Christian Apologists Are Wrong About The Gospels | Dr. Richard C Miller
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ค. 2023
- Christian Apologists Are Wrong About The Gospels | Dr. Richard C Miller
Dr. Richard C. Miller, a renowned scholar with a razor-sharp intellect, fearlessly delves into the intricacies of the gospel narratives, challenging their traditional categorizations as histories or biographies. With a quick wit and a keen eye for detail, Dr. Miller dismantles the conventional notion that the gospels are straightforward historical accounts. Like a skilled detective sifting through clues, he reveals the telltale signs of cultic legendary materials woven into the gospel tapestry. These narratives, according to Dr. Miller, are not mere chronological records of events but rather vibrant canvases painted with theological fervor and devotion. With a flicker of humor in his voice, he invites us to step into the realm of skepticism, where the gospels transcend the confines of history and biography, transcending into the realm of faith and myth. Dr. Miller's intellectual prowess leaves no stone unturned as he presents a compelling argument that challenges our preconceived notions and beckons us to explore the enigmatic nature of these sacred texts.
Grab his book Resurrection and Reception in Early Christianity
👉 amzn.to/35FqNYf
See Dr. Miller's critique of the gospels
www.debunking-christianity.co...
Also grab Dr. Tomas Hagg's book, "The Art of Biography in Antiquity"
👉 amzn.to/35FqNYf
==============================
*RECOMMENDED ONLINE COURSES HERE*
Check out MVP Courses
www.mvp-courses.com
Sign up for Dr. Kipp Davis Course "The Real Ancient Israelite Religions"
mythvisionpodcast.com/israeli...
Sign up for Dr. Richard Carrier's Course "New Testament Studies For Everyone."
www.mythvisionpodcast.com/nt-...
Sign up for Bart's new Mark course "The Unknown Jesus"
mythvisionpodcast.com/unknown...
Sign up for 👉 "Creating Jesus: Why Mark’s Gospel Was Forgotten?"
www.mythvisionpodcast.com/fir...
Sign up here for Dr. M. David Litwa's course - The Ancient Greek Mysteries & Christianity - -
www.mythvisionpodcast.com/mys...
Sign up here for Dr. Dale C. Allison Jr's course - The Quest For The Historical Jesus - - www.mythvisionpodcast.com/jes...
Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's course - Finding Moses - -
www.mythvisionpodcast.com/moses
Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's course - Other Virgin Births In Antiquity - -
www.mythvisionpodcast.com/vir...
Sign up for the 7 hour resurrection debate between Dr's Bart Ehrman & Mike Licona here - - www.mythvisionpodcast.com/res...
Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's Genesis "In The Beginning" Webinar here - - www.mythvisionpodcast.com/gen...
Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's Christmas Webinar here - - www.mythvisionpodcast.com/chr...
Sign up for Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's Did Jesus call himself God webinar - - www.mythvisionpodcast.com/bart
============================
**GET RECOMMENDED BOOKS HERE: 👉 amzn.to/35FqNYf
============================
Please consider helping support MythVision's work by joining the Patreon or contributing a one-time donation through my links below:
MythVision Website: 🔥 mythvisionpodcast.com/
MythVision Patreon: 👉 / mythvision
MythVision Paypal: 👉 www.paypal.me/dereklambert7
Cashapp: 👉 $rewiredaddiction
Venmo: 👉 @Derek-Lambert-9
Email MythVision: 👉 mythvisionpodcast@gmail.com
Facebook page: 👉 / mythvision
Facebook group: 👉 / thewaterboyzradio
Twitter: 👉 / derekpodcast
TikTok: 👉 / mythvision
Instagram: 👉 / dereklambert_7
Discord: 👉 / discord
===========================
👉👉 Checkout Our Other TH-cam Channel:
www.youtube.com/ @mythvisionclips
👉👉 Checkout MVP Courses to find new and upcoming online courses:
mvp-courses.com/
===========================
#mythvision #MythVisionPodcast #mvp #dereklambert
The gospels are Cult Fiction, not to be confused with Pulp Fiction.
Are you saying that the writers didn't believe they were reporting any facts, either?
@@Theslavedrivers My comment is intended as a joke. I think it's likely that some of the of the writers believed they were reporting some facts.
@@jon4574 Righto.
The funny thing is that taking the miracle accounts of Jesus in the gospels seriously makes about as much sense as taking the accounts of A Thousand And One Arabian Nights seriously.
Not when modern christians saints have done miracles just as big ie padre pio
@@edwardadelman5360 google "our Lady of Zeitoun". This miracle happened in Egypt and it was validated by it's government.
@@edwardadelman5360 name one
@@edwardadelman5360and Benny Hinn
Miracles still happen !! Miraculous healings and casting out of demons in the name of Jesus.....still happen !!! Now you have something on your hands to disprove
The gospels are pastiche fiction. It's like if I decided to write a Sherlock Holmes story.
Have at it mate! Maybe in 2000 years people will make life choices based on your Sherlock fan fiction 😅
@@user-nf8rm4ou7zDude, it would be a copy of a copy of a copy at that point. It wouldn't be the same story he wrote which is sad but hey at least his story survived in some form lol
So many christians are ignorant of the specifics of the bible (as I was when I still believed).
If I wasn't so lazy, I'd take a bunch of bible verses and an equal number of verses from other religions and pagan myths and present them to believers, but uncredited, or with different names. Ask which ones are believable and which ones aren't. But the correlation between the "yeses" and the ones from the bible would be pretty damn low if one was to pick out the nastiest ones.
to be frank, John, you could take a bunch of random bible verses and verses from other religions and the majority of Christians would be hard pressed to identify which is which. The rarely are able to name more than 3 or 4 disciples and include john. let alone that their are 17 disciples' names given and mark says there were 80.
Most of the Bible reads like Jewish nationalism to me. Is this really the book a world wide religion should be based on?
@@Justin_Beaver564 Depends on how imperialist its adherents are😆
It boggles my mind how many Christians haven't even read the Bible in its entirety. They believe this book is the literal message from God to humanity, and they don't even bother reading it even once?
@@Trip_Fontaine They don't need the "literal message from Bible god" because they think Bible god is communicating to them through the pro-social feelings they get when they're in a church setting. They get the sanitized, cherry picked readings from their pastor or whatever and the things they hear reinforce the fuzzy feelings they are getting and that is enough for them to spend the rest of their lives assuming that everything in the book confirms what they already feel.
In short, they're passively disincentivized from examining anything about their belief from the moment their brain can manage more than pooping and crying. It takes special circumstances to force them out of their bubble of ignorance.
This is why they best thing any atheist can do is just exist openly as an atheist.
Most people don't even really realize that there are alternatives to theism. The mere existence of atheists is a contradiction to their religion. If they think about that for even a second, they are now on the path to critically examining their beliefs. And we all know how that goes for most people once they actually read the damn book.
