The Jesus Hoax with Dr. David Skrbina
VloĆŸit
- Äas pĆidĂĄn 12. 09. 2024
- Visit MythVision Website: mythvisionpodc...
Email for MythVision: mythvisionpodcast@gmail.com
GET RECOMMENDED BOOKS HERE: đ amzn.to/35FqNYf
Become a MythVision Patreon: / mythvision
MythVision Podcast Paypal: www.paypal.me/...
Cashapp: $rewiredaddiction
Venmo: @Derek-Lambert-9
www.venmo.com/Derek-Lambert-9
MYTHVISION FACEBOOK PAGE:
/ mythvision
MYTHVISION FACEBOOK GROUP:
/ thewaterboyzradio
Twitter: @DerekPodcast (Derek Lambert MythVision)
Instagram: dereklambert_7
==============================================================================
Dr. David Skrbina discusses his research on Jesus being a Hoax. Is Jesus a hoax or Lie? Did the authors purposefully write lies down with the intention of tricking people? Watch this episode to hear this theory.
David Skrbina websites:
Jesus hoax.com
Davidskrbina.com
Time-stamps:
0:00: Introduction
3:34: What separates Dr. Skrbina from other liberal scholars
12:43: Dr. Skrbinaâs basic argument
18:38: The first problem: lack of evidence
24:21: The second problem: chronology
27:33: The historical context of Jesusâ story, and Paulâs role
33:17: More on Dr. Skrbinaâs basic argument
41:59: Is Paulâs Jesus an enhanced view of Jamesâ and Peterâs Jesus?
44:20: Could Paul have wanted to hijack an already existing Christian movement?
46:45: Paulâs audience: slaves and non-Romans?
48:34: On the Roman Provenance theory
50:48: Paulâs reasons: not only political but also financial?
55:07: âPaulâs pushing a story to the masses that he does not believeâ
57:56: Allusions to the Romans in Paulâs letters
1:01:14: Children of Devil = Children of Rome?
1:03:34: How did the letters were adopted by Rome?
1:05:47: What convinces Dr. Skrbina that a historical Jesus existed
1:07:05: Paul using stories about a historical Jesus?
1:08:20: What makes Dr. Skrbinaâs different from Dr. Ehrmanâs position?
#jesushoax #ApostlePaul #Mythvision
He spent the first 20% of this session decrying amateur contributors without doctorates etc and then other scholars like Erhman. I am reminded of a pertinent saying "Blowing out someone else's candle won't make yours burn any brighter". Everything after that, ironically, was pure opinion.
Thanks, Myth-schism :) Interesting talk! :)
The guy's a liar,period.
While education and intelligence may indeed be mutually enhansive, they are not the same thing.
That's humanism, many confuse it.
Yes he presents no evidence he's just attacking the characters of those who present an argument in which he doesn't believe.
15+ minutes in and this guy continues to wag his lips at us about how awesome he is compared to Bart Ehrman? Iâm sorry, im not interested in opinions. 5 years ago, at my rock bottom, I stumbled upon one of Ehrmanâs books and my life changed immediately! Why? Because I was raised on opinions- be it my evangelical mother, preachers or Christian school teachers, from masturbation to abortion, they all had one. And it involved being âRightâ. This guy sounds just like them. Yes, at my bottom, homeless and late stage alcoholic, I read Bartâs book and you know what it did? Provided stats and facts. Allowed me to have the power of Choice for the first time ever. At 43 I left Christianity and have never looked back. I donât need another mans opinion. I need facts, just the facts. Thank you for your show. Iâll stick with supporting Dr Bart Ehrman. Oh and in case you were wondering- 5 years clean and sober and a life beyond my wildest dreams.
Me too. I learned a lot reading the Bart man. He's not a guy that can be so easily dismissed. And congratulations C B. That is one hell of an accomplishment! God bless you.
Armchair Philosopher thx AP.
So that's YOU... doesn't work that way for everyone. Wish I could have picked up a book like a magic wand, but magic isn't real either so....
@First Last you should be watching a video about that then. Hard to convert an atheist, save your breath please please please
Ummm, just who did ***YOU*** want to talk???? I, too, am not interested in opinions...more precisely-----YOURS!
The Bible is more powerful than the historical idea of Jesus.
