When people like Gary mire the conversation down in endless semantic detail, I like to take a step back and remember that these tenuous “minimal facts” and the thin lines of reasoning that extend from them are all supposed to be a justification for believing in wild supernatural phenomena. Looking at it that way, you can see how juvenile this all is. Nobody starting from square one would reason to belief in resurrections and gods and miracles because of stuff like this. NOBODY. Grown men just sit there piddling over this stuff to justify what they already came to believe in for non-intellectual reasons. There’s a minimal fact for you, Gary.
Hey, it's Zod! Love your channel. To your point: The question I always ask theists is whether they remember consciously transitioning from non belief to theism and, if so, what persuaded them. Guess how many good answers I've gotten! Suffice to say, my findings line up with a recent quip from Alex O'Connor, who said, "When you hear somebody recounting a conversion story, how often does it really begin with 'premise one?'"
I was thinking, 'This commenter not only lays it out both simply and eloquently.'. Then, I saw it was Zod and thought, 'Of course.'. Kryptonese education at its finest.
This is how I felt listening to Dr. Ryan Mullins's podcast when he had some guy on there talking about hypertime and how God could defeat evil even though it exists now by retroactively altering time such that no evil ever occurs (I'm serious, though to be fair this was Mullins's guest's position, not his own), and the guest basically admitted that as long as this idea is NOT IMPOSSIBLE (i.e. has no obvious logical contradictions), it's not irrational to be a theist. And I'm thinking, like... really? We need magical hypertime-travel wiping evil out of retroactive existence after it already hyper-happened to make Abrahamic religion make sense to you (the guess was Jewish, technically), and you're perfectly OK with this because... it's NOT IMPOSSIBLE? That's all we need, that it isn't demonstrably logically wrong? No sane person is going to nod along and say "Aha, that's true, because I cannot show that this idea is self-contradictory, it is a perfectly reasonable thing to believe might explain evil while permitting Yahweh to exist."
@@JD-wu5pfYep, my post was meant to be humorous pointing out the absurdity of him for years (decades?) claiming he's writing this voluminous tome that'll supposedly finally end all debate on the resurrection while simultaneously conceding facts. I think his minimal fact argument has been reduced from like 15 to now 5 1/2 by his own admission.
@@JD-wu5pfNo worries, I didn't take it to be grumpy or condescending. And besides, no one can be expected to be writing clearly before their 1st cup of coffee! 😊
@@JD-wu5pf I think that's totally unfair to say. Sometimes it takes a long time to prove facts, like Einstein's theory of relativity, which wasn't 6 pages long I can assure you of that, and also literally any complex historical debate. I'm not putting myself on either side of this debate, I just think you're acting as if historical studies prove everything in 6 pages, but the immense size of any history book directly disproves your point.
@@JD-wu5pf Yeah, the amount of evidence in favour of the resurrection is like the amount of "soft tissue" that supposedly shows that dinosaurs lived recently: If what the believers believe actually were the case, there would be *tons* more evidence.
(worked on his book for 35 hours a week for 14 years) Truly, impressive. Few people can claim to have devoted so much time and effort to something so completely useless.
To help defray the cost of Gary's book(s). Thanks for doing the heavy lifting, Paul, and I look forward to your first book report. BTW - I noticed that you've begun releasing podcast episodes again and I couldn't be happier. Happy Year of the Dragon!
I've been studying flat earth for 30 years for 70h every day. That's why I'm an expert on flat earth and what I say goes. Wait - what do you mean it doesn't work like that
We can't get a straight story on the assassination of JFK which happened 60 years ago. How can we possibly think we can know all about an extraordinary claim about something that happened 2000 years ago?
We apply the concept/theory of UNIFORMITARIANISM. This was coined by geologists, but has utility in almost any epistimelogical discipline. It basically means that natural processes working today, worked in the same way in the past. So, all the 'miracles' and things in the bible that require us to suspend rational belief and accept some supernatural explanation run counter to the uniformitarian theory.
Actually, we can get a straight story on the assassination of JFK. He was murdered by Lee Harvey Oswald. The trouble is that people don’t want to believe the boring truth. The same applies to the resurrection. It didn’t really happen and the stories about it were made up. But that’s boring.
I've read the first 6 chapters which covers the intro through Gary's argument for the historical Jesus. I probably won't read the rest for a while. Other than Gary's poor arguments for the historicity of Jesus, this little bit stuck out to me: ```When studying ancient Greco-Roman history, it becomes obvious that virtually all of these ancient authors recorded various miracles and other supernatural occurrences, such as healings, prophecies, omens, portents, and the like.``` (p. 115) Gary here wants to say that people should trust the gospels as historical because all historians of the time included supernatural occurrences. He includes healings and then three different words for prophecies. The issue is that prophecies have a fairly easy natural explanation. You just have a prophet make a bunch of prophecies then you just record the hits and forget the misses. It's not all that complicated. Later in the book Gary want's to say that Christians don't have to take these non-Christian supernatural claims seriously because they are not credible and he says this: ```Moreover, the similarity to the earlier New Testament miracle claims of Jesus, as well as the plain fact that healing events can actually occur without any supernatural intervention at all, leave these accounts without any real differentiation from the individual arguments for the New Testament data.``` (p. 124) Here Gary admits that reports of healings are actually not necessarily supernatural. It's very odd to me how weak his argument was in this section.
_"You just have a prophet make a bunch of prophecies then you just record the hits and forget the misses. It's not all that complicated."_ Or just have them make their prophecies after-the-fact.
The Gospels are historical evidences. Pretending they are not is against actual studies and science for witness testimonies. Your heart is the reason why you reject them, not science.
I hope your book doesn't detract from the exemplary job you do on these videos. I was indoctrinated into paranoid Christianity and your videos help me find the actual evidence of religion (or lack thereof) and expose the lies. Thankfully I was always a rebel so I naturally questioned what I was told by authority and didn't stay a believer for long. The damage religion has done on my family has been large and I've seen firsthand what happens to people who don't seek actual treatment and instead 'go to god'. Keep up the incredible work you do!
@@joe5959 Contempt for zealots making a living off of pretending some ancient anthology is "the word of god (tm)" which does NOTHING to make the world a better place and more than talking about Harry Potter or The Lord of the Rings. What WOULD make the world a better place is simply following the philosophy of that namesake: by loving and forgiving. Not one person's mental or especially physical heath has been improved by the 70 hours of work done by this blathering "Doctor's" work.
@@joe5959 If you don't want to hear evidence against your case, I don't have to listen to yours either (especially since your argument is "do your own research" right before stating you don't want to hear anything else but what you already know). One-sided arguments are not proper discussions.
I believe I've previously supplemented a post with this theme, but I'll reiterate my opinion: You know Paulogia is a worthy of being a scholar by the fact that he's pilgrimaged from having been an ordinary, run-of-the-mill TH-camr (in terms of notablity) to combating the likes of fundamental Christian scholar Gary Habermass in less than a decade. This fact is profoundly euphoric for a mind teeming with skepticism, such as myself.
@hackman669 Thank you immensely for your sarcastic bite! 🥳🤔😕💛If you desire to consume my content, then proceed to The Infographics Show's video on Jesus' resurrection. My comment is categorized under the "newest" portion of that video's comment section.
Several times on Paulogia’s videos I have listed multiple examples of non-Christians dying for their deeply held beliefs; therefore using the same logic to prove that those beliefs must be true, else why would they die for them. And since their numbers were so much greater, perhaps they are even more true. The outraged responses are as consistent as they are hypocritical. Attacking the individuals involved (“How can we be certain they were dying for that belief at the second of death”). “Their beliefs are automatically false since they don’t agree with my church”. And “only those who die for my church are real martyrs.” The myopic denialism of others beliefs is sad, but all too common. “We believe it because a single source tells us.” Paulogia brings this up so often. Keep up the good work.
Paul - never underestimate the contribution you have made (and continue to make) to rational discourse and against superstitious thinking. Over time, many thousands of people will see your content and it will contribute to their decision to leave the faith they inherited and embrace reality.
Evangelical Christian donations, probably. They're quicker to give money, and less likely to do due diligence than most publishing companies. Though paying Trump's legal fees is probably a big draw on this resource right now...
