It could easily be a series of legends compounded over time. Since we know that Mark had the least incredible claims. Matthew had more. Luke had more. And John had the most. Also, it has been demonstrated that most crucified people are not entombed but left for carrion on the crosses. Believing in Christianity means believing in John and Paul. ( I am not against the social moral teachings that the church later developed. )
(If you're referring to the CZcamsr) Watched about 5 minutes of a video from him, he's a complete buffoon. "Most roman crucifixions would have ended in leaving the person to rot on the cross." Cool, that doesn't explain anything in relation to the events that took place, the historical archeology discoveries and writings we have about the event. That's like saying, "Most people who murder someone in America don't get the death penalty" Awesome, does that mean nobody anywhere in America gets the death penalty? NOPE. Simple jack logic.
@@TheRealTrucido Yes, I can tell that you only watched 5 minutes of Paulogia's videos in total by your complete lack of comprehension about his content. He in fact addresses the issue you bring up. Pehaps you should try again. Try FINISHING the video this time.
"I don't like what the bad man said, so I'm just gonna say "nuh-uh" to everything i don't agree with and ignore the exhaustive efforts he put into the videos, and ignore the experts he has in them."
@@TheRealTrucido Of the 100,000 - 250,000 people crucified by the Romans, exactly 2 are evidenced not to have been left to rot or thrown into a common pit grave. Of those 2, one was a Roman citizen, and therefore eligible for proper burial. And there is no evidence whatsoever that your jesus, if he existed, was buried in a tomb at all. Of course, the fact that the alleged owner of the tomb came from an imaginary town doesn't help your claim. Neither does the fact that currently, your co-religionists have identified 5 different "true tombs of jesus." You demonstrate the utter desperation of your kind to prove that a book of fairy tales is literally true. And you look a fool at the task.
@@TheRealTrucido "he's a complete buffoon. "Most roman crucifixions would have ended in leaving the person to rot on the cross." " And that is every historian will tell you. Are those buffoons too, or... ;)
I'm very curious about where you got your art. The picture of the girl on the left in the first 30 seconds of the video looks extremely similar to John Byrne's (of Marvel and DC Comics fame) style, nigh on identical.
Lol Lee Stobel is the last person who would trust on this issue. And no there's not a bunch of sources. There's the claims in the bible that contradict each other. Biblical Scholars and linguistic scholars can easily point out textual inconveniences, additions and subtractions. Legendary expansion is quite evident. The dying and rising messiah motif and apocalyptic movements was already in place well before Jesus. A Jewish messiah named Yeshua was crucified 70 yrs before Christ for heresy.
Most of the reason that Jews and in particular the Pharisees didnt want to follow Jesus is because they didnt have a dying and rising messiah motif. However, Daniel 9 is further evidence that he in fact is the Messiah. Because the temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. So either A) There is no God of the Jews or B) Jesus is God that fulfilled the prophecies. Option A is pretty lame since the beginning of the universe wasn't from nothing without design. So Option B it is!
@@TheRealTrucido _"A) There is no God of the Jews ... Option A is pretty lame since the beginning of the universe wasn't from nothing without design"_ That could be used for the ultimate in Petitio Principii !
@@PastPresented Cool story bro. Love the argument and counter points. However you must actually read the full context of what I said instead of cherry picking one of the sentences and claiming it's a fallacy. Here let me re-read it to you like you're a child. (Referring to the prophecy of the Messiah in Daniel 9) *Because the temple was destroyed in 70 A.D.* So either A) There is no God of the Jews or B) Jesus is God that fulfilled the prophecies. Option A is pretty lame since the beginning of the universe wasn't from nothing without design. So Option B it is!
Did you see the video or just give your opinion. You believe a conspiracy theorie? For hundreds of years they tried to find the so called contradictions but always debunked. No one can convince an atheist but God alone.
Question. What jurisdiction did the temple priests in Jerusalem have over people in a different province when they allowed Saul to go to Damascus and haul Believers in Jesus back to Jerusalem to give account of their belief?
What evidence is there that Jesus was given a burial instead of being left on the cross to decay? Also, do you believe that others also were resurrected after Jesus' death?