I am trying to suspend judgment on this guy, but I don't really care for the PhD waving (which isn't a PhD in history, theology, ancient Greek, etc.) and it seems to me the last thing you can evaluate in terms of the existence of Jesus (divine or not) is the motive for one advancing the existence of Jesus.
Well good thing we have your opinion! Gosh, now I can sleep tonight
@@willowgrey989 what a meaningful comment!
@@julianjanssen5499 just like yours
@@willowgrey989 Maybe you didn't read the second half of my (admittedly rather long) sentence.
Both Richard Carrier and Robert Price have PhDs in related fields. Dr. Price has two! And this guy has the nerve to diss theirs.
This is why we tell fairy tales to children to keep them secure and feel safe.đ
works both ways.
Even when all "abrahamic faiths" get exposed as fake, God won't cease to exist.
You do realize yogis have a process to attain God realization?
Fairytales of old did the opposite they terrified children.
Yehova, there's no man in the sky, hon. Wakey wakey.
And safety breeds docile animals which is more than likely the goal of parents and ruling officials.....
Despite all his qualifications, you do not need a PhD, to speculate as heavily as this guy does. This is in the category of "Ancient Aliens".
It was a giant suicide pact! They all wanted to die for preaching Christ.
Iâve never heard such RIDICULOUS REACHING. Almost embarrassed for him.
Since no one among us was there in person to report of what was happening then I think I'm safe to say that everyrhing is speculation. The difference is which speculation makes more sense to each.
Without going to far... There is already speculation that Donal Trump didn't get hit by a bullet but by pieces of glass from the teleprompter. And that happened less than a month ago, and there's live video of the moment he gets hit. Imagine what people are going to read about this 2000 years from now?
All proceeds from this episode go to helping Dr. Skrbina purchase an extra vowel.
Good idea! Let a younger Vanna White turn that vowel in a skimpy dress.
Or Bosch mug
The R is a vowel in Czech and Serbo-Croatian lol I've said the same thing before I learned a little bit of those languages
He is No Sherlock Holmes ~~maybe he is just trying to cash in on a book Dr Watson
@@johnniebee4328that's right. Serbia isn't even spelled with an "e" in the actual language! âș
Is it possible that the disciples didn't write down things because of 2 reasons:
1) They were illiterate
2) They believed the end of time is coming any minute and there's no use in writing
?
No they were not illiterate Luke 24 45
Interesting point! As a Catholic, we believe in the ORAL traditional as well as the Written, and Peter, Paul, and the Apostles, who became Disciples of Jesus and spread His Word ( And it IS a gospel of love)- love for yourself is to get rid of the crap that bogs you down ( otherwise known as sin!) and believe that God loves you and wants a relationship with you, and in your heart! So beautiful!
If that's a lie, I'm on board with it because it sire makes me feel better about myself and helps me to love others and chose kindness and goodness over the oppisite!! Thank you, Jesus!
And, no, they weren't illiterate! There was a lot written. Check out the Dead Sea Scrolls! Also, how could this history survive without a strong Oral Tradition of padding down stories, as ever culture of people has, and part of that is hyrogliphics, paintings on walls communicating with us. God wanted the Truth to survive, and we are so Blessed to have the Word of God!
As far as we know, Jesus and his disciples were Aramaic speaking judeans from the Galilee.
Our earliest written sources are greek and much later.
The Dead Sea scrolls are mostly in hebrew as far as I know and their connection to early christianity is not very clear at this point.
@@marydonahue1 Many cultures didn't have a written language, they were either completely oral or used story images on walls or rocks to tell the story by mouth. ancient people of the Middle East are the same, telling history and tales by mouth around fires to pass down their culture.
I could not get past 12 minutes into this episode, because your guest would not start discussing what he brings to table, just telling us why we should not accept everyone elseâs findings.
i just want EVIDENCE for ALL these "findings", Really backed up, so that i can create an understanding of my own. But in "these days" EVERYONE is an expert as it seems. "- Beware the False Prophets" is a good warning that is more relevant today than Ever really. I personally don't believe that the Bible today is even close to a Fraction of what is the "Truth"(Actual history), but rather mostly mistranslated EVERY time they made a New version and also massively fabricated as soon as the Catholic church got their "game going". If NOT why does NOT the Vatican allow us to get into their MASSIVE archives and Carbon-Date(C-14) ALL their "Evidence" so that we can know how old it is to start with?. I don't even believe that the Vatican are truly "Religious" anymore, but rather more of a Business of sorts.Yes I am Cynical, a conspiracist and terribly fed up with "other people"(with apparent LOW moral) telling us what to do and how to behave just for the sake of it. If you learn TRUE Loving kindness(Compassion), Altruism and tolerance YOU are good to go and have already Outsmarted the whole Church as they can't really teach you anything anymore. Cheers
Thank ya!