I am guessing his intention was to fill 1000 pages with crappe and then we are just supposed to “take his word for it” since you’re “ unwilling to read the whole thing”
I believe I've previously supplemented a post with this theme, but I'll reiterate my opinion: You know Paulogia is a worthy of being a scholar by the fact that he's pilgrimaged from having been an ordinary, run-of-the-mill TH-camr (in terms of notablity) to combating the likes of fundamental Christian scholar Gary Habermass in less than a decade. This fact is profoundly euphoric for a mind teeming with skepticism, such as myself.
I think he worked for those years at a christian University as "researcher". Thus also the research assistent staff (young graduates earning their first positions and such). Wikipedia opines: "He is distinguished research professor and chair of the department of philosophy and theology at Liberty University." Plenty of money for zero results there.
I am in the club of those who have lost a child. I see my son Seth all the time. I see him on the street, in my dreams, on occasion, I can smell his hair and its' been 5 years. My fellow lost child club members all report something similar.
A thousand pages written on minimal facts ? Gary's work is like the product of those tailors in the story about the Emperor who spent all his money on fabric thot only those of the purest heart could see. And here we have "young Paul" pointing out that this "Doctor" has no clothes/arguments !! Bravo Paulogia. Bravo !!
@@LuciferAlmighty Nothing wrong with words like "evolutionists" or "auditing" or "clear" either, but if I see them on a cover of a book written by-insiders-for-insiders, I doubt the veracity of every claim made in that book.
@@LuciferAlmighty It's a grammatical mistake, the word is being used incorrectly. It is not 'off topic', as that particular error is mostly used by liars. But even setting that aside, a grammatical/spelling error in the title of a book, does not bode well for the quality of the contents.
"...I've caught hundreds of snakes and bit hundreds of times..." - - This doesn't speak very highly of his ability to learn from his experiences. He has stepped on "32,000" nails? I hope he decided to invest in a pair of boots with steel soles. And both statements show Gary's penchant for hyperbole.
Your arrogance will be the reason why those snake bites killed you, but not him. Don’t test God’s patience, because he will allow the venom to destroy you.
There are plenty of people alive right now who make all kinds of eye-witness claims that I don't believe. Why am I expected to believe supposed eye-witness accounts from people who lived (supposedly) 2000 years ago? And I'm not obligated to provide an alternate explanation. If a claim is outrageous, I simply don't believe it. It's not up me to prove it wrong.
32 hours per page might be the record for the slowest writing ever seen. I should be expecting PhD scientific paper level writing on every page, but I'm actually expecting fancy word salad and half-truths. Have I just become too cynical?
I am admitedly sad that you did not include Gary's claim that Paul was able to verify that he saw the Risen Jesus with Peter and James on the basis of what he looked like, but you made me happy with his snake-hunting and nail-stepping stories.
@@goldenalt3166 _"Paul doesn't say what he witnessed."_ Acts 22:6: “About noon as I came near Damascus, suddenly a bright light from heaven flashed around me." Of course Jesus is a fictional character.
I just don't believe Someone can work 70 hours a week for 14 years. I did it for 6 months and was so tired I was beginning to think I had brain cancer. Took 2 days good rest to recover and realize I was tired. Granted it was a more physical job but I was also younger and healthier than Gary
Depends on how he defines work. Remember, he might also be counting interviews, time spent at church to 'review' the material, lunches, travel to the library, getting distracted on an interesting historical story from roughly the same time period... I can see him certainly technically claiming that W.
My father in law is a physician workaholic. His work is a core part of who he is. He worked 60+ hours per week for decades. He “retired” about 7 years ago and now only works “half time” at 40 hours per week at 73 years old.
Aside from the fact that people tend to exaggerate these things, if he considers "research" (i.e., reading stuff) to be "work" in this regard, then it's totally no big deal.
35 hours a week for 14 years..... Just to have it masterfully ripped to shreds in less than 22 minutes by Paulogia. From this day forward, any wasted time in my life will forever be known as having Habermased my time. Sitting around Habermasing instead of working. Roll a blunt and Habermas. All that time I Habermased dealing with my crazy ol baby momma who still ain't changed, still more productive than the time he took writing his book.
Did he miss this? 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 KJV For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; [4] And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: [5] And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: [6] After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. [7] After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. [8] And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
I would love to see you and Gary have a direct chat! That would give great "closure" on both sides, I feel. It's been a joy watching this all unfold throughout the years. Thanks & Cheers! 💖
You can watch the conversation between Habermas and PineCreek Doug. That's probably how a discussion with Paul would look like... Paul asks short little questions and then Habermas rambles along for 10 minutes until he forgets what the question was.
@@ramigilneas9274 Habermas, WLC and Jordan Peterson are one of thos trinities which overlap with other fundamentalist/literalist circles. I always thought of WLC as a deactivated JP. All three tend to grease themselves up then proceed to ramble when faced with the simplest questions.
I believe I've previously supplemented a post with this theme, but I'll reiterate my opinion: You know Paulogia is a worthy of being a scholar by the fact that he's pilgrimaged from having been an ordinary, run-of-the-mill TH-camr (in terms of notablity) to combating the likes of fundamental Christian scholar Gary Habermass in less than a decade. This fact is profoundly euphoric for a mind teeming with skepticism, such as myself.
As he was writing this greatly anticipated (at least by fellow apologists) multi-volume tome, I wonder how much time Gary Habermas spent looking at himself in the mirror and saying, "Yeah, that's right bitches, I'm a real bible scholar". We should be clear and honest and say that the sources avaialble to him have been avaialble to everyone for a very long time and yet still the resurrection remains in doubt. I wonder why 😁
@Paulogia: I’m so glad about the direction your channel has taken in the past few videos. I can’t overstate how happy I am about the quality and type of video you’ve been uploading lately.
Family Guy Habermas is an endless source of comedy. Thank you, Paul, for wading through this aeroplane chock of a book so that we don't have to - not that I ever would have, but I am curious as to just how minimal Gary's facts are.
@perfectblindguy bro I'm in the same boat, it's a very weird opening statement... who counts the nails you step on and how stupid are you to do this 32,000 times... and then brag about it...? Lol so many questions...
@@mattf5935 you actually believe hes stepped on 32,000 nails...? Even if it's true, what does that say about him...? Does he work at a nail factory with snakes and just fucks around to find cause hes into that...? Who would even brag about this...? Is so outlandish of a statement that you simply cant believe him...
I believe I've previously supplemented a post with this theme, but I'll reiterate my opinion: You know Paulogia is a worthy of being a scholar by the fact that he's pilgrimaged from having been an ordinary, run-of-the-mill TH-camr (in terms of notablity) to combating the likes of fundamental Christian scholar Gary Habermass in less than a decade. This fact is profoundly euphoric for a mind teeming with skepticism, such as myself.
I believe I've previously supplemented a post with this theme, but I'll reiterate my opinion: You know Paulogia is a worthy of being a scholar by the fact that he's pilgrimaged from having been an ordinary, run-of-the-mill TH-camr (in terms of notablity) to combating the likes of fundamental Christian scholar Gary Habermass in less than a decade. This fact is profoundly euphoric for a mind teeming with skepticism, such as myself.
Well one of the minimal facts is that he used to be alive, and that he has recently been seen alive again. I don't know where he is now, but would anyone really hallucinate? There were even group appearances. His resurrection is clearly the only reasonable explanation! Hey, this apologetics stuff is pretty easy. If only I didn't have this inconvenient atheistic moral compass...
I believe I've previously supplemented a post with this theme, but I'll reiterate my opinion: You know Paulogia is a worthy of being a scholar by the fact that he's pilgrimaged from having been an ordinary, run-of-the-mill TH-camr (in terms of notablity) to combating the likes of fundamental Christian scholar Gary Habermass in less than a decade. This fact is profoundly euphoric for a mind teeming with skepticism, such as myself.
For someone who has spent 70 hours a week over 14 years, at least half of those on this one book, as well as teaching at 15 graduate schools on top of his main university of employment and other books and articles he’s published in that time it makes you wonder how much time Gary spends with his students. Given how many students are enrolled at his university compared to staff. Only 700 odd full time staff and 3000 part time for 96,000 students. The university I attended had over 3000 staff for around 10,000 undergrads and 6000 post grads.
I'm not sure having Gary Habermas turn up to give a lecture would really improve the academic experience of the students or the quality of their education.
Paul, my (Christian) wife and I have been following you since your first posted videos with ShannonQ, and I have to say your fundamental decency and kindness have been an inspiration to me in my journey toward addressing the programming under which I was brought up in a fundamentalist evangelical home. I don't know how I can thank you enough for all the time you've helped me express my skepticism of the claims of apologists to my evangelical family without the bitter rancor the apologists teach their flocks are just emotional reactions to The Truth ™️. If I could fund your research and publication efforts, I would without hesitation. Thank you for everything you do. Also, take good care of Shannon. She's way out of your league but I can't think of another man on earth who deserves her affection more than you do. Cheers and another round of thanks, my brother in Skepticism.
