?
Therefore, is not The Bible a testament of Life and the treasury of Love one's faith requires of it to be - whatever your belief - if in what you believe there is the presence/prayer-sense of Love? Why bother to debunk or even approve of it, after all, are we not ourselves the greatest piece of fiction before the reality that will be our fate!
Is that anything to shake a spear at?
Another overlooked proof is that the reality of the Pentecostal infilling and gift of the Holy Spirit in salvation, could not have happened until after Christ's resurrection {Acts CHS.1&2}. Christ's resurrection was necessary to inaugurate the birth of the new covenant church. Are you Born Again of Water and of the Holy Spirit {John 3vs3,5}?
Vc tem que falar com quem sabe
Praise the lord !!!
Amazing and outstanding explanation using the scriptures as a historical tool and foundation to demonstrate the evidences and undeniable proofs of the resurrection of Jesus.
Although a few external witnesses have been mentioned , the way this analysis has been carried out is pretty authoritative in itself !!
The skeptical scholars are bound to be consistent, fair and reasonable their approach with any other ancient documents or manuscripts.
@The Truth
Your ignorance is flagrant !
The prophecies in the Old Testament about Jesus have been fulfilled to the letter.
The new testament manuscripts are way superior to any other ancient writings in number as well as in accuracy.
Dr William Craig lane is not the only person who knows the scriptures and the history of the church.
There are countless number of Christians who not scholars though but are well documented about Christianity.
@The Truth
Do you have any substantial proof or evidence supporting your opinions since you do not have any argument but bla bla bla..
Sorry man you are only a babe !!!
@@satmat6566 Your gullibility is fragrant.
@@m.a.sperry3424
No sir , it is fragrance !!
@@satmat6566 As in "smelly"?
He says that Jesus was crucified in AD 30. Does that mean he also believes that Jesus was born in 3 BC?. I've heard a lot of people say that he was crucified in 33 AD.
The best evidence we have supports that Jesus was born in 0 AD, crucified in 33 AD.
@@DaveyKanabus I watched a video a while ago of someone making the case that He may have been born around 4 BC.
Is King Herod that died in 4 BC the same one from the bible whom ordered the slaughtering of male children from the ages of 2 and under? I need to do some research.
I believe it's generally understood that he was actually born in around 4BC
It's not important.. but its bc they use the passover to do the dating ..
The passion story?
Wonderful
All Glory Be To God!
Bah, Zeus is modest...doesn't need the praise, and why would he need it?
He's GOD.
"Ich bin die Auferstehung und das Leben. Wer an mich glaubt, der wird leben, auch wenn er stirbt."
[Jesus Christus. Johannes 11]
One strong thought is that the disciple said G'd reised Jesus from the dead. In this way they accept that normal people do not raised from the dead by itself. Something they thought was the situation, but what they exprience was that; this must be G'd.
There's thousands of books on this topic with thousands of different conclusions. I hope you aren't going to dismiss this topic based off of one video
Craig. A legend in his own mind.
There is only one day that fits the crucifixion narrative. We must consider that there was more than one sabbath that week, the yearly Passover on Wednesday, 25 April 31 A. D. and the weekly sabbath on the 7th day of that week. Jews counted the days from sunset to sunset. This is the olny way you can have 3 days and 3 noghts from death to resurection. The resurection ocurred after sundown on Saturday night, the third day which began at sunset.
Historicity?
An idea that might help others here, regardless of what side you're on, as it relates to the question "did Jesus exist"? Establish a set of criteria, a test of sorts, say archaeological evidence, eyewitness testimony, written accounts, etc., and then apply that standard to any number of figures from antiquity and look at the results. You could start with Hannibal, Plato, Alexander the Great, and others....
People don't realize how much bias there is against Christianity
@Marcus Freebody So on what grounds, historically or scientifically, do you base your claim "Jesus didn't exist"? Also, what "tons of evidence" exist for the three people you mentioned? Finally, I think you're a little confused over Jesus as an historical personage vs. whether or not he was "supernatural"; are you aware of that distinction?