Starts at 13:00, after he dogs everyone for 12 minutes about not being Basicly "really" scholarly or qualified,, including even Richard Carrier,,,
He is No Sherlock Holmes ~~maybe he is just trying to cash in on a book Dr Watson
He doesn't seem to have any background in religious studies, archeology or really anything that prepares him to write about the question of Jesus. His writing spans a variety of very deep subjects. I'm always a bit suspicious when a scholar flits from field to field. That may be why he attacks scholars for being too cautious. He isn't cautious at all and his argument that the Jesus movement was a subtle conspiracy against Rome is based on almost nothing.
@@bartgrossman9361 Like the GOP claims Black Life Matters does? I know this video was posted before George Floyd got killed, but the arguments somehow came from the same box.
@@bartgrossman9361 funny how the "scholars" lol in religious studies cant come up with BASIC highschool level EVIDENCE of jesus. Cauase there isnt any
Yeah, he is clearly not familiar with carriers work beyond his recent book titles. I doubt he has even read those. He sounds like a politician with no substance to sell.
Skrbina is a total nobody which considers himself so important. Comparing himself to Ehrman Price and Carrier is an embarassment for such a dim light he is.
And who the fuck are you? NOBODY
@@willowgrey989 So are you and I
I had great hopes for this interview, but by the end, I decided not to buy his book. :-(
What I want to know is why do people want to destroy the idea that a man named Jesus ever lived. If people want to believe it, let them...how does it hurt you?
It hurts me by Bible thumpers taking an unreasonable stand on abortion, on capital punishment, on same-sex marriage, etc., etc. Their moral thinking is terribly skewed.
It hurts them because they have to accountable for killing babies, destroying the family unit, and accountability to Someone higher than themselves. In short, they want to be god of their own lives and don't like competition.
@@esq8 What a load of unhinged nonsense.
@@page8301 Which part? The part that rings true? Like all of it?
@@esq8 Nothing is true in that pile of drivel you spew into this thread.
The good Doctor would be more credible if he didn't the first 12 to 15 minutes, dismissing everyone who disagrees with him. If he's sure of his position, he doesn't need to insult, or downplay anyone to add credibility to him
I'm kinda of glad he did that actually. The point of him doing that wasn't a baseless attack or straw-man but it was a way to explain why these others don't have the freedom to talk or write about Christianity completely due to their positions at Universities or personal reasons. Since they are not "attacks" on these people but rather an explanation why we don't have a complete picture it helps me to understand him and his motives better. I appreciate it.
â@Deep.Purple cutting off someone's head doesn't make you any taller. Besides, his comments certainly don't apply to Carrier or Price or Miller.
It's likely the other scholars don't go there because examining motive is sheer speculation.
@@davidlenett8808 Not to mention Atwill, who not only ASKS the question "why", but goes to great lengths to try to answer the question.
I disagree. Pointing out what sets him apart is not insulting the people he was ASKED to comment on SPECIFICALLY BY NAME ASKED TO COMMENT ON. And all he did was saying they were not scholars mostly and other biases they may have. Such as having to be politically correct and pander to the media which is real.
I think he was just pointing out that Ehrman, Price, etc. have already put forth some of the same views that he has - except that he believes Jesus was a complete hoax, and the question of WHY the hoax started has not been sufficiently explored, even by Price.
Not saying I agree or disagree.
Paul saying I'm not lying always gets me.
Yup. When you see someone consistently making this statement, it's usually because they have been busted lying. In my PoliSci class, a professor once showed us a collation of interviews by President Richard Nixon. After it was done, the professor asked us what we learned. My response was, "He's always saying he's innocent and not a crook."
I absolutely agree - why does he need to constantly say this and why were these letters emphasised?
Trump, MTG, Boebert, George Santos all say the same thing. Lying is what got them where they are today.
