Did Jesus Rise From the Dead? Dr. Mike Licona
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ก.ย. 2024
- Did Jesus Rise From the Dead? Dr. Mike Licona
------
We recognize that all people have questions, but very few spaces exist to have open, honest, and respectful discourse around the deepest questions humans ask.
Join us for DIG & DELVE!
What is DIG & DELVE?
DIG & DELVE is an annual conference in Ottawa that is all about giving people a safe space to engage in discussion and explore deep issues that humans have been wrestling with for a long time.
One popular worldview promoted in our media is that it is foolish to believe in God. Influential writers disparage those interested in considering the relevance of faith to life.
Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence. - Richard Dawkins
At DIG & DELVE we hope to provide an open, honest and respectful environment where people can explore reasons why faith makes sense and why it is meaningful to give consideration to the life and teaching of Jesus. We hope to encourage curiosity and a healthy critical inquisitiveness. People coming from a spectrum of world-views, Christian and otherwise, are welcome.
At DIG & DELVE, we gather talented experts in their fields to come and share their opinions about deep issues human wrestle with and together we discuss some of the latest research around these questions.
Expect to be challenged. Join us at DIG & DELVE.
For more information go to diganddelve.ca
Thanks for watching
After losing Jesus to spending too much energy exploring the overly analytical historical critical methods, none of which I personally mastered, but which did strike me as methods used by scholars who were good at talking themselves, and others, out of the substance of the NT writings, I eventually came to the following position: The NT writers absolutely, positively believed in what they wrote. That doesn't mean their observations were true. It still comes down to some people having "ah-ha" experiences that lead them to believe that Jesus was raised from the dead. Paul pointed to those who actually saw this Jesus. We don't have that resource 2000+ years later. Yet, we have believers. Some way, some how, people come to believe. If we can talk people into belief, faith we be about our ability to do just that. In fact, we would, if we could. Suddenly, belief occurs. Ehrman looks at the same message that Mike Licona looks at. They have radically different experiences. Why? We struggle with that. Mark 9:24b (ESV) “I believe; help my unbelief!” People looked at Jesus in the eye and didn't believe he was the Christ. People looked at Jesus in the eye and believed. Nothing has changed save for Jesus is standing before us. Some reject this Jesus. Some accept this Jesus as the Christ.
Wise words.
Plus Paul pointed to such people that he himself probably never saw and he himself never saw the real Jesus.
@@hashh2019 We know for a fact (Galatians 1 and 2) that Paul met Cephas, and met James the Just, and John Bar-Zebedee, and discussed his doctrine with them. We know that they confirmed his doctrine. We know that Paul named them so that people could get corroboration to his story by asking them. We know that they all claimed Jesus rose from the dead (1 Cor. 15:3-8). Sorry, Friend, but you're speaking nonsense here.
@@WhereWhatHuh Thanks for enlightening me. Please pray for my faith journey.
@@hashh2019 I will do so at once.
This lecture boosted my faith further. Really, wonderful insights given by licona regarding resurrection, that too, without referencing Biblical verses. Ofcourse Bible is the living source for my spiritual life. But ur insights really added extra leverage to my faith, for example u mentioned everyone is ready to die for their beliefs. Happens to all categories including communists and jihadists. In their case it was instant dying. But in the case of disciples and early Christians, it was (long time) perennial suffocation afterward instant death. Many of the disciples went through whipping spitting beatings mockings sometimes starvation fatigue poverty etc. In the midst of these they all retained their faith and adehered to it vehemently. how it was possible? only because of the power of the Gospel truth i. e resurrection power. All were suffered and suffocated excruciatingly afterward experienced instant dying. If we take the case of jihadist, he would be well-fed before getting blown up(instant death).
This really touched my heart. Thank you licona for ur wonderful words.
@@hashh2019 if you say early nazis were also persecuted, who would believe?. Before making others enlightened, first get urself lightened 💡 with actual historical facts. I don't need any light source cause I'm fully wattaged in spiritual philosophy.
@@hashh2019that applies to sinners who dwell in sin (of mire) continuously, not to me. OK. Cause I'm a born again Christian. Last but not least, only a few words in order to lighten ur mind bulb💡
If you are one of those who follow that copy cat 🐱 religion cause it copied basic tenets and rituals of Judaism, it is a waste of time talking to you but if you r one of those panthiesic religions, I would like to continue.