Taking "the red pill" is sooo liberating. Welcome to reality. That evangelicals don't drink real wine is a great metaphor for them "taking the blue pill" and continuing their illusion. (Hope you don't mind The Matrix movie analogy) 🙂
@@onedaya_martian1238 I'm now 47, and was kicked out of my evangelical home at age 17 after coming out as bisexual and an atheist.... But mainly for refusing to attend our pastor's recommended conversion therapy Christian camp. I went on to get an evolutionary biology degree, which led to meeting my wife, who is also a biologist. She's the one who taught me there are Christians who know the science and choose to believe in religion on their own terms. Seeing the Evangelical Cult for what it really is did bring me some peace, once the military helped me become independent and self-reliant. I've had three decades to put it behind me, but I still have relatives and even siblings who won't talk to me because I'm openly queer and refuse to let them lie about us in front of me.
So, we waited 14 years for that? I suspect that Peter, Paul and Mary provided us with vastly better evidence for the existence of Puff the Magic Dragon
I have to say I think you're well on your way to developing it. You've been researching the topic for years for your videos. Primarily, learning how to write a book will be the hardest part for you if I had to guess. But if I had to request one thing it would be that I think you should be sure to lay out the goal of the book as not some necessary naturalistic explanation but one of the most reasonable inferences from the strong and available evidence. Good luck.
@@Loki- I agree. I was noting that since Paulogia is offering a potential answer it would be good to clarify it as one possibility since many may wish to pretend like he is presenting it as the only or a necessary answer of how things must've gone. It is just an idea of how I thought he could head off refutations that would miss the point. That a naturalistic explanation of the supposed facts can be made. Which many theist wish to say one cannot be made and that as such a supernatural explanation is warranted.
In terms of getting help, maybe lay out the process and what you could use help with? For example, if you needed transcription of your video replies into coherent paragraphs on the subject. Then just put up what you need so those of us with a little extra time and the right skillset could help.
Many more people claim to have seen Elvis alive after his death, than claim to have seen the resurrected Jesus. I say we have maximal facts for Elvis' resurrection
Edit: it doesn't take away from my commentary below, but is your minimal witness theory basically that it would help if it wasn't just a guy or two claiming the resurrection? Like if a whole town saw him revive and have multiple different diaries, historical books, etc that that would cement this claim better? 5:37 I have family members who believed they saw a family member recently after they had passed away. I even had moments of having to take second glances at people who I thought resembled them. How is fact 2 a special circumstance for Jesus? Especially considering they worshipped the guy besides just loving him. When a normal phenomena occurs I believe that's less likely to be a miracle. Maybe fact 2 is summarized and I'm missing conversations they had with Jesus in which case I also have a suspicion on that claim. I've had many dreams with conversations with loved ones who passed away. I also have had incredibly vivid unreal dreams. I believe it's more likely a combination of a consequence of the psychedelic power of the mind and these people aren't here to testify on their account. We get these stories passed down by banana phone, after all.
Of course I get to the end and you clarify hallucination possibility which reminded me of your videos I've watched on this which has been a bit ago. I usually comment as watching because I don't want to forget, but then getting answered by finishing the video is always the risk! Lol
@Loki - We have Greco-Roman literature in which a lot of elements from Homer, Euripides, and Ovid are incorporated. Not to forget that parts from Josephus are copied as well. So the idea that this is anything but Greco-Roman literature is entertaining, but without evidence. So any character in these stories are like Harry Potter and Hermione. By the way, Hermione can't tell us that Harry is a mage as she is a fictional character and this is what we find in the unnamed fan fiction we call gospels.
Dear Paul, you could write an article and submit it to a peer-reviewed journal (maybe co-authored with the help of a friend scholar). A short peer-reviewed article in a respectable journal carries more weight than a 5-kg non-peer-reviewed book 😁
I honestly don't think it is. They didn't logic their way into it so they won't logic their way out of it, they make it a huge part of their life and identity, and they surround themselves with like-minded people. They have no reason to stop.
It was funny watching him "squirm" just trying to explain his "facts" to another apologist. Imagine what he would sound like trying to defend his claims (which have already been refuted numerous times) to a real historian.
@@ObjectiveEthics He just gets angry and offended that people question him. He's got this idea that his pile of minimal facts arguments is so perfected, purely because of his personal investment in them, that to question them is an insult. If he tolerates it at all it will be from a vastly more credentialed expert than himself, and even then I doubt he would aquiesce on any front. Of cource, when he started this it was the 12 minimal facts. This was reduced over time until we have what we have now. And the premise is that these are facts that skeptics and believers can agree on, which is not true.
Something about James (brother of Jesus) I don't get and please correct me if I'm wrong. He was a skeptic or non believer and then decided is brother was in fact the son of god and converted? But growing up didn't Mary and Jman explain to him about his Mums miraculous conception and his brother being a deity? Growing up together James was totally oblivious to the fact that his brother, was not only pretty cool, had nice, wise things to say, but was a fucking god? THE god? Not much communication going on in that household.
_"Not much communication going on in that household."_ Jesus had four brothers and multiple sisters. You'd think that he would have told them that he is literally god and created the universe by himself.
@davcan18 I think you have an exceptionally strong argument. Along these lines: • Mary became pregnant while unmarried. Her villagers either believed that this was a virgin birth, or they didn't. If they generally did, then how to explain Jesus's own brother's skepticism? And how to explain (Mark 6:4-13) that Jesus _could not_ perform miracles there? That Mark passage says that her fellow villagers were skeptical of Jesus's divinity, so they must _not_ have believed that Mary's pregnancy was miraculous. But then they must have thought that she was pregnant by a man not yet her husband. Was this not a deeply shameful taboo? How did Mary & Joseph avoid expulsion or even stoning? • How is it possible that Mary and Joseph, _the two best parents who ever lived,_ forgot their child, the Creator of the Universe, behind in Jerusalem _for an entire day!?_ And he apparently took no notice of their departure either! (Luke 2:41-52) • We are taught that Mary & Joseph were poor. So what did they do with all that gold, frankincense and myrrh? (Matthew 2:11)
Paul and Peter earned the belief by living people who saw them perform curses and miracles. You are literally using the fact they are dead to claim “oh they had no evidence for it”. George Washington is a man of God who many wild stories that were true and witnessed by others, who spoke of prophecy, but even though he was the man to found a successful nation that overcame the world, you would refuse to believe no matter how recent he is to only be under 300 years apart from us. When you die, no one would even know you even exist. And it’s a fitting end you put yourself into.
Every preacher out their thinks they are the Peter Jackman version of the con artist P.T. Barnum. And it was Barnum who is claimed to have said "There is a sucker born every minute.", which is why we see these megachurch and televangelists working to grab every dime from those folks....'cause if they don't ....someone else will.
Somehow, Gary's book makes me think of the scene in The Good Place, where Michael says that he could read all of Earth's literature in an hour, 'but this took me two weeks to get through. I mean ... it's so convoluted...' Granted, I haven't read it... but...
You can always self-publish the book. What matters is how well a theory is defended. Of course, this defence must follow academic principles to be taken seriously, for instance: - Weigh your hypotheses against contrary hypotheses. - Construct logical, sound arguments. - Use the evidence we have, as we have it. - Mention sources (primary, secondary) and the latest bibliography. - And, most importantly, use scientific methodology (history, textual criticism) and a multidisciplinary approach. Some core problems I think Minimal Witnesses hypothesis should deal with: - Given the fact that the gospels are literary constructs, not historical accounts, how can we know they used oral traditions or previous written materials from the time of Jesus? And, if they used them, how can we tell them apart from the evangelists’ (whoever they were) own inventive? - How can we know who Jesus’ disciples were if Paul (our first source) doesn’t mention any, only apostles who, according to Paul, only knew about Jesus from hallucinations and scripture? - In essence, what evidence do we have of any witnesses to Jesus’ life and/or death?
How, how, how... do you spill 32,000 hours of work and dedication into a 1000 page magnum opus and never find out that 'evidence' is a mass noun and 'evidences' is a verb? Im sorry - whats D O C T O R Gary's ph.d in, again? -And why didnt he use his honorific in his book _which he needs publicity for??_ Dafuq is this guy doing?