@@joecurran2811 Brainwashing/"Educating" the "Mass"... IS!
@@benjalucian1515 simple solution! :)
Raise them all from the dead and put them on a lie detector, or the Scientology e-meter (really hard to fool, unlike the Police lie detector!) and that will verify if he was a liar or telling the truth! :)
Paul initially targeted early Christians with persecution, but realizing he couldn't eliminate them all, he took a different approach. He used a mixture of false information and Pagan beliefs to divert their faith from God, aiming to distance them from Jesus's message and keeping Jews from accepting it. Despite the Jews not embracing Jesus and Pagans maintaining their own beliefs, the question remains: Why did Paul orchestrate these actions? And why have various Christian-related atrocities been committed over time? Answering this question is crucial for the sake of understanding why Paul's actions led to these issues.
Paul went to Jerusalem and compared what he was teaching with what the disciples were teaching. They all agreed Paul was teaching the same gospel as they were. The one that Jesus gave them. The same Jesus warned me of a future situation in my life with a starkly clear waking vision. The event occurred a year later and the vision had crosses glowing in the windows of the restaurant where this event happened. Even the place where I finally sat was set out in this scene. So your assertions that Jesus never existed and that Paul corrupted the gospels are pure horse shit. Jesus lives now, he was crucified and had to be resurrected and attain His throne in heaven for Him to be able to send a messenger to me with this and other messages throughout my life.
@@thefrazzyouâre suffering from delusions. Please, please seek help or talk to someone before you hurt yourself or others. Thatâs all I can say.
If Jesus existed, he then did die. No miracles. No rising from death. Death is a irreversible process. This author's math education makes him a strong, logical thinker. I will read his book.
Skrbina doesn't seem to understand the reason behind Carrier's use of Bayes' theorem. In using Bayes' theorem, Carrier attempts to base the discussion of Jesus' existence on rational likelihood, rather than on faith. He's not doing it because he enjoys mathematics - which is how David seems to interpret it.
And just why would bayes theorem be rational??
@@raysalmon6566 The problem is that if a historian says "this is unlikely" it's highly relevant to the conclusion just how unlikely we're talking and how the argument is structured and so fort. Carriers methodology is an attempt to formalise the logic used for coming to historical conclusions in a way which highlights just how different probabilities interact to influence the probability of the conclusion. The fact of the matter is that probability is already the foundation of any historical argumentation and formalising this to avoid common mental traps is crucial imo even if historians don't like it. The fact of the matter is that the human brain is terrible at statistics when using "common sense" and so while many historians feel that they don't need to use statistics to evaluate how their probabilistic arguments flow to a final conclusion I think that they are wrong and that they should take Carrier seriously. As to whether or not his particular approach is the correct one you'd have to ask a statistician but Carrier has sound arguments for using the methodology he uses.
@@raysalmon6566 The whole point of the method is to say "We have this evidence" how can we model it, so it doesn't just become a mattter of "I feel this is more likely". The method IS valid. The premises and arguments you feed into it might not be, but that has nothing to do with the method.
@@nikolajrasmussen9573
That really is not historical methodology works
I donât think Skrbina does not understand the reason why Carrier uses Bayes. What Skrbina says that it is very difficult to apply Bayes in an historical study and he is not wrong about it
No virgin birth
No fall of man
No sacrifice on the cross
Each responsible for their own lives - words and deeds
Restored the altered covenant standards to what they were to start with
Absolutely
@bettygreathouse4999 you are delusional
Crist said let "no man" deceive you but do consider >> Romans 3:7 KJV ( For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my Lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? ) - Paul the Apostle đź
@@RalphSmith-cj5he Paul the deceiver
Who are the liars and decievers? This guy _just said_ at 32:00... "Jesus was a jewish rabbi who came to save the world from the evil forces, which were the Romans at the time..." No, that isn't what happend. Jesus' enemies were the Pharisees and Scribes... you see how bias works?
For so much preemptive trashing of Dr. Carrier and Dr. Price and the importance of his distinct education.. his argument is so weak. If this is the argument and evidence you can achieve by being a PhD and current professor- Iâll pass. Derek handled this so well and wouldnât let anyone talk trash about all of our favorite, amazing âgrandpa Priceâ.
It's like he didn't really read the other guys stuff. When he states "Carrier finds no basis for a historical Jesus, I would say 1/3 chance of Jesus being a real guy is some kind of basis.