@Marcus Freebody Interesting; that's the best you can do?
@Marcus Freebody The only "pure bullshit", is you and what you are saying; if you don't think Jesus existed, that places you in the category of a "crank". Even better, I'd say that your training/background in history amounts to a TH-cam account. How close is that? You are obviously an idiot, not capable of an honest, informed, intelligent debate; so run along back to fantasy world...:). But again, apply a standard of evidence to each of the figures you mentioned, as a test, and see what you get. What "archaeological evidence is there for Hannibal, by the way?
@Marcus Freebody "...Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed historically..."- Wikipedia. Now, moron, ask yourself a simply question; what is it that modern scholars know that a low IQ youtuber like you doesn't? Correct. They are educated, and you're not. Do yourself a favor, go to college and get educated...
Not a shred of convincing evidence was shared 🤦♂️
Turn the volume up
100% agree, and even if I did accept what Craig said, I still see why I would become a Christian.
Still waiting on your evidence that we came from nothing.
Or the jew's saying the apostles stoled the body could be looked at 3 ways.
1 the jew's did do it and was called out so they tried to put the blame on the apostles.
2 the apostles did steal the body and was trying to blame the jew's.
3 neither the jew's nor apostles stole the body and someone else did.
I do not understand how people can find this convincing in the modern world...
Perhaps, since Pilate found no fault in Jesus; because he was not fomenting rebellion against the Romans, was simply, as it seems was the case, indifferent to Jesus' crucifixion and allowed the burial. Rome didn't fear Jesus, Jerusalem did. The Sanhedrin did not have possession of the body, the Roman's did. I am far from an expert in the matter, but neither do I presume to know what was in Pilate's mind. Just a possibility.
Reasonable enough, though i doubt his mom and closest ones would be crying infront a man being tortured and killed that they doubted at any level and moment, was their beloved Jesus.
The fact is Jesus' body was gone. If by Romans or Sanhedrin they would have produced it when Faith began to spread. Historical evidence exists that The Faith spread during the lifetime of eyewitnesses & opposition. Not plausible to suddenly appear after death of Apostles.
I don't think we can assume Pilate found no fault in Jesus -- certainly the gospel writers wanted everyone to believe that in order to get the Romans off their backs. Jesus was crucified for leading a rebellion against Rome, claiming to be king of the Jews. Odds are that is exactly what he did.
Yes. Thank you Dr. Craig for spreading truth! ❤️🙌🏼
Bah! Who cares if it isn't right?
He talks about The burial site having independent historic verification, but that verification is Paul's letters from the Bible? What?
Oh o..
You actually don't understand what he said at all.
What you wrote is what is called a straw man.😂
@@boison.a - If you wish to view it that way, fine. You're wrong. The reality is that it's challenging the evidence provided.
@@AllThroughALife The reason why you are saying I'm wrong is that you consider Paul's letter to the church in Corinth as the independent verification he was referring to, but that is not so.
Paul himself QUOTED an early creed which he says was passed on to him.. "I deliver to you that which I have received'.. says Paul.
Analysis of this said creed indicates (as agreed on by most historical Jesus scholars, both Christians and skeptics) as going back as far as within months of Jesus' resurrection.
In fact, the letter claimed that most of those among the 500 who he appeared to at once after his resurrection were alive. In other words, 'you can go to Jerusalem and ask them'.. implied Paul.
It is simply wrong to consider the independent verification Dr. Craig was referring to as Paul's letter..
We can find a similar creed in Paul's letter to the Philippians... that creed was clearly being quoted by Paul.. it was not his invention.
I am however very interested in listening to why you claim I'm wrong. Kindly put forth your reasons and let's discuss.
@@boison.a - And where do we have this "early creed which he says was passed on to him"? We have the original, correct?
@@boison.a - Just circling back for that evidence about the earlier creed to which you referred. Where is that available to read?