Religious beliefs are based on faith not logic, reason, science, history, or even common sense. Debating an apologist is a total waste of time and extremely frustrating. There is simply no point debating religious people about their beliefs. Truthfully, what difference does it matter what religious folk believe?
I find it somewhat humorous that religious folk acknowledge their “beliefs” are based on faith and faith alone but then insist they have “evidence” that proves their “faith” is historically and scientifically provable. If that was really true, faith wouldn’t be necessary would it?
Unfortunately there are enough of them that it matters in American society.
The gospels are essentially ancient infomercials. They were the stories that proselytizers would tell potential converts to sell them on the Cult of Jesus. Fact, certainly as we understand it, was less important than telling a compelling story. The gospels are less concerned with "it happened exactly like this," and far more with "this is why you should believe." Like most great stories, there _are_ some elements of truth to be found mixed in with all the fable and fantasy, but there's very little about Jesus himself that we can be relatively certain of: that he was born, he lived, and he died. Everything else about him (including his personality, emotions, mannerisms, character, and composure) appears to be different depending on which gospel you read. And not just a little different. Each gospel seems to be focused on an entirely different person who just happened to share a few similarities and coincidences.
What I find odd about the whole thing is that his entire existence is presented as being wholly and completely concerned with spiritual matters. Nevermind that he lived in a time and place where there was a seething hatred of Rome, the Roman Occupation and its Collaborators (particularly within the Temple), and that there were other Jewish Rebellion Movements focused on the removal of the Roman Occupiers and the restoration of Jewish sovereignty. The gospels basically take Jesus on unrelated spiritual side-quests that are presented as being more important than the main story (Jesus being the leader, or co-leader, of a Rebellion Movement to drive out the Roman Occupation).
Why even mention a lineage to King David unless Jesus was expected to restore the Davidic throne by becoming an earthly King in the image of David? Why focus everything on the hereafter when there is so much to be done to improve the here-and-now? Paradise wasn't supposed to come after death, it was supposed to occur while one was still alive. The gospel writers appear to have had a very thin understanding of Judaism, and almost no understanding of what Jews believe(d) happens after death. Which is very bizarre if we are to believe that the gospels were written BY devout Jews... who just happened to be exclusively and extraordinarily fluent in academic Greek.
We can see a very clear pattern of myth-making when we trace the Christology of Jesus from Mark to John. Jesus goes from a low Christology, being more man than god in Mark, to a high Christology, being almost entirely god-like in John. It's very similar to the mythmaking of George Washington, with the bulk of this myth being added some 50-100 years after his death. There really is a linear progression transforming Jesus from man to god, with new things being added on and old things being rearranged, reformatted, and edited out. But you can also see a change in who the Jesus Cult was being marketed to, as each gospel seems to be targeted toward a specific audience.
So appreciate all your words and all your truth.
The gospels are not written in 'academic Greek'.
There is also the possibility that the gospel according to Matthew was originally written in another language, Aramaic or Hebrew.
I came across this channel a couple of days ago and spent the whole of Sunday downloading content. Derek's commitment to this project is phenomenal. Well done sir !
The Gospels are historical, eyewitness accounts.
@davidlafleche1142
No they aren’t. No eyewitnesses to anything Jesus did wrote the gospels, nor could have written the gospels on account of being illiterate. Just because you want this to be true doesn’t make it true.
I like your introduction. I like that you defined one technical word. I needed that. Please define all technical words that you can for you are teaching me/us. I like that Dr. MILLER defined some terms also. I will be looking up many terms from this discussion. Taking notes too.
I don't claim to speak for or deeply know Buddhism but the more miraculous and improbable accounts of the Buddha are easly accepted as for teaching a concept only and not a literal history. At least in some Buddhist traditions. We can be that way to.
Buddha was an atheist and he never did any miracle...I don't understand what you read
Dr. miller makes a statement in this interview that I have also said the past, and that is that the ancient people did not have television or the Internet, and they made up these fanciful fictive stories for entertainment purposes. There was also some discussion that the gospel stories and other literature of that genre are like the Marvel comics, or the DC comics of their day and age. Especially when you get into the book of acts with all the action and adventure and drama, next in with exotic peoples and places and religious ideas. Basically the gospels and ask are historical docudramas. Set often in historical places, with fictional main characters. or sometimes historical characters who were put into fictional situations and locations.
Kid at the end steals the show every time
Thanks for your dedication and the lengthy list of outstanding scholarly voices helping set the record straight. Each guest has their own expertise making for a very informative interview. Your guests don't give apologists much wiggle room. Making the disingenuous lying promoters of a hoax squirm like the worms they are is quite gratifying.
Some verses of the quran on Jesus (pbuh)
:171] O People of the Scripture(JewsandChristians), do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, “Three”; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs.
[4:172] Never would the Messiah disdain to be a servant of Allah , nor would the angels near [to Him]. And whoever disdains His worship and is arrogant - He will gather them to Himself all together.
[5:17] They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is the Christ , the son of Mary. Say, “Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy the Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?” And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allah is over all things competent.
[5:46] And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming that which came before him in the Torah; and We gave him the Gospel, in which was guidance and light and confirming that which preceded it of the Torah as guidance and instruction for the righteous.
[5:72] They have certainly disbelieved who say, ” Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary” while the has said, “O Children of Israel, worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord.” Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers.
This video finally cajoled me sufficiently to overcome (mis)perceived inertia and so finally I read Dr. Miller's book: _Resurrection and Reception in Early Christianity_
Notwithstanding a not insignificant tendency to be somewhat ungrammatical, this study transcends the theological, the teleological, the historiographical and the philosophical to an extent which compels this reader, at least, to consider seriously that not only is all of Christian Apologetic "schloarship" bunk, but also that a good deal of serious Biblical scholarship has been either surpassed, or bypassed.
The scope (historical and philosophical) of the sources examined, and the depth to which they are deconstructed, is impressive. That the exposition of the thesis was accomplished essentially within 200 pages makes it the more so.
Recommended.
After studying some Greek and critical reading I realize how limited our Church reading has been. But that brings up a question.. isn't the question of "what genre are the Gospels" highly dependent on the person reading it?
It depends on your goals.
Genre is a social construct, we develop and define genre together. An author writes and creates within a specific social context.
If you approach a text and try to divorce it from the social context it developed in, you're just imposing your own society's prerogatives onto the text.
You can certainly do this. But you're not understanding the text. You're making the text conform to your understanding. You're using the text to assert the power and dominance of your group. You're turning the text into propaganda for your society.
If your goal is to understand the text and appreciate it for its own sake, then you need to know about the society that it developed in and the author that developed it. You need to apply empathy and historical methodology to arrive at the category the text best fits and you need to understand as much about that category as you possibly can the way natives of that society would understand it.
So, if the goal is to impose yourself on the text, then yes. Who is reading the text does determine how the genre is determined.
If the goal is to understand the text, then no. The author and the society they existed in, or our best understanding of them (the past is a foreign country), determine the genre of the text.