Paul, your Minimal Witness hypothesis is the most coherent and compelling explanation of the 'Minimal Facts' that ive seen. Love your content. Hope you and Shannon and family are well. 🖖
The group resurrection appearances are listed here by Paul: 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 KJV For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; [4] And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: [5] And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: [6] After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. [7] After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. [8] And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
@JohnKerr-bq3vo None in the Bible are forged. This is all wishful thinking on your part because you must be drawing the conclusion you want to see based on perhaps certain pieces of information not accessible to history. This is the conclusion you want to believe, which means you have strong bias and so aren't thinking clearly about the subject.
I would love an episode on the politics of how a Pharisee, Paul, was able to obtain the political power to “persecute Christians”, whatever that means. Was he given the power to issue death sentences to Christians, for example? Was there some kind of already established alignment or agreement between the Roman Empire and some elements within the Israelite internal political structure?
I love how with no money and no staff you still manage to present an intellectually honest proposal that is open to critical scrutiny and well sourced. Something that thousands of hours do not appear to have achieved for Habermas...
Intellectually honest is a huge stretch. You guys go into this stuff already "knowing" it's fake and asserting it's fake before ever reading or watching any piece of media and then accusing Christians of being the biased ones. It'd be hilarious if it wasn't so tragic.
@ryanbrown4053 thanks for the engagement. I would like to know what you find to be intellectually dishonest about Paul's approach here? To mention nothing of the conclusions of eithers work I see Habermas overstating a case in ways that Paul does not. This fact I deem evident from the occastions when Habermas, on being challenged on the providence of his sources, he has on multiple occasions deflected with variations on "OK I don't even need that to make my point" (Paul Paul plays some of these responses on videos on his channel). If Habermas can dismiss his own arguments so easily as irrelevant then the fact he lists them as evidentiary pillars would seem to be an attempt to impress upon the reader that they are more substantive than they in fact are. This I deem indicative of intellectual dishonesty. If I have missed something in Paul's approach I would really appreciate you pointing it out. However, as I see it, Paul has made no other claim than that he has identofied a plausible hypothesis, consistent with scripture, of how the idea of the resurrection could have been established without supernatural intervention. Thanks.
I don't think we will be able to finance your minimal facts magnum opus with superchats but let us know what sort of numbers we will have to post to get you close
If you're willing to read Gary's book and cover it for us, the least I can do is pay for the damn thing.
Howie! That's so generous. Thank you.
Wow. Awesome
So now if a thousand people bought you a book, that would be generous to.
Dang! You, my good sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.
@@ronaldlindeman6136If they all donated $75. That would be pretty generous yeah
When people like Gary mire the conversation down in endless semantic detail, I like to take a step back and remember that these tenuous “minimal facts” and the thin lines of reasoning that extend from them are all supposed to be a justification for believing in wild supernatural phenomena. Looking at it that way, you can see how juvenile this all is. Nobody starting from square one would reason to belief in resurrections and gods and miracles because of stuff like this. NOBODY. Grown men just sit there piddling over this stuff to justify what they already came to believe in for non-intellectual reasons.
There’s a minimal fact for you, Gary.
Hey, it's Zod! Love your channel.
To your point: The question I always ask theists is whether they remember consciously transitioning from non belief to theism and, if so, what persuaded them. Guess how many good answers I've gotten! Suffice to say, my findings line up with a recent quip from Alex O'Connor, who said, "When you hear somebody recounting a conversion story, how often does it
really begin with 'premise one?'"
I was thinking, 'This commenter not only lays it out both simply and eloquently.'. Then, I saw it was Zod and thought, 'Of course.'. Kryptonese education at its finest.
Here is a minimal fact.
-In some of the earliest post resurrection stories about Jesus some of his closest followers don’t recognize Jesus.
One fun exercise would be trying to check what other supernatural claims are true based on these standards.
This is how I felt listening to Dr. Ryan Mullins's podcast when he had some guy on there talking about hypertime and how God could defeat evil even though it exists now by retroactively altering time such that no evil ever occurs (I'm serious, though to be fair this was Mullins's guest's position, not his own), and the guest basically admitted that as long as this idea is NOT IMPOSSIBLE (i.e. has no obvious logical contradictions), it's not irrational to be a theist. And I'm thinking, like... really? We need magical hypertime-travel wiping evil out of retroactive existence after it already hyper-happened to make Abrahamic religion make sense to you (the guess was Jewish, technically), and you're perfectly OK with this because... it's NOT IMPOSSIBLE? That's all we need, that it isn't demonstrably logically wrong? No sane person is going to nod along and say "Aha, that's true, because I cannot show that this idea is self-contradictory, it is a perfectly reasonable thing to believe might explain evil while permitting Yahweh to exist."
Gary Habermas - the man whose resurrection book kept getting longer while his list of minimal facts for it kept getting shorter.
@@JD-wu5pfYep, my post was meant to be humorous pointing out the absurdity of him for years (decades?) claiming he's writing this voluminous tome that'll supposedly finally end all debate on the resurrection while simultaneously conceding facts. I think his minimal fact argument has been reduced from like 15 to now 5 1/2 by his own admission.
@@JD-wu5pfNo worries, I didn't take it to be grumpy or condescending. And besides, no one can be expected to be writing clearly before their 1st cup of coffee! 😊
@@dougt7580that’s some truth! I’ve embarrassed myself a few times writing something “spicy” before coffee
@@JD-wu5pf I think that's totally unfair to say. Sometimes it takes a long time to prove facts, like Einstein's theory of relativity, which wasn't 6 pages long I can assure you of that, and also literally any complex historical debate. I'm not putting myself on either side of this debate, I just think you're acting as if historical studies prove everything in 6 pages, but the immense size of any history book directly disproves your point.
@@JD-wu5pf Yeah, the amount of evidence in favour of the resurrection is like the amount of "soft tissue" that supposedly shows that dinosaurs lived recently: If what the believers believe actually were the case, there would be *tons* more evidence.
"World's best resurrection scholar" is akin to being the foremost authority on Prometheus's liver condition.
Somebody has to be!
ROFLOL
That's brilliant, wish I'd thought of it.
it ain't good, usually.
Excellent reference. Well done
(worked on his book for 35 hours a week for 14 years)
Truly, impressive. Few people can claim to have devoted so much time and effort to something so completely useless.
reminds of that onion skit about the man who devoted his life to studying anteaters.
At least anteaters are real
If he'd taken a few more seconds to run it through a calculator, he'd realize he'd only spent 25,480 hours on it, just over 20% less than his claim.
That's roughly three or four times longer than it would take a moderately determined person to get a PhD. Call me cynical but I have my doubts.
Hey now, Duke Nukem Forever happened
He's like a professional Bigfoot hunter. At least they get to go camping.
Paul :"I won't offer a critique of the book until I've read the entire thing through at least once.
Gary : "I should have made it longer....."
I'm surprised he published it. There is no possible motivation other than it being true. 😊
👏👏👏👏
🤣🤣🤣
@@goldenalt3166 criterion from embarrassment
Well volume 2 still to be released later this year.
To help defray the cost of Gary's book(s). Thanks for doing the heavy lifting, Paul, and I look forward to your first book report.
BTW - I noticed that you've begun releasing podcast episodes again and I couldn't be happier. Happy Year of the Dragon!
Thank you so much for the support! And yeah, sorry for that podcast hiatus.
I'll contribute as well!! You're doing the Flying Spaghetti Monster's work!!🤗
Thank you so much, dude!
R'amen!
The fact the book uses the word "evidences" in the title is already a huge red flag!
Evidences is a word
Honestly, I think it's a fine word, it's a shorter way to say "pieces of evidence". But yes, it does sound wrong and dumb when you hear it.
TalkOrigins talks about the "evidences" for macroevolution.
@@LuciferAlmighty 'Evidence' is an uncountable noun. Use of the plural is both awkward and inappropriate in ordinary English.
@dougfraser77 evidences is a word in English. Nothing wrong with it, it's a valid word.
I've been studying flat earth for 30 years for 70h every day.
That's why I'm an expert on flat earth and what I say goes.
Wait - what do you mean it doesn't work like that
since the earth is flat, the days are 87 hours long and it works like that. wait...
You could wake up one hour early and make it 71h every day
Damn that's a lot of youtube
The Earth IS flat. And the Sun is a giant Destructo Disk.