The celebrated French writer Madame Staël was a Protestant ; and one of her friends, also a Protestant, made known to her that she had been converted to Catholicism. The famous writer replied, " I am determined to die in my parents' religion." "And I, my friend, have decided to die in my grandparents' religion." Sangyen 423 ✝️🙏
Ridiculous stories are always exactly that. Stories. While there are things we can't explain, or don't understand, it does not mean that miracles or magic exist. They do not. And so far, these ridiculous claims have offered only confusion to mankind, not the healing or peace they promise.
If any religious person would be able to read another book beyond the Bible, they could realize that religion worked only till our knowledge of reality started to debunk the theistic claims. Wishful thinkers and woke people are on the other end of the spectrum, yet they are the consequence of eradicating natural selection, and aylums.
Mock all you want, but if Rome or the Pharisees wanted to stop people from saying he is risen, they would have drug his body through the streets. The fact they couldnt do that, because there was no body, is evidence. It's the same logic as, "I won the lottery!" well if you cant provide the lottery ticket that says you won, evidence says you didnt. Right? Simple logic. Please educate yourself and ask yourself why you're mocking in the first place.
This video is not about an empty tomb, it is about eyewitnesses who say the saw resurrected Jesus and how that was not just a made up thing and I find it very annoying you use the LOL crap as if you just know everything, you are so sure. maybe someday you will not be so sure. I doubt you watched the whole thing or even tried to understand what he is saying.
@@fredgarv79 Since there is not a single word of eyewitness testimony about jesus anywhere in the bible, your claim is silly. All you have in your book is anonymous authors who say that someone told them that someone else said they saw jesus. Perhaps you understand the value of hearsay? Right, none. LOL
@@fredgarv79 Number of WRITERS who wrote in the bible that "I SAW THE RESURRECTED JESUS" = 0 There are anonymous writers writing they heard that some OTHER people saw something LOLZ
Study history. Historians and scholars accept the evidence even though most of them do not accept the resurrection as having occurred. They do however agree that something significant happened to make numerous believe that Jesus was resurrected. The reason is due to the events that occurred after the crucifixion.
LOL, the first mention of Jesus was in a record that talks about a cult hat worship a guy named Jesus, 60 years after Jesus alleged death. No mention what Jesus did, which is funny according to the gravity of the miracles that he made in his last 3 years. No other document about wine from water, no mention of walking on water, no mention of feeding thousands with only 4 fish etc. While we have records about how was the price of whey during that period? Right? Anyone who says there is evidence that Jesus existed are simply lying.
Most historians and scholars accept that a person who people now called jesus lived. He was, apparently, an apocalyptic Jewish preachers, with a few followers, who pissed off the Romans and was executed. There were so many apocalyptic itinerant preachers at the time, the claim is ordinary. But, f course, historians and scholars also accept the utter and complete lack of evidence that this jesus was anything but an ordinary troublemaker - not divine, not resurrected, just a loud guy who was executed.
@@petercollins7730 Nobody have evidence about the Biblical Jesus, the first records about a guy named Jesus was 60 years after his alleged death and the document only mention that name as somebody whom a group of cultists worshipped.
@@jhonvoyage2564 Well, Paul wrote about jesus about 20 years after his alleged death, but of course Paul never met jesus and was repeating stories from others. The gospels were written from 40 to 70 years after the alleged death of jesus, but they were not eyewitnesses either. The gospels were written by anonymous authors repeating, again, long-told stories from others. There is no evidence for jesus outside of the bible until 60 years after his supposed death, and that, if genuine (most scholars believe it is not genuine) simply mentions that there were people who believed in jesus. So, there is evidence, of a sort, 20 years after the life of jesus. But it isn't very good evidence.
A basic technique in writing any fiction is to do just that - set up the hero (or heroes) as fallen, or lost, or bad. Then, near the end, they are reborn as heroes and great men, etc. Sad you haven't read any other book than your 2000 year old book of fairy tales. If you had, you'd know this.