Whatever else the NT scriptures are, they certainly are a collection of Ancient Greek documents that come down us from a specific time and culture through the prism of millennia of transcription and translation and interpretation. This is objective fact and, however inspired we think they are, if we loose sight of their human history, we run the risk of creating our own myth and making God in our own immage.
Amazing, I learnt a lot
Then burn your brain and start over...you'll thank me later.
When I see such videos,the more I am convinced that I did the right thing excommunicating myself from Christianity...
Why
What parts convinced you?
Jesus was executed as a young guy, only 30. Then he came back to life. But there is no record of him anywhere? Wouldn't someone say they saw him or heard him speak other then those that believed in him.
James, Jesus' own brother did not believe in Him, neither did Saul/Paul.
The thing is, no one can "prove God" just like no one can "disprove" God. God is FAR above our finite brains and His Ways are higher than ours. We can't "figure out" God. All of our measly "logical thinking" and arguments can't even scratch the surface of God. God has provided more than enough evidence through His creation, through science, through history and through morality. It's just that some people are too stubborn to acknowledge it as God and are willfully ignorant. Atheists just don't like to accept the truth and don't like the idea of a just and moral God that will one day hold them accountable for their actions. So science is the only option. But as wonderful and powerful as science is, it simply doesn't have all the answers. It can't answer the biggest questions we have as human beings. Such as "Why do we exist"? "What is the origin of life?" "Where did the first self replicating molecule come from?" "How did living matter come from non-living matter?" Scientists still can't even explain what caused the big bang to happen in the first place. Biology still can explain those things and never will because God created life. Evolution may be able to explain what happens when you HAVE life, but it can't explain how life actually BEGAN in the first place. Being an Atheist DOES require faith. Some aspects of science are a leap of faith and in the dark. There are so many big questions left unanswered by science. Science, as wonderful and powerful as it is, simply cannot and will never be able to fully explain everything. Are you expecting God to reveal Himself to YOU? If so, that's NOT gonna happen. It doesn't work that way. You seek after HIM. That's how it works. God is not obligated to reveal Himself to anyone. Even if He did, that still doesn't mean they would submit to Him and want a relationship with Him. But there is a promise. If you truly seek Him with a sincere, honest and pure heart, He WILL reveal Himself to you. See, true Christians aren't Christians because of blind faith or intellectual belief. True Christians are Christians because they sought after God with all of their heart. Who wants to love Him, to know Him and to serve Him. To submit everything to Him 100%. That's why we have a relationship with Him. Because He revealed Himself to us. I think the issue with most Atheists (not all but most) isn't a "lack of evidence" thing. I think the main issue is because they don't WANT God to exist. They simply don't WANT to submit to God if He is real. That would mean they would have to give up a lot of the things they are doing that are wrong. Let me ask you a question, if Christianity was true, would you be a Christian? If God were to appear to you in front of your face in a dramatic display of lighting like the Arnold Schwarzenegger did in the Movie "The Terminator" and said "I'm God. I exist. Here I am." What would you do with that intellectual belief? (If you didn't just brush it off as an hallucination like some said that they would do) Would you sincerely be willing to give up your sins and your way of living for God's Ways? To serve Him and love Him for the rest of your life? Or would your attitude be like "Wow. I was wrong. You really do exist God." Then just go on with your life and operate as if He doesn't exist? If your response would be the second option, then by no means is God going to reveal Himself to you. He doesn't care about someone's intellectual belief. He wants your HEART. He wants a RELATIONSHIP.
Why do you say brother as if they were blood brothers?
He sounds like Bill Maher
Thank God for a man who has casually defeated all comers in the debating arena. The best anyone can say is Kalams argument makes no sense. Of course it makes no sense when you believe there is no Yahweh and Jesus was just an itinerant Rabbi who was killed for being a rabble rouser. Sad..