Some verses of the quran on Jesus (pbuh)
:171] O People of the Scripture(JewsandChristians), do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, “Three”; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs.
[4:172] Never would the Messiah disdain to be a servant of Allah , nor would the angels near [to Him]. And whoever disdains His worship and is arrogant - He will gather them to Himself all together.
[5:17] They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is the Christ , the son of Mary. Say, “Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy the Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?” And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allah is over all things competent.
[5:46] And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming that which came before him in the Torah; and We gave him the Gospel, in which was guidance and light and confirming that which preceded it of the Torah as guidance and instruction for the righteous.
[5:72] They have certainly disbelieved who say, ” Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary” while the has said, “O Children of Israel, worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord.” Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers.
Hm, I never considered the setting of these stories as a sort of urban fantasy before. Makes sense though.
Jesus is walking around a town. The audience, being from anywhere but Jerusalem, is invited to imagine a place that is both exotic but at the same time entirely mundane and even broadly familiar. Jesus is at a market, he's at a person's home, he's walking down the street. Suddenly, the real becomes surreal. A person is in trouble! But not just any trouble, they're possessed or they've been otherwise damaged by some unseen force. The fantastical imposes itself on the mundane. Jesus springs into action and then the fantastic recedes into the shadows. Only we end up with a quaint little speech to cap off the adventure rather than what we might expect in a modern telling.
Gmirkin yesterday, Miller today. Hallelujah!
Thank you for asking this question. What the gosples were and what were they used for. Crucial info to understand what was going on back then and how they saw it as honest practice.
Some verses of the quran on Jesus (pbuh)
:171] O People of the Scripture(JewsandChristians), do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, “Three”; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs.
[4:172] Never would the Messiah disdain to be a servant of Allah , nor would the angels near [to Him]. And whoever disdains His worship and is arrogant - He will gather them to Himself all together.
[5:17] They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is the Christ , the son of Mary. Say, “Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy the Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?” And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allah is over all things competent.
[5:46] And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming that which came before him in the Torah; and We gave him the Gospel, in which was guidance and light and confirming that which preceded it of the Torah as guidance and instruction for the righteous.
[5:72] They have certainly disbelieved who say, ” Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary” while the has said, “O Children of Israel, worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord.” Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers.
Thank you for this excerpt. Loving the kid at the end!
So good to see such in depth research on mythicism. It is so obviously reality and would dramtically improve the world if understood instead of it's deathcult leading it now!
Mythicism doesn't solve any world problems.
Many are called but few are chosen
Great discussion Derek! Keep up the good work brother!
Love you guys! I love Bart, too but sometimes I want to say "C'mon Bart, tell us what you really think!" :)
Bart is too much into Bart. He’s done being a critical scholar and he will never read the hard work of Richard Miller or Dennis MacDonald.
Yeah always thought gospel simply means the good news. They are not biographical or historical at least not in the modern sense.
Christian fundies say each gospel is a single individual's witnessing historical account.
@letsomethingshine yep, and many of them also think the world is between 6000 and 10000 years old. Also, many of them believe a 600 year old man built a floating zoo.
yes. THESE should be the first arguments that anyone should use while responding to ANY christian claim.
The Gospels emerged from a barbaric tribe living on the Sinai Peninsula. The authors wrote stories of hope about a godman who came down from the clouds to save humanity.
The gospels are Creeds. Declarations of faith, written for the specific purpose of codifying and disseminating faith, a clear agenda.
sacred text is the genre
I am sending you all abundant love light life peace prosperity joy and happiness through eternity with your families and communities
@RichardMiller-ym5jc Very funny (and very true, and sad) the _argumentum AD bartum_ 😆
What do you think about Ehrman's implicit threat to young scholars when he says (more than once, and with glee and satisfaction) things like this?: _anyone holding them [mythicism positions] is as likely to get a teaching job in an established department of religion as a six-day creationist is likely to land on in a bona fide department of biology_
On a different topic, in scientific articles it is mandatory that authors declare whether or not there is a potential competing/conflict of interest, or that could be perceived as conflict. For example, from journal _Nature_ : " _competing interests are defined as financial and non-financial interests that could directly undermine, or be perceived to undermine the objectivity, integrity and value of a publication, through a potential influence on the judgements and actions of authors with regard to objective data presentation, analysis and interpretation_ ". All authors must declare any potential conflict of interest even when there is zero conflict, just to be transparent, just because it could be perceived as conflict of interest. Shouldn't biblical scholars follow the example and disclose any faith statement in their peer reviewed publications?
If you read Winnetou - and then claim, you know the history of America from the roots...
3:54 Clip that it’s golden 😉✌️💗
In the case of Mark i use the genre of mystery thriller, as it is about uncovering a subtext compared to the surface level, which then creates that cognitive dissonance.
I think Miller captured something in his way of of description. I would however disagree on one point as i rather think that Mark sold his thriller to the rich and not necessairily to christians, but to people who were somehow interested in the latest near east proceedings.
It would be good to review an interview videotape and then add definitions of terms (such as 'cult determinative')
Hi Derek, have been watching for a few years now to challenge my own confirmation bias. But purely out of curiosity, what did you study at university or what field were you in? I know it’s not necessarily required to interview scholars or experts, but I’m just curious. I’m sure you learn a lot from them and your readings outside the scope of an official university anyway.
Why would you need to study at a university to learn this stuff? The info is there just got to look and read, use root word etymology, Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English translators etc. Over the last 20yrs most of the stuff presented on this channel I have learned on my own just trying to figure out the truth.
@@joshkrause2977 did you read the entire comment?
@joshkrause2977 I agree that information is there at your fingertips these days. It seems there is some bias and indoctrination going on at a lot of these colleges, especially in blue areas like Seattle. I'd be very careful where you send your kids these days, or you won't recognize them when they get back.
Thanks !! Interesting info.. Especially the "eye witnesses" and "biographies" in antiquity. Are you sure there are a total of 90 gospels? I counted 23 plus the 4 on the floor making 27 gospels.
😀 Solid transmission reference! I nominate 3-on-the-tree plus overdrive.
I really wish just brief notes of contextualization were given for those interested but less versed in minutiae of the Bible.
Thank you.
Have you ever noticed that Paul refuted Pascal's Wager in 1 Corinthians 15:19 by knocking out the claim that if Christians are wrong, they have lost nothing.
It seems the writers somewhat mirrored the Priene Calendar Inscription of Augustus Caesar
Those two verse line's are worded differently on in the English language
They are like every story in the bible ... allegory. This isn't a new idea however, what is never discussed is what are they an allegory for? There's only ONE way to answer that question and that is to talk to an actual initiate of the mysteries. I follow the Norse tradition not the Christian yet I understand 75% of their sacred texts because I already know what they're teaching because ALL mystery schools teach only one thing. The philosophy is universal we just use different symbols.. Without the torch light of the initiate I'm sorry to say you're like children stumbling around in the dark
Well when Thor starts beating on the clouds with his big hammer, I find it best to come indoors so I won't get wet or struck by lightning.