@petercollins7730 3500 year old technique? Amazing they got 40 people over a 1500 year period to write 66 books with your premise in mind. Or, you don't believe it's true and feel you need to validate that opinion. Besides, I only prefer nonfiction
@@Raeodor It was written over 1000 years, not 1500. And it lacks any semblance of univocality - the number of direct contradictions in the bible are in the thousands. Many of the authors, especially of the new testament, clearly had the previous writings to use as template. Whoever wrote Matthew, for the most extreme example, wrote much of his book (the part not copied from Mark) in order to deliberately fulfill what he thought were prophecies in the Hebrew bible. Finally, remember the bible was assembled and edited, much of it edited multiple times. Not edited well, but edited. And you refer to the 66 book bible; what about the bible of 80 books, or 83 books, or 85. How do you know that your bible is the correct bible?
@petercollins7730 because burden of proof was used to know which books were authentic. All your other points are also just flat wrong. You got a lot of research to do. Don't just listen to whatever you hear and read. I'm sorry you fell into that trap. It's all real and you can prove it yourself.
@@Raeodor No, you missed the point. Currently, there are bibles which have met the "burden of proof" and which include 66, 80, 83, and 85 individual books. Obviously you are protestant and accept the short bible; other protestants accept the longer bibles. Roman Catholic and Orthodox bible have 72 (or 73, depending on whether Lamentations is separated) books. So, explain why your bible is the correct one, with evidence. As to research, you cite no evidence whatsoever. You simply parrot what you learned from apologists on CZcams. Explain why your bible is correct, with evidence. I'll wait. That's your burden of proof.
It could easily be a series of legends compounded over time. Since we know that Mark had the least incredible claims. Matthew had more. Luke had more. And John had the most. Also, it has been demonstrated that most crucified people are not entombed but left for carrion on the crosses. Believing in Christianity means believing in John and Paul. ( I am not against the social moral teachings that the church later developed. )
You should check out Paulogia. He covers this topic in exhaustive detail with excellent scholarly sources, far far better than Strobel.
(If you're referring to the CZcamsr) Watched about 5 minutes of a video from him, he's a complete buffoon. "Most roman crucifixions would have ended in leaving the person to rot on the cross." Cool, that doesn't explain anything in relation to the events that took place, the historical archeology discoveries and writings we have about the event. That's like saying, "Most people who murder someone in America don't get the death penalty" Awesome, does that mean nobody anywhere in America gets the death penalty? NOPE. Simple jack logic.
@@TheRealTrucido Yes, I can tell that you only watched 5 minutes of Paulogia's videos in total by your complete lack of comprehension about his content. He in fact addresses the issue you bring up.
Pehaps you should try again. Try FINISHING the video this time.
"I don't like what the bad man said, so I'm just gonna say "nuh-uh" to everything i don't agree with and ignore the exhaustive efforts he put into the videos, and ignore the experts he has in them."
@@TheRealTrucido Of the 100,000 - 250,000 people crucified by the Romans, exactly 2 are evidenced not to have been left to rot or thrown into a common pit grave. Of those 2, one was a Roman citizen, and therefore eligible for proper burial. And there is no evidence whatsoever that your jesus, if he existed, was buried in a tomb at all. Of course, the fact that the alleged owner of the tomb came from an imaginary town doesn't help your claim. Neither does the fact that currently, your co-religionists have identified 5 different "true tombs of jesus."
You demonstrate the utter desperation of your kind to prove that a book of fairy tales is literally true. And you look a fool at the task.
@@TheRealTrucido "he's a complete buffoon. "Most roman crucifixions would have ended in leaving the person to rot on the cross." "
And that is every historian will tell you. Are those buffoons too, or... ;)
I'm very curious about where you got your art. The picture of the girl on the left in the first 30 seconds of the video looks extremely similar to John Byrne's (of Marvel and DC Comics fame) style, nigh on identical.
Lol Lee Stobel is the last person who would trust on this issue. And no there's not a bunch of sources. There's the claims in the bible that contradict each other. Biblical Scholars and linguistic scholars can easily point out textual inconveniences, additions and subtractions. Legendary expansion is quite evident. The dying and rising messiah motif and apocalyptic movements was already in place well before Jesus. A Jewish messiah named Yeshua was crucified 70 yrs before Christ for heresy.