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 who did he ever defeat🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@J w 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 if god were real he would have already killed your for embarrassing him 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@J w my day has already come. You made it by being the clown you are! Thanks for that man. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@J w Are you gay? Jesus was gay! I have evidence for that
@J w I went to the jesus university just like your prophet WLG
In Acts the Jewish leaders reportedly say, “The disciples came and stole away the body”, by way of explaining away the empty tomb. This is the argument that I find the most convincing for the empty tomb. The main weakness with this argument is that we are still required to take Luke’s word for it. It’s not proof in any legal or scientific way. It’s not evidence of anything other than what a man wrote on a piece of papyrus. A man who invented a spurious genealogy and fanciful birth account at the beginning of his gospel, is certainly capable of inventing logical reasons to support the empty tomb.
You're just asserting possibilities. Not really historically satisfying.
It was not physical resurrection fundamentalism here
5:35 .. i have to stop you there Dr Craig, how can you factually claim that Jesus was buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea. The only references we have to this are in the New Testament, just because something is written in the NT does not make it true. It's a claim, not a fact.
@Juicelad There are lots of mentions of Julius Caesar from historians who were around at the time, we know the exact day of his birth and death, we have coins minted with his face on, statues of him, we know exactly what he looked like, we know who he succeeded, we know who succeeded him, there would be an enormous gap in history if you took Julius Caesar out of the picture. And, his supporters didn't make any claims about him doing incredible feats of magic, or flying up into the sky and into the clouds after his death. And he certainly didn't claim to be the son of God.
@J w
Nope, this is how myths are written.😂
@J w
The case against the existence of the empty tomb:
-no mention of the empty tomb outside of the gospels.
-no mention of Joseph or Arimathea outside of the gospels.
-no mention of the town of Arimathea outside of the gospels and no archaeological evidence that this place ever existed.
-the romans crucified hundreds of people each week.
Usually they were left to rot on the cross and then ditched in a mass grave, so they would most likely not allow that Jesus was placed in a tomb.
That was part of the punishment and there is not a single recorded exception for insurrectionists like Jesus.
-Paul, our earliest source doesn’t mention the empty tomb or Joseph or Aramithea.
-the story looks like it was invented to fulfill a prophecy "Jesus is buried with the rich“.
-the character of Joseph of Arimathea enters the story just to provide an empty tomb, then immediately leaves the story to be never heard of again. Sounds like something written by JJ Abrams.😉
-in the beginning of the life of Jesus there were Joseph and Mary... and in the end of his life there were different people called Joseph and Mary. Sounds like something George Lucas would write... it’s like poetry, it rhymes.😉
-the empty tomb is probably the most important place ever for Christians... but somehow they immediately forgot where it was. And it has never been found.😂
Where he would be buried is also prophesied in the old testament.
He covers everything but proof.
What kind of proof are you looking for ? Is he supposed to come to earth with each new generation of people . And say here I am now you can believe in me .the word has been given it is faith in him that has to come from you . That makes it all the more special and righteous. He doesn’t do parlor tricks , stick his face in the clouds to make it easy for you . He is there you just have to open your eyes and heart and accept him . God bless ✝️
@@22julip Yes, why cant he? You notice he never appears when in a modern age were we can observe him?
Faith, because there is no proof.
He doesn’t do any tricks.
@@ericbell940 I have the proof here 4 reasons Jesus burial the discovery of his empty tomb. His post Mortem appearances and the origin of the disciples belief in his resurrection, plus one more that sealed the deal for me , the people who died rather than renounce their belief in him . No one dies for a lie . Put that in your pipe and smoke it ! As Bill Buckley once told Peter Atkins who tried to challenge Bill Craig , to give reasons for belief in Jesus Resurrection . Peace my friend and God bless
@@22julip 1. So a empty tomb is proof?
2. Belief is not proof.
3. What about moslems who die for there faith?
4. Boy you certainly put me in my place with the pipe comment,
I have am question about prayer if you are interested.