Most of what we know of norse traditions comes to us by way of interpretation by christians. So you're kinda stuck.
You're either following what christians understood, in which case ya got a bit of christian tradition in ya.
Or you're filling in the blank spots with your own stuff, in which case you're not really following norse tradition but making up your own.
Or you're picking and choosing as you see fit, in which case you're doing a bit of both.
As such, given that you almost certainly have lived much of your life in a christian influenced cultural context (statistically speaking), your assertion of "understanding 75% of their sacred texts" isn't surprising. Nor is it surprising that you would view "the philosophy" as "universal". You swim in christianity while imagining yourself separate from it. You're like a fish imagining what it's like to swim on land.
Allegorical interpretation was a later thing. Not all stories in the Bible are meant as allegorical.
@@epicofatrahasis3775See Answers in Genesis for example. They still making deceptive tactics to put in their literalists interpretation.
I wonder if the apologists get confused cuz they are holding their book upside-down? Maybe Emperor Derek should buy them glasses.
Is unauthorized gospels reliable for example infancy gospel 🤔
Hila soy de cuba buen programa
Yup you gotta take all the noncanonical gospels into account when you discuss whether Jesus was historical or a story character.
Dude, raised as a Bible Bap, they'd say 66 books are enough, KJV only. And I believed that from a little boy till a few years ago. Still in the process of knowing what's fact or doctrine but I'm really curious who's to say what gospel is canon or not right?
@IOverlord apparently an alleged majority vote 🤣
To me the fact those other gospels exist is evidence enough that the bible is comic books.
Read and compare Luke 4:18 verse with Isaiah 61-1 verse about the way it was written
Funny how some scholars think the gospels writters were writing for them. Luke tries to get an orderly account. He actually says that. Mark was all over etc
0:47 You forgot the most important, a training manual for spiritual practice.
It is really silly to imagine Matthew and Luke as attempts at "cradle to grave" biography. The infancy stories are painfully obvious, even to the authors themselves, as mythical creations. How stupid does the "modern scholar" want to imagine Matthew and Luke must have been? This is my frustration with academia. It traffics in the absurd.
Oh my gods Baby History Buff Miller is the cutest thing ever!
No, You're the cutest.
Omg Derek your son at the end is so precious! He’s got his momma’s good looks! Glad to see you’re raising a critical thinker sir!
Why not Daddy's good looks?
He is Dr. Miller's son, I think.
So Jesus never said Recovery for sight to the blind if it was worded that way from the Septuagint
Nobody can disagree with that
Mr can someone in ur podcast when they tell something please bring data and show Bible in version english and original text Bible ( in hebrew/aramaic/greek) ...? We want also to see what they said and direct see the text from Bible english and original text
There one thing tha t all ancient philosophy texts have in common ,they all condemn sex out side of monogamy and procreation and marriage .This was a reflection of the high rate of out of control pregnancies and disease that were wrecking city ,towns and tribes,since there was no understanding of any birth control method or and birth control or condoms
Yup
All these Doctors, authors, they are just talk about texts, texts, texts trying to go from the level of the historical text to figure out the truth. This is as if you are trying to reconstruct from the shadow the original 3D object that creates the shadow. So according to them if the text has some faults, then Gospel is unrealistic and therefore Jesus did not exist. If they do not believe in Jesus why do they bother so hard to debunk him? I wonder?
If however, they are trying through the Gospel to believe, their approach is wrong. Christianity has undoubtedly miracles to demonstrate (see light of resurrection) reachable and observable every Orthodox easter at the grave of Jesus in Jerusalem. Also the relics of saints which are uncorrupted such as saint Alexander of Svir, and John Maximovits (San Francisco) among many others. Check it out if you are open to the truth. Otherwise you will spend your lifetime trying to convince yourself that Jesus did not exist researching this gospel or the other gospel or this canonical and that apocryphon text ending up nowhere because the voice of your consciousness will keep triggering you to repent and accept the truth while you will be constantly trying to convince that voice that this cannot be true because there is this inconsistency in that gospel or that contradiction at the other gospel. So stop torturing yourself and look at the evidence unbiased.
"This is as if you are trying to reconstruct from the shadow the original 3D object that creates the shadow. " - how Plato of you.
" why do they bother so hard to debunk him?" - the Christian cult(s) have weighed heavily on us through our history, and working our way out of the cultic indoctrinations is important to free ourselves from weight of the Christian hegemony.
EXACTLY. Bart gives just enough of a fingerhold for all the apologists clinging to the ledge.
Oh give me a break. They mention Bart all the time because he’s the devil incarnate to them. It isn’t his fault that he’s so successful against apologists that he’s their primary frame of reference for critical scholarship.
@@Jd-808 I certainly don't think Bart is deliberately doing this, but I did hear at least one apologist claim Bart supported everything this preacher said.
I also have heard Bart repeatedly in claim we have more attestations for the existence of a historical Jesus than figures like Alexander the Great, which is rubbish.
@@johnnehrich9601 If Bart says that, I agree it’s rubbish. But apologists can claim all kinds of things. Overall Bart is extremely effective because everything he says is eminently plausible to any Christian. There isn’t anything strange or foreign about his model, it’s just standard historical methodology being applied to the gospels as if they were any other text. This is very difficult to argue against without sounding like you’re just serving an agenda.
A model like Miller’s is going to be effective _for people who are open to it_, but most evangelicals won’t be. It’s much more difficult to make the case to people like that they shouldn’t be reading the gospels as history, than it is to say “OK, let’s read them as history, and see what shakes out”
@@Jd-808 I do agree with you on this. Ehrman has done outstanding work, in both analyzing and presenting this material to other scholars and to the public. He was the first to break through the dogma for many people.
What I find disturbing is that in relation to mythocists, he has a total blind spot. Ehrman pooh-poohs their work, and is so positive in his claims. Every good mythocist from Carrier on down is "more likely than not," making tentative claims (mostly because we have the slimmest of evidence.) Ehrman specifically disparages Carrier, but Carrier is the one with the PhD in HISTORY from one of the best universities. Ehrman has his doctorate in textual criticism from Princeton Theological Seminary.
If I can make an analogy, it is like Ehrman is claiming Sherlock Holmes definitely existed because the text claims Holmes lives in Nazareth - I mean 221B Baker St. All those Holmes stories are different attestations. But Ehrman's main expertise is analyzing the stories, whereas Carrier examines the Holmes stories against the background of the Victorian world. Doesn't make Carrier more accurate, but Ehrman should not be giving his nervous little laugh when he talks about Carrier.
Carrier, Fitzgerald, Gleason and other mythocists repeatedly warn atheists from using these arguments with believers.
@@johnnehrich9601 I disagree about Carrier. Yes, he has great credentials, but you can’t just rest on them. Functionally I see him as an apologist for mythicism, working backwards from the conclusion and presenting the best possible argument for it. If you look at how he got into researching the subject in the first place…it’s very revealing. He’s good when his work isn’t dependent on mythicist assumptions, but he won’t move on, and he doesn’t need to, because he has a career being a mythicist in the same way Christian apologists have careers doing what they do.