Why waste of time ? Because the founder of that religion who dwells most of his time 'in bed' than in spiritual activities, having dozen wives along with sex slaves who married adopted son's wife after forcing him to divorce her. Even he didn't leave little girl 👧 Ayesha. Generally we, civilized people, behave with little girls 'elderly' and show father's love towards them. But he, like swine, fell on her in bed. Not only that somewhere in Q, it is mentioned that he got the capacity of doing intercourse with all his wives in one night. In addition to that, all these jihadists r eagerly waiting for virgins in heaven after getting blown themselves killing innocents. So their heaven is filled with sexual swine activities.
where as Christianic heaven is holy free of all carnal acts, worshipping the Jehovah all the time. Cause in the Holy Bible it is mentioned in several places flesh and blood can't inherit the kingdom of God. So we worship God in heaven all the time but not like swine enjoying with virgins in 'their type' heaven.
E. T. C. P T O still there
But
It is waste of time .....................bye 👋
I find it fascinating that so many agnostic or atheist scholars can believe that Jesus was a real person, that he was crucified, and that the tomb was empty but yet have to come up with these crazy idea's as to why the tomb was empty instead of accepting that Jesus really rose from the dead. William Lane Craig debated a professor one time at I believe UC Irvine who was so desperate not to accept the resurrection story that he believed that Jesus had a twin brother who he was separated from at birth and that after Jesus was crucified and buried, the twin brother then came back, stole the body and showed up as if he was the crucified Jesus. That is no lie. That is straight off WLC's website. This just goes to show how people will refuse to believe no matter what the evidence shows.
Because people got crucified every day, yet people never rise from the dead. That's why one part is easy to believe, and the other requires actual evidence instead of ''Ive seen it'.
But they don't believe the tomb was empty, there are no secular historical documents that mention any tomb, in fact, the Romans buried criminals in common graves, not tombs.
@@abdmzn The Romans left common criminals to rot on the cross and be scavenged.
@@abdmznspecific lands/areas were able to keep to their own burial practices, and families were not to be denied the bodies of their loved ones.
@@srrlIdl”It’s not as simple as ‘I’ve seen it.’ It’s ‘We all saw it, we acted as if we saw it, it transformed us into different people, and we died for this thing we know as a truth.’
After hearing Ehrman's claim that the New Testament texts could not have been written by their authors because the authors were "illiterate," I was immediately struck with 2 questions: 1) What evidence does Erhman have to support his claim that the authors were illiterate, given that he is making a definitive statement? And, 2) is it possible that, provided that the authors were illiterate, scribes were utilized to record the text as it was dictated to them? Scribes were a noble profession of their day, with their services utilized by many prominent individuals, including Kings, governors, and other such prominent persons. That Ehrman ignores both of these possibilities leaves much of his scholarship in question and provides for the possibility that his perspective is highly ideologically based, whereby he engages in research and scholarship in an effort to prove his skepticism instead of an effort to prove truth.
Doesn't it quite literally say in the Bible that Peter was illiterate?
Anyways, very very few people could read and/or write in the ancient world. At best 10% could read, at best 5% could write. And this would be the upper class. The disciples were of the underclass, fishermen etc. There's no evidence to suggest they were literate, and every reason to think they weren't.
As far as dictation, there's very little evidence of such a thing occurring in the ancient world
My overarching point is that it is an assumption to state that an individual person is illiterate, especially without a substantive basis upon which to make such a claim for said person. It is improper to state definitively that the disciples were illiterate, as there is no definitive evidence to support the claim. Further, the use of a scribe was quite common in that day, as I stated earlier.
We know from the Scriptures that the use of a scribe was not uncommon. In fact, there are several passages in which the person is named. For instance, in 1 Peter 5:12, we read that the letter was penned by a person identified as Silvanus.
For other authors, it is safe to assert that they were, indeed, literate given their profession. Luke, the author of Luke and Acts, is identified as being a physician (Colossians 4:14). Paul, author of the largest number of texts in the New Testament, is identified as a Pharisee, receiving his education from an individual identified as Gamaliel (Acts 22:3).
Regarding your last statement, given the prominence and importance of scribes in the ancient world, I find your contention that "there is very little evidence of such a thing occurring" without basis.
One final point: we know the timeframe in which the New Testament texts were written. Given that they exist, there are only two possibilities for their existence: either they were written by the ascribed author of the text, or they were written by a scribe following dictation. Both possibilities are offered the same conclusion: the individual writing the text was literate. Claiming illiteracy in the presence of a written text, which requires literacy, is quite extravagant.
@@zion653 It's not extravagant at all if we determine they weren't written by the authors traditionally ascribed to them.
Paul wrote or dictated his letters, there's no debate there. It quite literally states in acts that Simon and Peter weren't literate (the Greek word means "unlettered").
But, such a determination is reliant on the contention that an individual other than the ascribed author personally wrote or dictated the text. In other words, it would require a claim that the texts were written fraudulently.