Most of the reason that Jews and in particular the Pharisees didnt want to follow Jesus is because they didnt have a dying and rising messiah motif. However, Daniel 9 is further evidence that he in fact is the Messiah. Because the temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. So either A) There is no God of the Jews or B) Jesus is God that fulfilled the prophecies. Option A is pretty lame since the beginning of the universe wasn't from nothing without design. So Option B it is!
@@TheRealTrucido _"A) There is no God of the Jews ... Option A is pretty lame since the beginning of the universe wasn't from nothing without design"_
That could be used for the ultimate in Petitio Principii !
@@PastPresented Cool story bro. Love the argument and counter points. However you must actually read the full context of what I said instead of cherry picking one of the sentences and claiming it's a fallacy.
Here let me re-read it to you like you're a child.
(Referring to the prophecy of the Messiah in Daniel 9)
*Because the temple was destroyed in 70 A.D.* So either A) There is no God of the Jews or B) Jesus is God that fulfilled the prophecies. Option A is pretty lame since the beginning of the universe wasn't from nothing without design. So Option B it is!
Ahh yes a failed dichotomy. Must be either your conclusion of an old interpretation of Daniel or something lame.
Did you see the video or just give your opinion. You believe a conspiracy theorie? For hundreds of years they tried to find the so called contradictions but always debunked. No one can convince an atheist but God alone.
There is at least 4-5 years between each Gospel. Legendary corruption could easily happen in 40 years.
Question. What jurisdiction did the temple priests in Jerusalem have over people in a different province when they allowed Saul to go to Damascus and haul Believers in Jesus back to Jerusalem to give account of their belief?
What evidence is there that Jesus was given a burial instead of being left on the cross to decay? Also, do you believe that others also were resurrected after Jesus' death?
The Sabbath wasn't changed until much later.
The celebrated French writer Madame Staël was a Protestant ; and one of her friends, also a Protestant, made known to her that she had been converted to Catholicism. The famous writer replied, " I am determined to die in my parents' religion."
"And I, my friend, have decided to die in my grandparents' religion."
Sangyen 423
✝️🙏
Another excellent video; God bless you.
BTW it's 'mistook' not 'mistaked'.
Ridiculous stories are always exactly that. Stories. While there are things we can't explain, or don't understand, it does not mean that miracles or magic exist. They do not. And so far, these ridiculous claims have offered only confusion to mankind, not the healing or peace they promise.
Sigh.
If any religious person would be able to read another book beyond the Bible, they could realize that religion worked only till our knowledge of reality started to debunk the theistic claims. Wishful thinkers and woke people are on the other end of the spectrum, yet they are the consequence of eradicating natural selection, and aylums.
Opinions, claims, whatifs...
An empty tomb is exactly as much evidence for a resurrected god as an empty stable is evidence for a flying Pegasus.
LOLZ
Mock all you want, but if Rome or the Pharisees wanted to stop people from saying he is risen, they would have drug his body through the streets. The fact they couldnt do that, because there was no body, is evidence. It's the same logic as, "I won the lottery!" well if you cant provide the lottery ticket that says you won, evidence says you didnt. Right? Simple logic. Please educate yourself and ask yourself why you're mocking in the first place.
This video is not about an empty tomb, it is about eyewitnesses who say the saw resurrected Jesus and how that was not just a made up thing and I find it very annoying you use the LOL crap as if you just know everything, you are so sure. maybe someday you will not be so sure. I doubt you watched the whole thing or even tried to understand what he is saying.
@@fredgarv79 Eyewitnesses, whom are credited by what? Are you aware that people able to tell untrue things, right?