That's exactly how it works....lol
We can't get a straight story on the assassination of JFK which happened 60 years ago. How can we possibly think we can know all about an extraordinary claim about something that happened 2000 years ago?
Exactly!!!!!!!!!
Because ....🎶the bible tells us so🎶..............🫠
We apply the concept/theory of UNIFORMITARIANISM.
This was coined by geologists, but has utility in almost any epistimelogical discipline. It basically means that natural processes working today, worked in the same way in the past.
So, all the 'miracles' and things in the bible that require us to suspend rational belief and accept some supernatural explanation run counter to the uniformitarian theory.
Actually, we can get a straight story on the assassination of JFK. He was murdered by Lee Harvey Oswald. The trouble is that people don’t want to believe the boring truth.
The same applies to the resurrection. It didn’t really happen and the stories about it were made up. But that’s boring.
Been screaming this for years!!!
I've read the first 6 chapters which covers the intro through Gary's argument for the historical Jesus. I probably won't read the rest for a while. Other than Gary's poor arguments for the historicity of Jesus, this little bit stuck out to me:
```When studying ancient Greco-Roman history, it becomes obvious that virtually all of these ancient authors recorded various miracles and other supernatural occurrences, such as healings, prophecies, omens, portents, and the like.``` (p. 115)
Gary here wants to say that people should trust the gospels as historical because all historians of the time included supernatural occurrences. He includes healings and then three different words for prophecies. The issue is that prophecies have a fairly easy natural explanation. You just have a prophet make a bunch of prophecies then you just record the hits and forget the misses. It's not all that complicated.
Later in the book Gary want's to say that Christians don't have to take these non-Christian supernatural claims seriously because they are not credible and he says this:
```Moreover, the similarity to the earlier New Testament miracle claims of Jesus, as well as the plain fact that healing events can actually occur without any supernatural intervention at all, leave these accounts without any real differentiation from the individual arguments for the New Testament data.``` (p. 124)
Here Gary admits that reports of healings are actually not necessarily supernatural. It's very odd to me how weak his argument was in this section.
Yikes. Great point.
Special pleading
_"You just have a prophet make a bunch of prophecies then you just record the hits and forget the misses. It's not all that complicated."_
Or just have them make their prophecies after-the-fact.
@@fred_derf
Arseophecies - when flatulence is mistaken for words.
The Gospels are historical evidences. Pretending they are not is against actual studies and science for witness testimonies.
Your heart is the reason why you reject them, not science.
I hope your book doesn't detract from the exemplary job you do on these videos. I was indoctrinated into paranoid Christianity and your videos help me find the actual evidence of religion (or lack thereof) and expose the lies.
Thankfully I was always a rebel so I naturally questioned what I was told by authority and didn't stay a believer for long. The damage religion has done on my family has been large and I've seen firsthand what happens to people who don't seek actual treatment and instead 'go to god'.
Keep up the incredible work you do!
Those are kind words. Thank you. Well done for escaping the maze.
Matrix? :) @@Paulogia
@@joe5959 So you're claiming to have evidence? Well, why hide it? Present it if you have it.
Otherwise, the null position.
@@joe5959 Contempt for zealots making a living off of pretending some ancient anthology is "the word of god (tm)" which does NOTHING to make the world a better place and more than talking about Harry Potter or The Lord of the Rings.
What WOULD make the world a better place is simply following the philosophy of that namesake: by loving and forgiving. Not one person's mental or especially physical heath has been improved by the 70 hours of work done by this blathering "Doctor's" work.
@@joe5959 If you don't want to hear evidence against your case, I don't have to listen to yours either (especially since your argument is "do your own research" right before stating you don't want to hear anything else but what you already know). One-sided arguments are not proper discussions.
I can cover shipping. Lol. Thanks Paul. Excellent work as usual.
Deal! very generous
32000 hours of confirmation bias. What a waste.
I believe I've previously supplemented a post with this theme, but I'll reiterate my opinion:
You know Paulogia is a worthy of being a scholar by the fact that he's pilgrimaged from having been an ordinary, run-of-the-mill TH-camr (in terms of notablity) to combating the likes of fundamental Christian scholar Gary Habermass in less than a decade. This fact is profoundly euphoric for a mind teeming with skepticism, such as myself.
So another tv pastor writes a book. How original.🙄
@@hackman669lol U better buy it if U want to make heaven
@hackman669 Thank you immensely for your sarcastic bite! 🥳🤔😕💛If you desire to consume my content, then proceed to The Infographics Show's video on Jesus' resurrection. My comment is categorized under the "newest" portion of that video's comment section.
@@BenjaminEaster-b8b hi 🙂 why Jesus not showing to everyone when he resurrected
It's sad to see someone so proud of having completely wasted their life.
dont forget his afterlife.. eternity beckons.. hahah.. poor wife.. hope they are not reunited in heaven...BORING
Several times on Paulogia’s videos I have listed multiple examples of non-Christians dying for their deeply held beliefs; therefore using the same logic to prove that those beliefs must be true, else why would they die for them. And since their numbers were so much greater, perhaps they are even more true.
The outraged responses are as consistent as they are hypocritical. Attacking the individuals involved (“How can we be certain they were dying for that belief at the second of death”). “Their beliefs are automatically false since they don’t agree with my church”. And “only those who die for my church are real martyrs.”
The myopic denialism of others beliefs is sad, but all too common.
“We believe it because a single source tells us.” Paulogia brings this up so often. Keep up the good work.
Got to agree.
Paul - never underestimate the contribution you have made (and continue to make) to rational discourse and against superstitious thinking. Over time, many thousands of people will see your content and it will contribute to their decision to leave the faith they inherited and embrace reality.
Who the heck was paying him for 14 years? That's a big advance.
Evangelical Christian donations, probably. They're quicker to give money, and less likely to do due diligence than most publishing companies. Though paying Trump's legal fees is probably a big draw on this resource right now...
I am guessing his intention was to fill 1000 pages with crappe and then we are just supposed to “take his word for it” since you’re “ unwilling to read the whole thing”
I believe I've previously supplemented a post with this theme, but I'll reiterate my opinion:
You know Paulogia is a worthy of being a scholar by the fact that he's pilgrimaged from having been an ordinary, run-of-the-mill TH-camr (in terms of notablity) to combating the likes of fundamental Christian scholar Gary Habermass in less than a decade. This fact is profoundly euphoric for a mind teeming with skepticism, such as myself.
I think he worked for those years at a christian University as "researcher". Thus also the research assistent staff (young graduates earning their first positions and such).
Wikipedia opines: "He is distinguished research professor and chair of the department of philosophy and theology at Liberty University."
Plenty of money for zero results there.
@@astrinymris9953 I had trouble getting through "to do due diligence". Quite a tongue twister. 😀
I am in the club of those who have lost a child. I see my son Seth all the time. I see him on the street, in my dreams, on occasion, I can smell his hair and its' been 5 years. My fellow lost child club members all report something similar.
Virtual hugs through the internet.
Yeah, ive procrastinated on projects when I don't like how the results are coming out. I understand, Gary, i really do.
A thousand pages written on minimal facts ? Gary's work is like the product of those tailors in the story about the Emperor who spent all his money on fabric thot only those of the purest heart could see. And here we have "young Paul" pointing out that this "Doctor" has no clothes/arguments !!
Bravo Paulogia. Bravo !!
It doesn't bode well when the word "evidences" appears on the cover of a book that supposedly deals with evidence.
Nothing wrong with the word evidences.
@@LuciferAlmightyAs a word, no. But "On the resurrection: Evidences" doesn't make grammatical sense.
@@TheUltrahypnotoad off topic much
@@LuciferAlmighty Nothing wrong with words like "evolutionists" or "auditing" or "clear" either, but if I see them on a cover of a book written by-insiders-for-insiders, I doubt the veracity of every claim made in that book.
@@LuciferAlmighty It's a grammatical mistake, the word is being used incorrectly.
It is not 'off topic', as that particular error is mostly used by liars.
But even setting that aside, a grammatical/spelling error in the title of a book, does not bode well for the quality of the contents.
1000 pages seems like a written gish galloping.
"...I've caught hundreds of snakes and bit hundreds of times..." - - This doesn't speak very highly of his ability to learn from his experiences.
He has stepped on "32,000" nails? I hope he decided to invest in a pair of boots with steel soles.
And both statements show Gary's penchant for hyperbole.
Sounds like more of a lie than hyperbole.