It appears that you are referring to Acts 4:13, in reference to Peter and John. The text states that the leaders, rulers, and elders "perceived" that they were unlearned. They carried this assumption of them and were astonished upon hearing the boldness of their speech. The text, at least not here, is not stating that Peter and John were, in fact, unlearned.
God bless you Mike❤️✊
After all of this talk without hardly referencing the Holy Bible, these beautiful verses written by Paul to the Corinthians comes to mind!
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29 THAT NO FLESH SHOULD GLORY IN HIS PRESENCE (emphasis added is mine).
30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.
1 Corinthians 1:20-31 King James Version (KJV)
Great lecture. Thank you for posting.
Dawkins' view of faith (in the description) is not faith; it is more like wishful thinking, because faith, Christian faith, rides on evidence evaluated. The Bible is full of evidence: of eye witnesses, of contemporary correspondence and reports (e.g. the prophets), of historical accounts. Moreover, faith implicitly requires a teleological framing of existential reality. That is, inherently in their existence, their experience of life humans have a future orientation, a future prospect at some level that gives them hope of some sort. Perhaps Dawkins 'hope' is to vanquish Christianity. this is a future orientation, a hope in which he places some existential confidence. A faith, in short. The puzzle for me is how he can explain a future orientation, when for a configuration of material (man, in his conception of the world) can give rise to anything but the present, and perhaps the past. The future? It doesn't exist! Yet it drives all human endeavour.
Let's suppose there was a man two thousand years ago who was born of a virgin, who had profound intelligence that amazed anyone who talked to him, who fell foul of both Jewish and Roman authorities, who was crucified, who came back to life 3 days later and who 40 days after that flew up into space.
The best explanation of those extraordinary facts would be that Jesus was an alien implanted on Earth to try to raise the consciousness of humanity. He tried to teach people using the cultural references that they understand which would be their local religion. His 'resurrection' was him being restored using highly advance unknown Alien technology. He then flies into space to go back to his alien brethren. His teachings than get mangled and misunderstood and people make a religion out of him.
Now that sounds implausible and outlandish but it's actually a better explanation than Jesus was God because no matter how infeasible the Alien hypothesis is, it's within the bounds of possibility.
No matter how insane it sounds it's a better hypothesis than the idea the universe was made with a plan by an invisible magic mind that lives outside of space and time, but the plan went wrong in a way this infinitely wise mind couldn't foresee, so the magic mind came to Earth as its own son to be tortured to death so humans don't have to go to the cosmic prison that the magic mind invented.
You haven't read , studied or research a lot don't you? It shows
@@Divine.Disciple7 You can’t make some ignorant snarky comment. Explain why I’m wrong and I generally find I know more about christianity than the average christian which isn’t difficult
@@grahamblack1961 I'm not here to change your mind, believe what you want go ahead
Andrexx evidently you didn't watch the whole sermon!
Almost 30 mins into the lecture and Dr. Licona still didn't offer a single shred of evedence to prove that Jesus rose from the dead except to say that PAUL SAID SO.
You do realize that "I saw Him" is evidence, right? (1 Cor. 15:8) And that "Go ask Cephas; he saw Him too!" is also evidence, (1 Cor 15:7) and "you can ask James the Just, He saw Him too," (1 Cor. 15:7) is also evidence? You may not like the evidence, and you may not believe the evidence, but it's evidence.
What are you talking about 😂😂 go cry somewhere else, no evidence will EVER be enough for hopeless people like you, this video is filled with evidence. Go roll in the dirt 🐷
What kind of evidence are you looking for if you're not going to believe eyewitness testimony? Something miraculous happened 2000 years ago to cause 11 frightened apostles to suddenly boldly proclaim what they saw with their own eyes. Many of them along with thousands of others went to their deaths refusing to renounce their faith. But in 300 years, Christianity would be the official religion of the empire that was responsible for their massacre.
At the end, he asks the audience, based on all the information given, to explain Paul’s conversion, the group appearances of Jesus, and other questions. He argues that based on all her historical facts surrounding the resurrection narrative, resurrection is the only plausible and possible hypothesis to explain ALL of those facts.
What kind of proof do you want?
In more ways than one.... one will save you whilst on earth, the other in eternity.
Do you have physical evidence for the alleged JC?
Mike has the same information as the rest of us.
If believe in our heart Jesus was raised from the dead and confess with our mouth Jesus is Lord we shall be saved.
Is it not about being a little child? Is the kingdom not given to the little children?
They worship Paul.
I’m sorry but I’m 25 minutes into this video and you haven’t started to answer the question. *clicks off*
Ok jerry good for you😂
THOUSANDS ..&.... MORE THOUSANDS ...... "STYLES", "VARIATIONS", "VERSES", "TRADITIONS", "PLEADING ......