It simply hasn’t mattered that it doesn’t convince any scholars, as long as his audience is convinced. From what I have seen other scholars say, Miller is simply wrong here that Carrier is marginalized as a result of bias or blindnesses in the field. I can believe that happening to Miller and Macdonald but for Carrier there are other things one can point to before leaning on that.
Dr. Miller, pontificating how the authors of the gospels did not intend their writing to be taken literally, ignores the Torah, which such Jews DID take literally and connected their gospel writings to as fulfillment in various ways. This includes the writing styles and techniques. I am shocked how these men speak so assertively and smugly yet ignore huge swaths of data which even "laymen" recognize. There is a near dogmatic bias that these folks end up taking on.
Gospels are genre of sacred texts. I thought that was obvious. They certainly aren't biographies. Their purpose is to preach religion = sacred texts. similar to the Hebrew Bible, Vedas, Gathas. It's not like the Gospels invented religion.
Gotta love all this sound of "one hand clapping" with no significant pushback. Perhaps one day you'll try having a debate between scholars, where we get to hear the rebuttal to the nonsense here. Anyone who claims that the Gospels are "fiction" is simply ignorant and/or deceived. But I guess people would rather have fiction and false ideas rather than truth.
You don't offer any arguments save for derisive comments to compare to what they have said. Why should anyone take you seriously?
@@Fernando-ox5mo Take a look at my channel content and SEE. There is a very real reason why I don't take people like Derek (a non-scholar who blindly appeals to hand-picked, biased scholars) or Dr. Miller seriously.
You see, unlike Derek, I actually TEACH Biblical Hebrew and Greek on my channel, and thus when scholars make false or misleading claims, I can correct the falsehoods and know what's going on. Derek has NO Biblical scholarship of his own, and therefore has no way to discern truth from error in these matters.
@@CRoadwarrior So you have exclusive knowledge of what is "truth"? People who are deceived don't even know they're deceived....do you?
The Nobel prize went to scientists who empirically validated Bell's Theorem. Contra Einstein, non-local effects are real. But this didn't validate Bohr, of whom Bell was a severe critic.
Who's Bell?
Then you've got that the Septuagint show's Greek word's changed the way that the Hebrew word's in sentences were written
He made an excellent argument, as himself a non-Mythicist, as to why those such as Carrier and Lataster need to be part of the discussion. It’s pathetic to see other scholars, and less than scholarly individuals, attempting to marginalize their arguments through strawmanning, personal attacks, mean tweets and derogatory thumbnails.
I dispute that Apologist consider the Gospels as biographies. They seem to assign almost everything in the gospels as analogical: with a very few matters considered historical in the broadest sense, eg, there was some dude whose followers believed raised from the dead.
Apologists are among the most strident Mythists.
Thanks
Thank you very much
Pride and arrogance will not accept who wrote the 10 commandments.
Men wrote the 10 commandments, speaking for their imaginary god.
From a Biblical scholar:
"So for example, when we read carefully what Yahweh says in the book of Leviticus, namely that the Aaronids (the sons of Aaron only), are high priests contrary to the Levites, that they alone are Yahweh’s mediators and the Levites are reduced to mere ministers of the Aaronids, that only through sacrifice can one atone for sins and not confession as preached by the Levites, or more precisely the Levite’s Yahweh, etc., *it can be no coincidence that in these laws and commandments,* ***which are placed on the mouth of Yahweh,*** *that Yahweh himself is presented advocating and legitimating the very views and beliefs of the specific priestly guild writing the text, and,* ***contrary*** *to the views and beliefs of their rivals, the Levites and the Levite’s Yahweh!* We will examine this more closely when we get to the contradictions in these books. But in short, this was the function of ancient literature, and we are allowing these ancient texts to speak for themselves. *In this particular case, the Levites and Aaronids wrote specific texts that each advocated their religious beliefs, views, and their position as high priests* ***by writing these sentiments directly into the mouth of their god!***
But just studying the Bible alone, scientifically, affords us the occasion *to see that many of these so-called words of Yahweh are* ***actually the very words of the texts’ authors.*** When we see numerous texts employing this ancient literary technique, and moreover, ***presenting Yahweh as the spokesperson for their own views and agenda,*** *and* ***contrary*** *to Yahweh’s other words in other texts written by other authors employing the same technique,* how can one conclude otherwise.
In other words, when in the composite text that we now call the Bible we find: Yahweh declaring that only Aaronids can officiate as his priests and Yahweh declaring that all Levites can officiate as high priest; Yahweh declaring that sin is atoned through confession and Yahweh declaring that sin is only expiated through the sacrificial cult, no exceptions; Yahweh declaring that he gave laws and commandments at Sinai and Yahweh declaring that he only gave the Ten Commandments at Sinai; Yahweh commanding to exterminate all the Canaanites without pity and Yahweh declaring to tolerate them and live in their midst; Yahweh declaring that the wilderness generation were disloyal and rebellious and Yahweh declaring that they were a paradigm of loyalty and faith; Yahweh declaring that he may be offered sacrifices at any altar and Yahweh declaring that there is only one altar where sacrifices are to be offered up; Yahweh declaring that the people saw him at Sinai and Yahweh declaring that they only heard his voice; Yahweh declaring that circumcision is an eternal covenant and keeping the land depends on observing this very commandment and Yahweh declaring the Mosaic laws as the covenant and keeping the land is dependent on keeping these laws; Yahweh declaring that he dwells in the midst of the people and Yahweh declaring that he only resides in heaven; Yahweh commanding Passover to be celebrated by all at Jerusalem and Yahweh commanding it to be celebrated at each person’s home; Yahweh commanding that animals for consumption must be ritually sacrificed and Yahweh commanding that they don’t have to be sacrificed ritually, etc. ***one must conclude that Yahweh is being used by these authors, each with their own contrary views and beliefs as a spokesperson for each of these authors’ agendas.*** These are all the personal, and competing, views, theological beliefs, and religious systems of our biblical authors. And this is only the tip of the iceberg."
*"Studying the Bible"* - Dr Steven DiMattei
*"Contradictions in the Bible | Identified verse by verse and explained using the most up-to-date scholarly information about the Bible, its texts, and the men who wrote them"* -- by Dr. Steven DiMattei
"You nailed me hard!" Bro...phrasing? hahaha
I mean, Jesus got nailed hard 😏
@@FaptainCalcon750 ooooh..you went there! haha
David Fitzgerald used to have t-shirts that read, I got Nailed by David Fitzgerald.
Dr Miller has some wonderful facial expressions
confusing, is the diatessaron the cube, Thanos is after?
You know when they say “it’s the greatest story ever told”, haven’t they seen or read “The Great Escape”?