Skrbina seriously accused Dr. Price of being in it for the money? Not only is that insulting, it just doesn't make any sense.
It makes absolute sense.
Yeah it does make sense... is you iq 65?
It definitely makes sense đ€Šââïž
Skrbina's accusation sounds a bit like a projection Trump would be jealous of.
It doesn't make sense because he doesn't make a lot of money. Yet he sticks with it through the decades.
Paul made it up. Dr Skrbina sets forth a simple and convincing argument that hangs together. Very entertaining interview.
Let me get this straight. Paul preached against Rome, yet the Romans allowed him to spread his message *within the city itself for two whole years* while living in his own private rented house. Something's not right here. đ€
My thoughts too Ed.
There's no actual evidence Paul went to Italy or Rome, the claim originates from a small obscure parish church in the south of Italy. Just the same as about a thousand churches across Europe claim to have the teeth of Jesus
Paul did not preach against Rome He preached Chist.
Sorry. The entire Bible is a hoax and all religions are scams. However, there's advice and principles in the Bible that are beneficial to heed. Jesus is a heroic figure, perhaps more a legend than a reality, who's a good example for mentally sound people who don't go overboard.
To the Romans he's making an "opiate of the masses" kind of argument. He's telling Rome that his sect will help keep the underclass quiet while focused on otherworldly nonsense.
David: you make good compelling arguments on merit. I advise against criticizing others based on degrees and arguments from authority. Itâs a spurious way of arguing. Your arguments would be good or not good based on be quality of your ideas and rhetoric, nothing more or less. In my experience degrees only indicate interests, at most, not competence, even at researching and writing.
Especially since he clearly hasn't taken the time to actually look into Richard Carrier's background.
Exactly! This is the typical argument from authority fallacy. "Well so and so is not qualified to make an argument because they haven't done x, y, z like "I" have." He should just stick to the arguments and where he feels they are valid or not.
Agreed, David, please make an apology otherwise I will not buy nor read your book. A touch of arrogance has to be mellowed with some humility.
"how is your view different?" "The others, they're just one-trick ponies in the Jesus business."
Ah. An intellectual hater. Got it. Next time someone in your family is ill, just take them to someone "with an interest' in medicine. Don't worry if they're licensed or degreed.
The reason none of the early disciples didn't write anything is because they believed he was coming back in their lifetime....they were wrong
Weren't early disciples illiterate?
They knew they were going to die, not his return back then. That is exactly what happened too.
@@garystanfield2274 The biblical writers wrote that he would return before some of them tasted death...They were wrong. They attributed that prediction to Jesus, and he was wrong...The early disciples believed that false prediction, and didn't write anything else....They were wrong...The Bible was and is wrong. Jesus was and is wrong....
@@brianbucher1313 lol, you don't even know who or what was being spoken of. They all knew they would die from the Roman Emperor persecutions.
The name Jesus is a pagan lie. Christianity was created to put people in the Lake of Fire not to save them from it.
His best evidence Jesus existed is his unproven theory that this kernel of truth is needed for Pauls lie. His best evidence is his own reasoning. This guy calls himself a scholar and philosopher, but canât see how circular this is đ€Ż
He calls himself a scholar because he IS a scholar. He's got multiple phd's for goodness sake!
@@hardywatkins7737 no shit! So he definitely should know what circular reasoning is.
God also says. If you turn your back on Him. The truths will become lies and lies will become truths. He will let you destroy yourselves if thatâs what you want. But you wonât like it.
I am continuously astounded by the gullibility of people to believe the Christian story. Without indoctrination, it's ludicrous.
I appreciated the author's perspective.
To think starting a religion is not motivation enough is to ignore what happens around us every day.
I guess this arrogant guy has never heard of Atwill, Valiant, and Fahey, since he says no other scholars look into motives about why the gospels were produced. And he is nowhere near in the same league as Price, Carrier, and Kenneth Humphreys. He says they're in the Jesus buisness; that's bs. Carrier and Humphreys are ancient Greco-Roman history scholars, among other things. Price has studied many other religions and writes fiction in the vein of HP Lovecraft, among many other pursuits. And it's not like Jesus mythicist books are hot sellers. Hell, Price could have stuck to the party line and been working in a university somewhere like Ehrman. But he chose to follow the truth wherever it leads him. Therefore he makes much less income than he otherwise could have, given his vast knowledge of the texts and religions, which is far superior to what Skrbina possesses.