FOR THE BLOOD"! ...... I'M ONLY GUESSING? ..... EVERY "TEACHER" ...... "CREATIVE LECTURER" ..... "LAY PERSON"
"SCHOLAR" ....... "PRIEST" ........ "PRIESTESS" .... "MUSICIAN" ...... WHO IS STILL ....... DILIGENTLY WORKING ....... FOR
THIS .... RISEN JESUS ....... IN SACRED RESPECT! ....... MUST CONTINUALLY ....... STILL BE ....... REFRESHED ......
ANOINTED ...... BY THIS ....... SOVEREIGN GOD ...... OF THE UNIVERSE! .......
As a Christian who believes Paul was a liar and deceiver and a false apostle who preached a different Gospel than Jesus and his disciples, I look at his testimony as unreliable, and so this presentation is weak in that respect.
You are unbelievably stupid don’t call yourself a Christian
@@justincole8039 thanks for the kind words! Have a nice day and may the light of Christ fill your heart with peace and Joy, and that you find liberation from all your sin so that the time of judgement does not overtake you.
¿OVNIS?
Jesus didnt die in the first place.
@Michael H. Mohamad not only a old pervert but a womanizer of all taste. Cause he wanted to taste women of all ages elderly olderly young as well as little girls. That's y he kept sex slaves of all kind(age) along with wives backed by devil god.
@@tintupintu7562 - Thats true
@@gavinhurlimann2910 y we Christians r unable to confront muslims upfront though they got full of lies in their Quran( for example they believe that Ismail was taken as sacrifice by Abraham on Sinai) and a pervert liar founded it ? Is it because we r told love thy neighbor ?
Don't say anything from The Qur'an the book for liars😠😕
I have five questions to Christians
1. Why Christians hate judas Iscariot and Pontius Pilate. Didn't they help Jesus to do what he meant to do, sacrifying himself for your sin? You should thank to them.
2. Why Jesus didn't do by himself the sacrifice? Why did he waited the Jews and Roman to do the crucify? He had 12 disciples to build his own cross.
3. If Jesus was not crucified and not resurrected, will you worship him as God?
4. Why do you use the cross as symbol of Christianity. The cross you know it as the thing where Jesus was tortured and hang to death.
5. Why don't you potrays Jesus in his divine states. In my picture to do the best that is: Jesus stand on the cross. His feets step on the top of the cross. His body cover with dry blood, his hand wounded because of toture and nails, his costume turn red because of his own blood. But he stand strong, his face shiny, his eyes open a little with sorrow but confident. Three or four feet behind him a pair of wings belong to unseen creature flying. The wing do not belong to Jesus but Gabriel. Gabriel was there because God, the Father, asked him to accompany Jesus flying back to heaven where he belong to. Jesus did not need wing because he is God. The picture symbolize that Jesua already finish his mission, he had already dead once for your sin. Now he is ready to coming back to heaven. What do you think about my imagination? Instead, you worship Jesus in his state as a corpse hanging in front of your bench inside churche.
This guy got owned by Matt Dillahunty. Hard.
Dr Licona's proof of Jesus's ressurection - PAUL SAID SO.
A total waste of my time. If this is the best you Christians have to offer, then I'm glad I made the right decision to become an agnostic.
Hey Pig.
@@hashh2019 I just called by his profile name.
Jesus was a yogi of ancient Vedic tradition. The 'Resurrection' is explainable in yogic practices.
These tools exist in all of us, now!
Alex Caskie yeah, yeah, he was Jedi!
Any historical records to prove your delusions. Please post your links.
Hinduism eh? 33crore gods eh?
At 4:04 he actually says something quite sensible. ".....your faith is worthless". Abandon your ridiculous myths. And you don't need to read 80 "scholarly" articles a year to be kept up to date with something that never happened. Get over it.
Andre XX What basis are you considering that Christianity is a myth?
All religions are full of myths like this. How many people have been raised from the dead in the last few centuries?
You cannot apply the present to the past. (the problem of induction). That is not how you do History.
You have to look at the evidence and deal with it, if you consider yourself a critical thinker.
What evidence? And how many theists look at the evidence against THEIR silly position?
You seem to need this to not have happened. Get over it!
No he did not.
In two words “probably not”.
...... TOO MUCH ..... OVER ANALYZING ..... OF FAITH ...... IN A "STERILE"
INTELLECTUAL ..... MODE ...... MAKES TOO MANY ..... PUNCH DRUNK!
....... WE BELIEVE ..... BECAUSE ...... WE KNOW! ......... THERE IS NO OTHER
WAY!