I reckon "The Hobbit" leaves it for dead as well
22:30 I like how you just dismissed natural remedies as worthless myths while gave all the credits for "modern medicine". yeah, this was worked extremely well especially in the past few years.
That is so devistating. 😮😢. The world is full of the Bible story of Jesus, being a VIP doode figure, and all of the Christmas ☃️ story telling stories about this man Jesus, and Mary the mother of him, Christian religion is about Jesus yeshua, and woven fabric around Christmas story stuff
The Greek's changed alot of word's of the Hebrew bible. Example: "Almah," was written in Hebrew language but not in the Greek language
The Gospels aren't based on what the hebrew people said that was written but what was written from the Septuagint
😂😂😂
Listening to this episode makes me remember my kids as todlers. You know the toys todlers have with squares, triangles, round and star-shaped things that you want the todler to fit into similar shaped holes…more or less successful😂
I learned long ago that when the map and reality doesn’t match it is always reality that matters.
When will all parts of ”science” accept that when reality and theory doesn’t match, it is time to update the theory and in this case the division between different categories. 🙄
Yes.. and that is the scientific (academic) method, namely to adjust the models of understanding until they best explain the data. In truth, as several classicists have explained, genre in 1st-century Greek literature had become messy and typically violated by manner of fusion. Few texts of that period were fitting entirely into traditional / standing categories because of this. The gospel genre itself exemplified this.
@@RichardMiller-ym5jc As well as other writings from that time, like the ”diaries” from Caesar etc. So why we try to fit books and letters from that time into todays labels?
@@Mikeatthenet, Your intuition is a somewhat correct. The genre's over time have evolved and morphed and even vary between concurrent civilizations. If you google "ancient biography wiki" you'll find a page that seeks to place the gospels under the ancient genre. Society today tends to hold public published biographies to various standards of accuracy. The ancient biography in the Greek and Roman world was held to somewhat looser standards, particularly in late antiquity (c. 150 - 500 CE), that is, after the composition of the NT Gospels.
@@RichardMiller-ym5jc It seems to be a general problem that ”we” tends to judge past time based on our standards instead of focusing on how things were undrrstood at the time it was written. Thats why I find it a bit odd to discuss if the gospels are biography, history, an article written by a journalist aiming for Pulitzer prize etc. It is what it is and the interresting thing is the intention by the author and how the original recievers/readers understood the message and if we can be sure we understands it correctly. I am fairly convinced the authors of the gospels didn’t aim for a certain genre when they wrote the gospels. I am convinced they had a message and wanted to present it as good and convincing as possible, meaning probably more in the genre of what Aristoteles and later Caesar and Cicero did when they were fighting in their legal battles early in their careers, meaning some form of ”rhetorics”. I am not sure what a modern speach like MLK’s ”I have a dream” speach would have been classified if distributed as a book for example.
19:40 THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU. I like Ehrman, too -- but the idea that Daniel/Isaiah/Ezekiel-obsessed, xenophobic, strictly Torah-adherent messianic Jewish sectarians would come up with "pay your taxes", "respect Caesar as God's leader on earth", "be a good little slave" pro-Roman stuff *let alone* all the blatant antisemitism in the NT is just silly on its face. Ehrman gives Paul WAY too much credibility. Tabor, too. Still love those guys... but you can tell they grew up religious -- and very far from actual Jewish folks.
The writers focused on the most relevant ideas at hand, you want a 500 page biography
We are discussing ancient genre, not what historians “want”…
👍🏼
The Gospels as theological Fan Fiction
When I first became a Christian I would get frustrated when people would cling to their fables or doctrines of men they assumed came from the Bible like Xmas, Easter, the trinity etc. More thoroughly understanding that the Bible, both Testaments were written to be understood primarily by the Church for doctrines, instruction and correction, and that primarily for the latter days(Matthew 13:11, Luke 8:10, Revelation 1:1) I now sit back and am entertained by the scholars and critics( scoffers if you will) twisting themselves into knots trying to critique or disprove something they can’t possibly understand. They certainly will in time, but for now quite amusing indeed!😂🙈🙉
Seems awfully narcissistic to assume these wildly diverse and originally disassociated texts were composed primarily for you and your American cultural community today. We scholars sit back and laugh (and cry) seeing the abject lunacy of modern superstitionism related to these utterly misunderstood texts in our modern time. Humankind clings to these texts, however grossly misunderstood, as a cheap poorly tied together mythical raft of junk on the high seas of reality. The English Bible is a culturally contrived raft of false comforts and delusion. Few if any of its original authors would have participated in writing their respective bits had they foreseen that their respective text would have been botched together with all these other texts, miss-translated to death, and mass published to a global readership as superstitious / sacralized self-help literature from the very mouth of the deity of a world religion thousands of years later.
@@RichardMiller-ym5jc What do you think about the idea of the Bible as a form of Jewish nationalism and/or a way to preserve Jewish identity?
@@RichardMiller-ym5jc Now that is a classic, albeit hysterical response. A self identifying “scholar” disparaging another person as a narcissist. Absolutely hysterical. Creative too I might add, “mythical raft of junk on the high seas of reality”! You must be a poet as well as a “scholar “. You must post a link to some of your ‘associated, cerebral, congruous’ research to help educate and enlighten a poor peasant. Im sure it’s truly fascinating! The screenshot of your comment will serve as needed comic relief as unsuspecting humankind ( superstitious peasants and scholars alike) hurls itself into the event horizon of its pinnacle achievement! Priceless indeed. Thank you!
@@mikebrown9850, I cannot hate you.. I was once not unlike you. I would spit on anyone whom I perceived as the enemy of my belief system. I did not follow the master all that closely, mind you. If I had truly believed the stuff, I would have taken seriously the injunction always to treat others with gentleness and respect (1 pet 3.15) whenever I sought to defend my internal Christian hope. For me, however sincere my beliefs, religion brought out lower versions of myself, not better.
I sincerely wish you well, man.
@@Justin_Beaver564 Hi there.. I think that is an insightful way to begin framing contextualizing these texts. Have you heard of Josephus Flavius ? He was a first-century Jewish historian. In his own writings, he often described the Hebrew Bible as civic literature, the literature of a civilization, similar to how most all other civilizations had their civic texts, often riddled with myth and foundation legends (e.g., the Greeks, Persians, Chinese, Egyptians, etc.). I think the New Testament was a bit different in that these texts were primarily outward facing and aimed more at forming identities for early cultic communities.
The idea that gospels were biographies isn’t an apologetical one…they just latch onto it because of what the word signifies today. Robyn Faith Walsh for example considers them biographies.
Intuitively though Dr Miller’s conception of the intended audience, the gospels as “cultic literature” for assemblies etc, makes more sense to me than what she advocates (that they were intended for an elite literary audience). But I don’t understand how that makes them something other than biographies, and I think it explains the absence of the typical aspects of the genre he notes.