@@robertwarner-ev7wphe probably took a snake hunting tour once in the Everglades
Oh!.... Sorry... I thought he said "snails"! 🤣
Your arrogance will be the reason why those snake bites killed you, but not him. Don’t test God’s patience, because he will allow the venom to destroy you.
@@justice8718 Wow, you mean timberry was killed by a snakebite? I don't understand why you're replying to him.
There are plenty of people alive right now who make all kinds of eye-witness claims that I don't believe. Why am I expected to believe supposed eye-witness accounts from people who lived (supposedly) 2000 years ago?
And I'm not obligated to provide an alternate explanation. If a claim is outrageous, I simply don't believe it. It's not up me to prove it wrong.
Exactly!!!
It makes me smile every time i hear, " for the bible tells me so" jingle!!
Well, if you need a Paulogia convert named James to proclaim your truths… At your Service 😊
Sure, I'll call you brother!
You don't happen to have a brother named Jesus, do you?
@@IanM-id8or yes, folks will say I witness... man I didn't see nutt'n unless cash, wire, cheq or money order I'll see whatev you want
@@IanM-id8or Only a gardener, unfortunately.
To help facilitate you writing that book, or whatever you decide to do instead. Thanks for the great work you do. 😊
That's amazing! Thank you!
32 hours per page might be the record for the slowest writing ever seen. I should be expecting PhD scientific paper level writing on every page, but I'm actually expecting fancy word salad and half-truths. Have I just become too cynical?
He is a scholar, but he is also paid to make people believe. He will of course try to convince people of things that are not actually true.
George R. R. Martin: Hold my beer.
No, you are right.
No. Gary is more or less that way. Can sometimes be too esoteric.
@@raptorcrasherinc.9823 When is the Bible ever wrong about you?
I am admitedly sad that you did not include Gary's claim that Paul was able to verify that he saw the Risen Jesus with Peter and James on the basis of what he looked like, but you made me happy with his snake-hunting and nail-stepping stories.
Given the gospels describe resurrected Jesus as changed or unrecognized, it's pretty dumb to even claim that Paul's Jesus looked like Peter's Jesus.
He looked like DB Cooper but with longer hair and a beard
Paul only asserted that Jesus was a bright light.
None of the Gospel authors witnessed jesus.
@twitherspoon8954 Paul doesn't say what he witnessed. Acts gives two different accounts.
@@goldenalt3166
_"Paul doesn't say what he witnessed."_
Acts 22:6: “About noon as I came near Damascus, suddenly a bright light from heaven flashed around me."
Of course Jesus is a fictional character.
"The big four"
John, Paul, George and Ringo
Yeah, yeah, yeah!
Leatherface, Freddy Krueger, Michael Myers, Chucky.
More like Winter, Summer, Fall and Spring!
@srthomas65 .....huh?
Paul(ogia) was referring to 4 people, 2 of which were John and Paul. I just tweaked it a bit.
@mattCrawley I'm referring to astrotheology
Love your work!
Thank you!
It is certainly a form of cowardice when someone turns off comments on their video.
It's also an admission that they know they're full of crap and don't want it pointed out.
They must suffer from so much cognitive dissonance that it hurts
I just don't believe Someone can work 70 hours a week for 14 years.
I did it for 6 months and was so tired I was beginning to think I had brain cancer. Took 2 days good rest to recover and realize I was tired.
Granted it was a more physical job but I was also younger and healthier than Gary
Depends on how he defines work. Remember, he might also be counting interviews, time spent at church to 'review' the material, lunches, travel to the library, getting distracted on an interesting historical story from roughly the same time period... I can see him certainly technically claiming that W.
@@chameon378For tax purposes, it was all about the book. 😊
My father in law is a physician workaholic. His work is a core part of who he is. He worked 60+ hours per week for decades. He “retired” about 7 years ago and now only works “half time” at 40 hours per week at 73 years old.
Hard agree. What he includes in 'work' is probably a bunch of nothing, the way many white-collars do.
Aside from the fact that people tend to exaggerate these things, if he considers "research" (i.e., reading stuff) to be "work" in this regard, then it's totally no big deal.
35 hours a week for 14 years..... Just to have it masterfully ripped to shreds in less than 22 minutes by Paulogia.
From this day forward, any wasted time in my life will forever be known as having Habermased my time. Sitting around Habermasing instead of working. Roll a blunt and Habermas. All that time I Habermased dealing with my crazy ol baby momma who still ain't changed, still more productive than the time he took writing his book.
😂😂😂 👍
Did he miss this?
1 Corinthians 15:3-8 KJV
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; [4] And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: [5] And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: [6] After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. [7] After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. [8] And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
I would love to see you and Gary have a direct chat! That would give great "closure" on both sides, I feel. It's been a joy watching this all unfold throughout the years.
Thanks & Cheers!
💖
You can watch the conversation between Habermas and PineCreek Doug.
That's probably how a discussion with Paul would look like... Paul asks short little questions and then Habermas rambles along for 10 minutes until he forgets what the question was.
@@ramigilneas9274 Habermas, WLC and Jordan Peterson are one of thos trinities which overlap with other fundamentalist/literalist circles. I always thought of WLC as a deactivated JP. All three tend to grease themselves up then proceed to ramble when faced with the simplest questions.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -M. Twain
@@ramigilneas9274 expecting Habermas to be an honest interlocutor is just silly...
I believe I've previously supplemented a post with this theme, but I'll reiterate my opinion:
You know Paulogia is a worthy of being a scholar by the fact that he's pilgrimaged from having been an ordinary, run-of-the-mill TH-camr (in terms of notablity) to combating the likes of fundamental Christian scholar Gary Habermass in less than a decade. This fact is profoundly euphoric for a mind teeming with skepticism, such as myself.
As he was writing this greatly anticipated (at least by fellow apologists) multi-volume tome, I wonder how much time Gary Habermas spent looking at himself in the mirror and saying, "Yeah, that's right bitches, I'm a real bible scholar".
We should be clear and honest and say that the sources avaialble to him have been avaialble to everyone for a very long time and yet still the resurrection remains in doubt. I wonder why 😁
Can't believe you finally have book in hand!! Wow long time coming
@Paulogia: I’m so glad about the direction your channel has taken in the past few videos. I can’t overstate how happy I am about the quality and type of video you’ve been uploading lately.
Family Guy Habermas is an endless source of comedy. Thank you, Paul, for wading through this aeroplane chock of a book so that we don't have to - not that I ever would have, but I am curious as to just how minimal Gary's facts are.
I am very late, but i just wanted to tell you how much I love how you do what you do. This was fantastic, as always. Thanks for your precision!
Hes caught hundreds of snakes, been bitten hundreds of times and stepped on 32,000 nails... this is what professional liars say...
@perfectblindguy bro I'm in the same boat, it's a very weird opening statement... who counts the nails you step on and how stupid are you to do this 32,000 times... and then brag about it...? Lol so many questions...
If he has been doing this every day since he was 10 years old, that means he steps on more than 10 nails per week. Sounds about right.
@@mattf5935 you actually believe hes stepped on 32,000 nails...? Even if it's true, what does that say about him...? Does he work at a nail factory with snakes and just fucks around to find cause hes into that...? Who would even brag about this...? Is so outlandish of a statement that you simply cant believe him...
I believe I've previously supplemented a post with this theme, but I'll reiterate my opinion:
You know Paulogia is a worthy of being a scholar by the fact that he's pilgrimaged from having been an ordinary, run-of-the-mill TH-camr (in terms of notablity) to combating the likes of fundamental Christian scholar Gary Habermass in less than a decade. This fact is profoundly euphoric for a mind teeming with skepticism, such as myself.
@@mattf5935 If he stepped on 10 nails a week he must be into self-harm.
That PhD by his name makes me sad for academia.
You should make your minimal witness thesis a PhD dissertation!
I believe I've previously supplemented a post with this theme, but I'll reiterate my opinion:
You know Paulogia is a worthy of being a scholar by the fact that he's pilgrimaged from having been an ordinary, run-of-the-mill TH-camr (in terms of notablity) to combating the likes of fundamental Christian scholar Gary Habermass in less than a decade. This fact is profoundly euphoric for a mind teeming with skepticism, such as myself.
The self-proclaimed "magnum opus" is actually here
well, volume one of four
I surprised we even got this. I cant say I'll read it. I'll leave it to you paul....I trust ya.
@@Paulogia Really? Ok I heard it now. A bit verbose that boy
A magnum octopus is a many tentacled splendour.