@@ericbell940 I didn’t expect you to have an open mind and understand how those things I listed were facts historical facts . You don’t have to take my word but they are facts . Also you said many people died for their faith , that’s true but It’s a totally different thing to be killed for a false belief, lastly the church the Catholic Church has been around for over 2.000 years that’s a long time to worship a made up God . Hopefully someday you’ll open your eyes and heart and understand the truth. Be well !
How did jesus have a younger brother?
"the moon shall not give her light and the stars shall fall from Heaven"
I wonder what Professor Brian Cox thinks about that prediction.
(Matthew 24:29)
Yeah, let's wonder what Brian Cox (who doesn't have any relation to Biblical or Historical studies) thinks about Jesus using apocalyptic language, which is also used in Joel, Daniel, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. It's irrelevant what he thinks. That's like saying "I wonder what Barack Obama would say about the Chicago Blackhawks making the NHL playoffs".
@@100_1OO________1
"Thou shalt buy thy slaves from the heathen around you".
I wonder what Barack Obama thinks about that commandment.
(Leviticus 25:44))
@@100_1OO________1
"Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth".
I wonder what Daniel Werfel thinks of that advice.
(Matthew 6:19)
@@100_1OO________1
"Sell that thou hast and give to the poor"
I wonder what the Pope thinks of that advice.
(Matthew 19:21)
@@100_1OO________1
"Take no thought for the morrow".
I wonder what Ken Graham thinks of that advice.
(Matthew 6:34)
Lots of rationalization, no evidence.
Because u don't understand history n how historians deal with ancient narrative
@@mccaboy I teach history.
@@robertlight5227 then u have to explain yrself
@@mccaboy Sure. Do the carbon dating again. If it again comes back circa 1350 ad will u admit the Shroud is a 'work of art' as it was called when the local Bishop accepted it?
Also, provide the 1300 years of provenance to prove it is circa 35 ad.
Do you teach history in university?
I don't quite understand this guy. He defends the resurrection of Jesus but he says that Jesus understanding of the cosmos while he was on earth was primitive. In the time of Jesus people believed the earth was flat, was fixed, and the sun revolved around the earth. He says that Jesus got it wrong when he referred to Adam and Eve, Noah and the flood, and Jonah. Since Craig believes that Genesis is not history but allegory he says that Jesus because of his primitive knowledge of the origin of creation wrongly believed that Genesis was a real history. So here we have Jesus who was fully God and fully man through whom all creation was spoken into existence did not realize that the events of Genesis were just allegory. I wonder was the God in Genesis a fictional character also. All I can say is people like Craig who are considered great philosophers must lose common sense in the midst of their brain storms of philosophizing. If you find this hard to believe look up creation.com/craig-genesis-account
I might be able to partly address one of these objections. Jesus having "primitive" understanding of the cosmos is not a viable objection because 1. that's an anachronistic arbitrary label, and 2. inconsistent with the character put forward in the story. The Jesus of the Gospels may or may not have had special knowledge of the material aspects of reality, but it is certain he did not care. Dr. Craig's assertion is consistent because God incarnate or not, a core aspect of Jesus' character was that he never addressed anything outside the Kingdom of Heaven. It was irrelevant to him. So if he didn't know the earth was round, it was because he didn't care.
The scientific fact that the earth is round was derived by Eratosthenes at least 2 centuries before Christ, please do your research before commenting such naivety.
Already at the 5:32 second mark WLC made a huge mistake and it's how many people believe the resurrection happened.
I know plenty of biblical scholars who have admitted they do not believe such a thing happened.
One example would be Bart Erhman and I could list plenty more.
Point in case the resurrection of Jesus is not a universal agreed upon fact by historian's.
I believe in the empty tomb but not because of the gospel acountbut because of the evidence from the Shroud of turin.
This strikes me as an excellent synopsis of the historical arguments for the resurrection. Probably the weakest part of the presentation is in the last six minutes, where Craig states that God raising Jesus from the dead meets all six criteria for the plausibility of a historical explanation. In most cases, I think we would be inclined to say that positing the supernatural is a rather strong strike against the hypothesis in question.