My work concludes that the gospels (both in and outside the NT) defied any tidy generic class, which is why they gained their own labeled class and were never called “biographies” or “histories” or “mythographies.” Also important to bear in mind that almost from day-1, they were being allegorized and symbologized, and placed alongside an utterly whimsical parade of other “gospel” narratives exiting the earliest Christian literary myth factory.
New data update. Plastic toxicity is making people gay and or trans. Look in to it it is important for all life on earth.
Go more than moderate atheism start questioning the Talmud and the Koran too
Mark is rather an Eulogy or Reqiem (in a parable/parallel story manner) then a Biography of Nerones chrestos (Jesus Christ), it begins where Neron/christ at an age of almost 29 kicks off his 3 years ministry with his baptism/ Anastasis ( 'going on stage' ; appearing, surrection ) culminating in the climax of 'sacrificing his life'/ 'the' crucifixion . Ofcourse at the time everrybody knew 'chrestos' and everybody knew precise who Mark meant .
Jesus born around 4, plus 32 (29+3)= 36 the birth-year of Neron. 36 plus 32 (29+3)= 68 when Nerones died ; Jesus life is just Nerones life mirrorred (shifted) back in time. This time-shift is used by Mark, together with the identity change to write his 'underground' gospel in code. Mark did so to avoid the cursing, the 'damnatio memoriam' declared by the roman senate upon Nerones .
Nerones Mentor, grandpa, uncles, stephdad, mother , halfbrother and relatives are all woven into the fairy /tale. A special double role is played by Seneca who is Simon (peter), Judas (lucius), Annas (caiaphas), Kephas (Anneus) and Pilate (Quirinius) the procurator/prosecutor ; all opposers together. Grandpa (camillus = germanicus ) is the heir of Tiberius who is mirrorred ( fits )with king Herod . The uncles are obsolete (martyred) together with grandma. Germanicus dynasty the claudians is named as 'herodians' and about this house divided in itself is many more to tell. Magnifico Spectaculo
Guys for the material reader mythology s fake and copycat form previous giants. For the abstract magi it's simply a nuisance that can't be ignored.
In what minute they discussed about bart erhman?
Host the TWIN RICHARD(S) discussion!
Make it happen!
I would rather see Miller and Crossan. They are actually not very far apart.
Well there is one thing for sure. When we die, we will find out about Heaven and Hell or we will just rot in the ground.
...or something else no one has thought of.
Are you sure about that? Ecclesiastes says the dead know nothing which implies no consciousness...when your brain is destroyed, YOU are destroyed.
Or Reincarnation, or eternal reoccurence, or alternate universe, multiverse, or a return to the source, open your mind, man.
@@lilchaos4792 I would like to be re-incarnated as a seagull and just hang around Mc Donalds or the wal-mart parking lot all day. Maybe I could go down to the beach or go fishing, that would be nice. If I get bored I could just fly and soar through the air and be high.
we already know. dead means dead, same as dinosaurs.
The Gospels are messages. They were "good news;" that is what "gospel" means. They were the good news of the kingdom of God.
The Gosples are not biographies, though they include vignettes of Jesus' life. After all, Jesus did not merely speak the messsage; he was the message.
In the Gospels, Jesus is a real historical man and what he said and did was absolutely connected to real history. They were not spiritual self-help books not spiritual philosophy. They were not treated like that in the non-canonical documents we have, such as the Epistle of Barnabas, the Didache, and 1st Clement. In all of these, a real life Jesus connects us to the real future life called eternal life.
Barnabas 5:1
"For to this end the Lord endured to deliver His flesh unto
corruption, that by the remission of sins we might be cleansed, which
cleansing is through the blood of His sprinkling."
If Jesus was not a real historical preacher of righteousness who died for sins, then Barnabas, et al. are misreading them.
Uuuf. Rude awakenings pending.
How can we know the true gospels without the church?
How does the “church” know?
Fan fiction.
I think most Christians and atheists tend to forget that the Bible was written by man that's why it's riddled with mistakes because man is riddled with mistakes
If Southern Baptist and many other denominations get to cherry-pick the hate then be smart enough to cherry-pick the love. The Bible I think is meant to give us a choice Between Love and Hate, choose. I say to all atheists and Christians good luck because I have no idea what happens after death all I want to do is be a good person in this life and I want to model myself after Jesus Christ of Nazareth even though I can never be him or even come close but it's an impossible goal I would like to try for
"The Bible I think is meant to give us a choice Between Love and Hate"
This is a modern revisionist view. The Bible was meant to establish dogma. It just happens to be a lot more interesting that the compilers probably imagined.
@@neilcreamer8207 No it's just called thinking for myself and not letting a preacher control my religious thought process
I hope I'm closer to the right then the people who tend to focus on the hate.
I think a lot of Christians unfortunately have been led to believe all pastors are divine angels here to share the word and I just don't see it that way, from the beginning there have been those who have used religious text to draw hate and focus that hate on the impoverished. They fail to realize preachers, just like the apostles, we're just men interpreting The Words of Christ. You have the choice and the free will to follow the hate embedded by humans or the love that Jesus Christ of Nazareth talked about for one another, his message may have been muddled by his disciples but that does not take away your power to choose love or hate.
@@zt3823 I think most people, including Christians, have no idea about the fabrication, lies and forgery that is Christian literature, not least that the words they put in Jesus’ mouth (if there even was such a figure) are probably fiction. Nor do they know how exaggerated are the stories of the persecution Christians suffered or that once Constantine made Christianity a state-endorsed religion, Christians started to attack the old religions and Classical literature. Anyone who thinks that the early Christians were anything but vindictive, cruel and destructive should read about the murder of Hypatia of Alexandria. And if you think that Christianity was founded as a sweet religion of love, read the Book of Revelation.
@@neilcreamer8207 do you believe everything everyone tells you because I don't think you should which is why you shouldn't believe the Bible all the way it's people's ideas on religion it probably wasn't even written by the apostles but there was a man named Jesus Christ from Nazareth who they all encountered and talked about and his amazing message and I think there's something to that man's message that's just my opinion
Vegetarian Talks
It is literature.
Dear God Derek! What was that largely unintelligible introduction??? Use SIMPLE COMMON SMALL WORDS alhamdulilah 🙏🏽
The New Testament (the Muratorian Fragment) got rewritten by King James thus changing what was written in the Hebrew language
That depends. It’s also possible that the Gospel writers writings were based on the LXX
I can tell you I've been in the Presence of God. It was accompanied with power. See Ephesians 3:19 Amplified version. My experience in April, 1972 mirrors that verse. Christ is resurrected. That experience answered my question, "Does God exist" in the affirmative. It's like being introduced to a living human being. From then on you know you met this person and that person was real.
For me to say God doesn't exist and the Bible is fiction.......I know I'd be lying because I KNOW otherwise.
God loves you, Christ gave His life for you showing how much he loves you individually.
One NT manuscript expert, Bart Ehrman, says that none of his work impacts or negates any foundational Christian tenets/beliefs. So, where's the beef? IOW, what's the point of all his arguments, that being the case? His arguments are superfluous. They don't matter, IMO, for that reason. There's been no corruption of core Christian tenets says Ehrman. Most of the textual variants have to do with spelling a word differently and superfluous things of that nature.