The strange thing is if a grown adult says he has conversations with an imaginary friend you would be called nuts.
Outstanding work as always, Paul.
You get me so excited about Habermas... it's some kind of talent, for sure.
You’re fun. Thanks for the hard work.
Thanks for watching!
Gary actually got killed by snakes a few times but he resurrected
What kind of snake handler gets bit THAT OFTEN!? Is that a kink I haven't heard about?
Well one of the minimal facts is that he used to be alive, and that he has recently been seen alive again. I don't know where he is now, but would anyone really hallucinate? There were even group appearances. His resurrection is clearly the only reasonable explanation!
Hey, this apologetics stuff is pretty easy. If only I didn't have this inconvenient atheistic moral compass...
@@noneofyourbusiness7055 See, Atheism is a worldview, with moral pronouncements. Checkmate! /s
I believe I've previously supplemented a post with this theme, but I'll reiterate my opinion:
You know Paulogia is a worthy of being a scholar by the fact that he's pilgrimaged from having been an ordinary, run-of-the-mill TH-camr (in terms of notablity) to combating the likes of fundamental Christian scholar Gary Habermass in less than a decade. This fact is profoundly euphoric for a mind teeming with skepticism, such as myself.
Who knew the "first fruits" of the resurrection would be nuts?
Thanks!
Welcome!
Completely unconvincing. Thanks Paul.
Go write the two witness book Paul.
thank you
@Paulogia Thank ypu! Your work is awesome.
For someone who has spent 70 hours a week over 14 years, at least half of those on this one book, as well as teaching at 15 graduate schools on top of his main university of employment and other books and articles he’s published in that time it makes you wonder how much time Gary spends with his students.
Given how many students are enrolled at his university compared to staff. Only 700 odd full time staff and 3000 part time for 96,000 students.
The university I attended had over 3000 staff for around 10,000 undergrads and 6000 post grads.
I'm not sure having Gary Habermas turn up to give a lecture would really improve the academic experience of the students or the quality of their education.
I am so enjoying the comments. Well done everyone 👏👏👏🍀🍀🍀
Paul, you just get better with every passing day.
Paul, my (Christian) wife and I have been following you since your first posted videos with ShannonQ, and I have to say your fundamental decency and kindness have been an inspiration to me in my journey toward addressing the programming under which I was brought up in a fundamentalist evangelical home. I don't know how I can thank you enough for all the time you've helped me express my skepticism of the claims of apologists to my evangelical family without the bitter rancor the apologists teach their flocks are just emotional reactions to The Truth ™️. If I could fund your research and publication efforts, I would without hesitation. Thank you for everything you do.
Also, take good care of Shannon. She's way out of your league but I can't think of another man on earth who deserves her affection more than you do. Cheers and another round of thanks, my brother in Skepticism.
Taking "the red pill" is sooo liberating. Welcome to reality.
That evangelicals don't drink real wine is a great metaphor for them "taking the blue pill" and continuing their illusion.
(Hope you don't mind The Matrix movie analogy) 🙂
@@onedaya_martian1238 I'm now 47, and was kicked out of my evangelical home at age 17 after coming out as bisexual and an atheist.... But mainly for refusing to attend our pastor's recommended conversion therapy Christian camp. I went on to get an evolutionary biology degree, which led to meeting my wife, who is also a biologist. She's the one who taught me there are Christians who know the science and choose to believe in religion on their own terms. Seeing the Evangelical Cult for what it really is did bring me some peace, once the military helped me become independent and self-reliant. I've had three decades to put it behind me, but I still have relatives and even siblings who won't talk to me because I'm openly queer and refuse to let them lie about us in front of me.
So, we waited 14 years for that?
I suspect that Peter, Paul and Mary provided us with vastly better evidence for the existence of Puff the Magic Dragon
Marijuana is absolutely real! What are you talking about?
"WE" are a patient people, we are waiting for the last two books of Song of Ice and Fire about that long too.
Thank you for the great videos!
I have to say I think you're well on your way to developing it. You've been researching the topic for years for your videos. Primarily, learning how to write a book will be the hardest part for you if I had to guess.
But if I had to request one thing it would be that I think you should be sure to lay out the goal of the book as not some necessary naturalistic explanation but one of the most reasonable inferences from the strong and available evidence. Good luck.
Good advice.
Por que no las dos? It's not necessary in refutation to offer potential answers, but it's a nice touch.
@@Loki-
I agree. I was noting that since Paulogia is offering a potential answer it would be good to clarify it as one possibility since many may wish to pretend like he is presenting it as the only or a necessary answer of how things must've gone.
It is just an idea of how I thought he could head off refutations that would miss the point. That a naturalistic explanation of the supposed facts can be made. Which many theist wish to say one cannot be made and that as such a supernatural explanation is warranted.
In terms of getting help, maybe lay out the process and what you could use help with?
For example, if you needed transcription of your video replies into coherent paragraphs on the subject.
Then just put up what you need so those of us with a little extra time and the right skillset could help.
@mikehill1114
You replied to me, not to Paulogia.
Being a resurrection scholar is akin to being a scholar on the contents of the basket Little Red Riding Hood brought to Grandma's house.
Many more people claim to have seen Elvis alive after his death, than claim to have seen the resurrected Jesus.
I say we have maximal facts for Elvis' resurrection
Happy reading! I do hope it’s well written 😁✌️💚🤘
Edit: it doesn't take away from my commentary below, but is your minimal witness theory basically that it would help if it wasn't just a guy or two claiming the resurrection? Like if a whole town saw him revive and have multiple different diaries, historical books, etc that that would cement this claim better?
5:37 I have family members who believed they saw a family member recently after they had passed away. I even had moments of having to take second glances at people who I thought resembled them.
How is fact 2 a special circumstance for Jesus? Especially considering they worshipped the guy besides just loving him. When a normal phenomena occurs I believe that's less likely to be a miracle.
Maybe fact 2 is summarized and I'm missing conversations they had with Jesus in which case I also have a suspicion on that claim. I've had many dreams with conversations with loved ones who passed away. I also have had incredibly vivid unreal dreams. I believe it's more likely a combination of a consequence of the psychedelic power of the mind and these people aren't here to testify on their account. We get these stories passed down by banana phone, after all.
Of course I get to the end and you clarify hallucination possibility which reminded me of your videos I've watched on this which has been a bit ago. I usually comment as watching because I don't want to forget, but then getting answered by finishing the video is always the risk! Lol
@Loki - We have Greco-Roman literature in which a lot of elements from Homer, Euripides, and Ovid are incorporated. Not to forget that parts from Josephus are copied as well. So the idea that this is anything but Greco-Roman literature is entertaining, but without evidence. So any character in these stories are like Harry Potter and Hermione. By the way, Hermione can't tell us that Harry is a mage as she is a fictional character and this is what we find in the unnamed fan fiction we call gospels.
@@TorianTammas thank you for the information! I've not taken that many history courses nor done much self study.
Why does the phrase “post hoc rationalization” keep coming to mind?
Dear Paul, you could write an article and submit it to a peer-reviewed journal (maybe co-authored with the help of a friend scholar). A short peer-reviewed article in a respectable journal carries more weight than a 5-kg non-peer-reviewed book 😁
What, no "for Bible tells me so" jingle?
It’s in there. 😂
oops, I read the caption as "liver failure" initially
Awesome! I love your passion! I hope this works out for you!
I'm so distracted by Habermas' voice. He sounds like Peter from Family guy.
Look! My cereal spelled out “Oooooooooo”
Dad… those are cheerios.
Oh geez. Now I can’t stop thinking about that.
@@mjjoe76 sorry dude 😂
@@adamredwine774I think Hitchens used that in one of his debates
@@ATOK_ he did
Sometimes I wonder if it’s worth it to argue with these people over their imaginary friends! Jeez!
I honestly don't think it is. They didn't logic their way into it so they won't logic their way out of it, they make it a huge part of their life and identity, and they surround themselves with like-minded people. They have no reason to stop.
I love that Habermas is already on the defensive, he knows every single point he tries to make in the new monster of a book has been shredded already.
It was funny watching him "squirm" just trying to explain his "facts" to another apologist. Imagine what he would sound like trying to defend his claims (which have already been refuted numerous times) to a real historian.
@@ObjectiveEthics He just gets angry and offended that people question him. He's got this idea that his pile of minimal facts arguments is so perfected, purely because of his personal investment in them, that to question them is an insult. If he tolerates it at all it will be from a vastly more credentialed expert than himself, and even then I doubt he would aquiesce on any front.