So...imagine the following response: "Yeah, something weird happened alright. Maybe it was Jesus' twin brother doing some weird posturing (as Craig describes one of his opponents implausibly suggesting), or some other weird, freaky thing. But freaky things do happen in the course of natural history, and I'd rather go for the freaky *natural* thing over the freaky *supernatural* thing you're describing."
I could certainly understand this response. On the other hand...it's worth noting what the response would amount to: the antecedent naturalistic metaphysics would be driving the historical analysis. It seems that someone who was *neutral* on the metaphysic would be tempted by Craig's account.
When you have more than 500 witnesses saying they saw Jesus, is not unreasonable to conclude the supernatural event at hand. The question becomes then about the reliability of 1 Corinthians in which Paul states that claim about 500 witnesses. So you must deal with the credibility of the new testament as a historical account written in Paul's case about 3 decades after the resurrection. If you have an event is not practical to assume the supernatural but if you have multiple witnesses saying it was supernatural you have to consider the possibility of the supernatural
So how do you explain it?
@@RagingBlast2Fan Well, assuming that Craig has done his homework correctly (and I rather suspect he has), then the choice is between giving an implausible naturalistic explanation or a supernaturalistic one. For most of us in the 21st century, a supernaturalistic explanation carries the aura of implausibility as well. (Think of our first reaction to weird supernatural-ish stuff that a stranger might say which doesn't conform to our antecedent religious biases.)
Of course, there are a lot of different implausible naturalistic hypotheses out there (swoon theory, a body swap, etc.), and so if I were a skeptic on this thing, I wouldn't commit to any of them. I'd commit to some *one* of them being right, and just insist that my position is a big disjunction of all of them. So, let "INE" mean "implausible naturalistic explanation" and let "ISE" mean "implausible supernaturalistic explanation." The choice you're looking at is between the following:
Skeptical Claim: (INE1 v INE2 v INE3 v ...)
Believer's Claim: ISE
Now...which of these is more probable? That's our little quandary.
If I were playing the skeptical game, I would harp on the fact that the big disjunction of all the INEs out there would improve the overall probability as more disjuncts are added. Obviously any one INE on its own would look pretty stupid. (Swoon theory? Really?) A big disjunction of all of them is less so. And since the believer's claim (implausibly) invokes the supernatural, the skeptical approach is more plausible overall.
If I were playing the believer's game, I would attempt to provide arguments that invoking the supernatural really isn't so implausible after all--which of course takes us into the heart of a metaphysical dispute.
Three observations:
1. The skeptical game is old school--it's really just a gloss on David Hume's argument against miracles (although really Hume borrowed that argument from the deists of his day).
2. At some point, the decision about the historicity of the resurrection ceases to be about history and starts being about metaphysics.
3. I think Craig knows all of this, and to his credit (and the credit of others like him), he takes on the Humean approach while venturing into the metaphysical dispute.
But RagingBlast2Fan, to answer your question, I prefer to play the believer's game.
It is “evidence” like this that caused me to leave Christianity after 30 years of belief.
Stop exaggerating and pretending like you were a true Christian. You never had a real relationship with Jesus Christ, you never really knew Him, and you never knew His Word.
1 John 2:19-21
“These people left the faith, but they never really belonged with us; otherwise they would have stayed with us. When they left, it proved that they did not belong with us. But you who believe are not like that, for the Holy One has given you His Spirit, and all of you know the truth. So I am writing to you not because you don’t know the truth but because you know the difference between truth and lies.”
Nice try kid you just pulled the true scottsman fallacy. In other words, I have reasonable grounds to say you’re wrong. Get rekt
Well you are free to do what you want, that is true love (no force)
How can i know that these 4 facts are true? Does anyone else seach it?
You don´t, it´s all bullshit.
Great content. PRESENTATION would be so much better if he didn't have to keep reading it from notes. Definitely would have been sincere.
Utter delusional nonsense.