Do you talk to Christians that are scholars in the field of NT manuscripts? If not you may be seeking confirmation bias and not the truth.
How about being around some Christians for a month or two or three and watching what they do on a daily basis? I know of one in particular who discipled me in college I could introduce you to. He's a Navigator Rep in New Mexico, now 81 years old. I was impressed with him from the get go. He had promises from God for a wife and children in 1971. (Yes God actually does communicate to humans through His Spirit. I've experienced it myself.) He met with God on a daily basis, wrote down what he prayed for and wrote down how God answered his requests. He witnessed to people on almost a daily basis. I thought wow this guy acts like God really exists. I found out that He really does exist. You might learn the same things by being around believers carrying out His assignments here on earth.
Which version of god exists? Which version of Jesus was real? Why does the Jesus story match older stories of different “sons” of god? Why is the Bible riddled with zodiac symbolism and numerology?
TLDR
@@joshkrause2977
Can you be more specific as to what you mean by "which version" of God and Christ exist? I don't know what you mean.
It's simply Christ that was crucified and resurrected for the salvation of mankind. The one written about in the NT manuscripts. The Christ crucified at Passover.
No clue about older stories of different "son's of god. You'd have to be specific on that. Are you claiming there are other stories about someone who claimed to be God and who died for the salvation of mankind? Who was the Lamb of God that took away the sins of the world?
God filled me with His Presence for 3 days in 1972. Around 1993 or 1995 I found a passage, Ephesians 3:19 Amplified, that my experience mirrors exactly. That blew me away that there was scriptural basis for it.
That God, who creates from nothing and calls things that don't exist into existence. The God who can fill you with the richest measure of His Divine Presence. The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Moses. The One who places desires within us so that we pray for those specific things and He answers affirmatively. The I AM of the Bible.
The God who loved the world so much that he sent His Son into the world in oorder that the world might be redeemed through Him.
The God who can empower a person to break their alcohol addiction or drug addiction. The God who meets our needs for love, security, and peace. The God who has promised to send the Comforter, to make His home within us and has promised to prepare a dwelling place for us in heaven.
How can you say that God is loving when you believe God tortures people eternally for finite sins? Including the "sin" of simply believing the wrong things about God. For me, that's the #1 reason I don't believe in traditional Christianity. It's a stark contradiction that there is no way to get around. I've never seen any apologist even come close to resolving that contradiction. You can say that this is just the reality of how salvation works, but you can't then turn around and say God loves us. If I told you about a guy who has kept his son in a torture chamber for the last 40 years because his son believed the wrong things when he was a child, anyone would think that guy is monstrously evil. Yet that man I described is literally INFINITELY more just, more compassionate, and more loving than the God you believe in. Torturing people eternally for finite crimes isn't love - it's the polar opposite of love. It's pure unadulterated evil. Just being frank here. Sometimes I see people try to resolve the contradiction by simply saying there are "rules" about the nature of salvation God has to follow. But if such rules exist and God can't change them, then God is not all-powerful.
@@Trip_Fontaine
One thing I know and have experienced, the Presence of God. That has happened several times and the way He's let me experience His Presence has varied. The most intense and powerful experience was in 1972.
As an analogy: What if I was introduced to someone and we shook hands and talked for a while. Then I began to see posts and news about this person that he was imaginary, never actually existed? I would know the stories about this person being imaginary were false.
That's what all this doubting Christ was an historical figure and not being God, etc. is to me. It's false, based on my personal experience, untrue.
I hope you understand that's where I'm coming from.
So as far as God being cruel and evil with the punishment being given to those who don't obey Him, I don't know how to respond. It does seem harsh to me. But, I'm not God. I didn't make this universe. I have experienced His love from Him directly. Humans are a mixed bag. Some believers I've experienced love from, others I've experienced rejection from.
I'm in the disciples boat from John 6:
"67 'You do not want to leave too, do you?' Jesus asked the Twelve.
68 Simon Peter answered him, 'Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69 We have come to believe and to know that you are the Holy One of God.' "
At first I believed Christ was resurrected and that his death paid for my sin. A few years later while involved with a college ministry I came to KNOW that He is the Holy One of God, not just by faith but by experience. My faithfulness to Him has been all over the map. My record is spotty at best. I'm doing the best I know how at present. Am I going to allow something He has said to be a stumbling block for me? Who else has His power? Where would I go and do if I allowed something He says or something about His character to be a stumbling block? There is nowhere else to go. Simple answer.
I am something in this world of humans. I deserve respect and the love of my family and friends.
But before God I am a zero. I fall at His throne begging for mercy and grace. I can't offer Him a thing. He owns the cattle on a thousand hills, is rich beyond measure. My righteous acts are as filthy rags. That's who I am before Christ. Unworthy to untie His sandals. So, how can I criticize His judgements and actions whether I agree with them or not?
Matthew 7:
"14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few."
What I can tell you is that to be in God's Presence is better than life itself.
CS Lewis was smarter than you, Richard C Miller.
About what, Missy ?? Medieval literature. He didn’t have any training in NT, Bible, Ancient Near East, or Early Christian Literature.
Better men than this guy and all the commentators here have tried to discredit the Gospels starting from the liberal German scholars Wellhausen et al in the 1860's onwards. They are still trying today. The bIble has undergone exhaustive literary,, textual, historical etc. criticism from the most stringent of atheist scholars since then. There is nothing new this person is saying. And he's trying to persuade you that there's new stuff to say.
They are the Gospels, the Gospels of Jesus Christ. Problem solved.
sacred texts. sequel to the hebrew bible.
All written 150 or more years after he died……
The Jews desperately want to build the 3rd temple in Jerusalem, would you be willing to help them?
a) there were Jews at the time; they were Hebrews, b) the Hebrew doctrine was a 3rd Temple would be celestial, 3rd, there had been hundreds of Temples built on the site: it is a convention to refer to the early structure as 2nd ... the 1st is mythical.
@russellmiles2861 Are you saying there was never a 1st temple built in Jerusalem? When say the Hebrew doctrine, are you referring to the Old Testament?
@@tryme3969 I would prefer Hebrew Bible or Tanakh. Regardless, the Hebrew concept of a 3rd Temple is that which YEHEW creates on return. It is more complex that that as they don't consider YEHEW to have left. But they have a concept of a final reconciliation which a celestial temple is an aspect. Thus, can't call any structure a third temple. They have built lots of temples: they all get called 2nd Temple - it is a concept as much as a structure. They certainly believe their was a 1st.Temple to shelter YEWEH. This occured back in their dream time, a mythical period. There was no such temple outside of imagination. Then again what we imagine is no less significant that what our external senses might tell us about.
@russellmiles2861 I'm trying to understand what you're saying here. Are you saying that there was no destruction of the 1st temple in Jerusalem by the Babylonians?