Of cource, when he started this it was the 12 minimal facts. This was reduced over time until we have what we have now. And the premise is that these are facts that skeptics and believers can agree on, which is not true.
Great video Paul thanks
The word 'facts' in this is doing lifting so heavy it's able to resist the pull of a neutron star....
Can't wait for your book.
Pine creek recently replayed his chat he had with habermas. For someone who is claimed to be one of the most experienced apologists he got smoked
Well covered. Can’t wait for the review of the book.
Something about James (brother of Jesus) I don't get and please correct me if I'm wrong. He was a skeptic or non believer and then decided is brother was in fact the son of god and converted? But growing up didn't Mary and Jman explain to him about his Mums miraculous conception and his brother being a deity? Growing up together James was totally oblivious to the fact that his brother, was not only pretty cool, had nice, wise things to say, but was a fucking god? THE god? Not much communication going on in that household.
_"Not much communication going on in that household."_
Jesus had four brothers and multiple sisters.
You'd think that he would have told them that he is literally god and created the universe by himself.
@davcan18 I think you have an exceptionally strong argument. Along these lines:
• Mary became pregnant while unmarried. Her villagers either believed that this was a virgin birth, or they didn't. If they generally did, then how to explain Jesus's own brother's skepticism? And how to explain (Mark 6:4-13) that Jesus _could not_ perform miracles there? That Mark passage says that her fellow villagers were skeptical of Jesus's divinity, so they must _not_ have believed that Mary's pregnancy was miraculous. But then they must have thought that she was pregnant by a man not yet her husband. Was this not a deeply shameful taboo? How did Mary & Joseph avoid expulsion or even stoning?
• How is it possible that Mary and Joseph, _the two best parents who ever lived,_ forgot their child, the Creator of the Universe, behind in Jerusalem _for an entire day!?_ And he apparently took no notice of their departure either! (Luke 2:41-52)
• We are taught that Mary & Joseph were poor. So what did they do with all that gold, frankincense and myrrh? (Matthew 2:11)
How do we even know that Paul and Peter weren't the PT Barnums of their time? What did either actually do to earn our belief?😊
Paul and Peter earned the belief by living people who saw them perform curses and miracles. You are literally using the fact they are dead to claim “oh they had no evidence for it”.
George Washington is a man of God who many wild stories that were true and witnessed by others, who spoke of prophecy, but even though he was the man to found a successful nation that overcame the world, you would refuse to believe no matter how recent he is to only be under 300 years apart from us.
When you die, no one would even know you even exist. And it’s a fitting end you put yourself into.
Every preacher out their thinks they are the Peter Jackman version of the con artist P.T. Barnum. And it was Barnum who is claimed to have said "There is a sucker born every minute.", which is why we see these megachurch and televangelists working to grab every dime from those folks....'cause if they don't ....someone else will.
I actually like the minimal fact name. Because there are minimal facts,like none.
Proof that thousands of hours of work does not necessarily eliminate bias or insure accuracy.
Somehow, Gary's book makes me think of the scene in The Good Place, where Michael says that he could read all of Earth's literature in an hour, 'but this took me two weeks to get through. I mean ... it's so convoluted...' Granted, I haven't read it... but...
"Evidences". OMG - even the title of the book screams ignorance
That word is such a red flag these days. It's only used in the plural by theists deceiving
Evidences is an actual word.
@@LuciferAlmighty so is fishes. My point remains
@alexmcd378 what point?
@@LuciferAlmighty that the plural form is almost never used by anyone except theists trying to deceive, and is therefore a red flag
"Résurrection scholar" sound a lot like a bacc in leprechaun or a master degree in easter bunny study.
*Exceptionally Verbose ;*
Taking over 1000 pages, to sum up a claim, that could easily be laid out in a short pamphlet.
_A highly polished turd._
You should call it the Minimal Witnesses Hy-Paul-thesis.
The desire to be convinced makes me suspect of any claim that you desire to be convinced is true.
Thank you for this. Excellent.
You can always self-publish the book. What matters is how well a theory is defended. Of course, this defence must follow academic principles to be taken seriously, for instance:
- Weigh your hypotheses against contrary hypotheses.
- Construct logical, sound arguments.
- Use the evidence we have, as we have it.
- Mention sources (primary, secondary) and the latest bibliography.
- And, most importantly, use scientific methodology (history, textual criticism) and a multidisciplinary approach.
Some core problems I think Minimal Witnesses hypothesis should deal with:
- Given the fact that the gospels are literary constructs, not historical accounts, how can we know they used oral traditions or previous written materials from the time of Jesus? And, if they used them, how can we tell them apart from the evangelists’ (whoever they were) own inventive?
- How can we know who Jesus’ disciples were if Paul (our first source) doesn’t mention any, only apostles who, according to Paul, only knew about Jesus from hallucinations and scripture?
- In essence, what evidence do we have of any witnesses to Jesus’ life and/or death?
Literature and history are not false dichotomies. Extensive studies of the gospels and letters has shown traditions - this is consensus.
32,000 hours and I would bet he never once considered his presuppositions may be wrong.
How, how, how... do you spill 32,000 hours of work and dedication into a 1000 page magnum opus and never find out that 'evidence' is a mass noun and 'evidences' is a verb?
Im sorry - whats D O C T O R Gary's ph.d in, again?
-And why didnt he use his honorific in his book _which he needs publicity for??_
Dafuq is this guy doing?
Paul, your Minimal Witness hypothesis is the most coherent and compelling explanation of the 'Minimal Facts' that ive seen.
Love your content.
Hope you and Shannon and family are well. 🖖
Habernas is a hobbyist apologist, NOT a biblical scholar.
Of the hobby lobby ilk even
That's apparently how the biblical scholarship community sees Gary, if they think about him at all.
Woohoo, psyched for the upcoming much more interesting book on the minimal witnesses!
The group resurrection appearances are listed here by Paul:
1 Corinthians 15:3-8 KJV
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; [4] And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: [5] And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: [6] After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. [7] After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. [8] And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
Exactly, there goes his “minimal witnesses” theory.
so the bible tells me so !
@@JohnKerr-bq3vo Paul is accepted by historians.
@@TheGreyHollowRoad of that I am aware, but not his 'revelations' and half of the forged letters.. did anyone ever write back do you wonder?
@JohnKerr-bq3vo None in the Bible are forged. This is all wishful thinking on your part because you must be drawing the conclusion you want to see based on perhaps certain pieces of information not accessible to history. This is the conclusion you want to believe, which means you have strong bias and so aren't thinking clearly about the subject.
Good work sir 👏
I would love an episode on the politics of how a Pharisee, Paul, was able to obtain the political power to “persecute Christians”, whatever that means. Was he given the power to issue death sentences to Christians, for example? Was there some kind of already established alignment or agreement between the Roman Empire and some elements within the Israelite internal political structure?
Yes, you literally shown yourself to be ignorant of Jewish-Roman history simply revealing your inconfidence in this subject.
@@justice8718 Yep, not that up on Jewish-Roman history. Why do you think I asked the question?
I love how with no money and no staff you still manage to present an intellectually honest proposal that is open to critical scrutiny and well sourced. Something that thousands of hours do not appear to have achieved for Habermas...
Intellectually honest is a huge stretch. You guys go into this stuff already "knowing" it's fake and asserting it's fake before ever reading or watching any piece of media and then accusing Christians of being the biased ones. It'd be hilarious if it wasn't so tragic.
@ryanbrown4053 thanks for the engagement. I would like to know what you find to be intellectually dishonest about Paul's approach here?
To mention nothing of the conclusions of eithers work I see Habermas overstating a case in ways that Paul does not.
This fact I deem evident from the occastions when Habermas, on being challenged on the providence of his sources, he has on multiple occasions deflected with variations on "OK I don't even need that to make my point" (Paul Paul plays some of these responses on videos on his channel). If Habermas can dismiss his own arguments so easily as irrelevant then the fact he lists them as evidentiary pillars would seem to be an attempt to impress upon the reader that they are more substantive than they in fact are. This I deem indicative of intellectual dishonesty.
If I have missed something in Paul's approach I would really appreciate you pointing it out. However, as I see it, Paul has made no other claim than that he has identofied a plausible hypothesis, consistent with scripture, of how the idea of the resurrection could have been established without supernatural intervention.
Thanks.
I don't think we will be able to finance your minimal facts magnum opus with superchats but let us know what sort of numbers we will have to post to get you close