@@fredgarv79 Since there is not a single word of eyewitness testimony about jesus anywhere in the bible, your claim is silly. All you have in your book is anonymous authors who say that someone told them that someone else said they saw jesus. Perhaps you understand the value of hearsay? Right, none. LOL
@@fredgarv79 Number of WRITERS who wrote in the bible that "I SAW THE RESURRECTED JESUS" = 0
There are anonymous writers writing they heard that some OTHER people saw something
LOLZ
Study history. Historians and scholars accept the evidence even though most of them do not accept the resurrection as having occurred. They do however agree that something significant happened to make numerous believe that Jesus was resurrected. The reason is due to the events that occurred after the crucifixion.
LOL, the first mention of Jesus was in a record that talks about a cult hat worship a guy named Jesus, 60 years after Jesus alleged death. No mention what Jesus did, which is funny according to the gravity of the miracles that he made in his last 3 years. No other document about wine from water, no mention of walking on water, no mention of feeding thousands with only 4 fish etc. While we have records about how was the price of whey during that period? Right?
Anyone who says there is evidence that Jesus existed are simply lying.
Most historians and scholars accept that a person who people now called jesus lived. He was, apparently, an apocalyptic Jewish preachers, with a few followers, who pissed off the Romans and was executed. There were so many apocalyptic itinerant preachers at the time, the claim is ordinary. But, f course, historians and scholars also accept the utter and complete lack of evidence that this jesus was anything but an ordinary troublemaker - not divine, not resurrected, just a loud guy who was executed.
@@petercollins7730 Nobody have evidence about the Biblical Jesus, the first records about a guy named Jesus was 60 years after his alleged death and the document only mention that name as somebody whom a group of cultists worshipped.
@@jhonvoyage2564 Well, Paul wrote about jesus about 20 years after his alleged death, but of course Paul never met jesus and was repeating stories from others. The gospels were written from 40 to 70 years after the alleged death of jesus, but they were not eyewitnesses either. The gospels were written by anonymous authors repeating, again, long-told stories from others.
There is no evidence for jesus outside of the bible until 60 years after his supposed death, and that, if genuine (most scholars believe it is not genuine) simply mentions that there were people who believed in jesus.
So, there is evidence, of a sort, 20 years after the life of jesus. But it isn't very good evidence.
@@petercollins7730 I do not accept the Bible as evidence in any way.
If the bible was fake, the jews wouldnt have wirtten how they fell away from God so many times.
A basic technique in writing any fiction is to do just that - set up the hero (or heroes) as fallen, or lost, or bad. Then, near the end, they are reborn as heroes and great men, etc.
Sad you haven't read any other book than your 2000 year old book of fairy tales. If you had, you'd know this.
@petercollins7730 3500 year old technique? Amazing they got 40 people over a 1500 year period to write 66 books with your premise in mind.
Or, you don't believe it's true and feel you need to validate that opinion.
Besides, I only prefer nonfiction
@@Raeodor It was written over 1000 years, not 1500. And it lacks any semblance of univocality - the number of direct contradictions in the bible are in the thousands. Many of the authors, especially of the new testament, clearly had the previous writings to use as template. Whoever wrote Matthew, for the most extreme example, wrote much of his book (the part not copied from Mark) in order to deliberately fulfill what he thought were prophecies in the Hebrew bible. Finally, remember the bible was assembled and edited, much of it edited multiple times. Not edited well, but edited.
And you refer to the 66 book bible; what about the bible of 80 books, or 83 books, or 85. How do you know that your bible is the correct bible?
@petercollins7730 because burden of proof was used to know which books were authentic. All your other points are also just flat wrong. You got a lot of research to do. Don't just listen to whatever you hear and read.
I'm sorry you fell into that trap. It's all real and you can prove it yourself.
@@Raeodor No, you missed the point. Currently, there are bibles which have met the "burden of proof" and which include 66, 80, 83, and 85 individual books. Obviously you are protestant and accept the short bible; other protestants accept the longer bibles. Roman Catholic and Orthodox bible have 72 (or 73, depending on whether Lamentations is separated) books. So, explain why your bible is the correct one, with evidence.
As to research, you cite no evidence whatsoever. You simply parrot what you learned from apologists on CZcams.
Explain why your bible is correct, with evidence. I'll wait. That's your burden of proof.
Of course it wasn't a hoax. The story is euhemerism.