Actually the elephant in the room that overpowers everything is the fact that there was a massive religious power vacuum that occurred when Rome destroyed the Jewish world, there became this obvious religious power vacuum that nobody mentions or talks about in the context that I'm expressing it right now it was a massive power vacuum in the world of religion and that made it very easy for Christianity to come along
đRepent? No you won't ! Therefore our Holy of holies shall humble you, for you have stolen our Earth and you persist in your madness. Repair His People and He may show you mercy. Look up! There is your just recompense arriving in Glory for the salvation of our souls.
A mother does not need a PHD to raise a child, a humans does not need a Degree to find the truth. Graduates have already been indoctrinated by education. So letâs get this right.
Probably the reason that the gospels exist without any evidence of authorship has more to do with people not wanting to be identified the gospels were probably written by people who did not want to be fingered for having written those pieces therefore no author is ever given, fear of persecution as there was no First Amendment
Your absolutely on the right track . The video or book that confirms this is called Caesarâs Messiah. You should see itđđŒ
The true religious Believers believe in the word faith, that's like taking the easy way out then you don't have to question anything when you have it takes all their fears away of the unanswered questions.
Religion is inevitably based on Faith. This is why it's a mistake for believers to debate sceptics and atheists: reason isn't their strong suit. They should celebrate their Faith and abandon attempts to prove the impossible.
Wrong, Faith is the minimum requirement, the currency of Heaven and its directly tied to loyalty. Its not a cop out, but rather the entry way
@@thevulture5750 "Ignorance" does not have the same meaning as "I don't know", yet you are equating the two terms. "Ignorant " is a pejorative word meaning that someone is generally uninformed or uneducated. You think that by substituting one expression for the other you can prove that the agnostic is uninformed and uneducated, but all you've done is commit another logical fallacy.
@@thevulture5750 I think you will find that the word generally has a demeaning connotation, and I think that's how you meant it.
@@thevulture5750 What I would say is that anything is possible, no matter how unlikely. I cannot definitively say that one-eyed flying purple people-eaters don't exist on Mars, but I think it's extremely unlikely. I think the same about the existence of God, by which I mean the traditional Judeo-Christian God, as I assume that's what we're talking about. And I'm not saying it's a toss-up whether he's there or not. I think the likelihood of his existence is heavily weighted against him. Anything is possible, but suppositions for which there's no evidence are unlikely to be true. Revelation is not evidence. Prime mover arguments are not evidence. There simply is no evidence. All believers have is Faith, a fact which the Church has always loudly proclaimed. And that's fine, if you want to believe, but Faith is not Reason.
Ive dreamt about the afterlife dozens of times.Ive seen passed on friends,neighbors, family,strangers.Once I was homeless,not broke,just taking a break.I was at a service at a salvation army church.They asked if anyone wants to be born again and I went along with it.I felt his presence,the light.The preachers sermon went on to tell a story about someone who couldn't make ends meet and he prayed and prayed and hallelujah he got a quarter raise,a meer quarter. I continued looking for work, I got some,got layed off,moved out of state,still not religious but I'll tell you what, I can't deny the spirit of Jesus I felt when I went up to that alter.Ive had spirits come through my house, it's all real,death and the afterlife, it's a place that Ive experience many times in my dreams.
I was surprised the video didn't include an ad for whatever liquor Dr. Skrbina is drinking.
So Jesus walks into a bar, orders a glass of water, turns it into wine. The bartender charges him for the wine, so Jesus turns it back into water.
I don't see any clues that he is drinking. Maybe the florid skin is high blood pressure
@@jewellevy It's the way he sips from a particular style of drinking glass.
Some people can't stand to be told the guy they pray to wasn't God
â@@jewellevy
It's obvious, don't you see it's a mug of beer? đș
The main problem I have is when he is hypothesizing about Paulâs motivation for fabricating the story and describing the Jesus character. He is making the mistake that many others make in lumping the Pauline epistles in with the Gospels. The Jesus he describes is not the one depicted in the later Gospels and would not easily support his Pauline motive hypothesis. Whatever Paulâs motives were the writers of Gospels clearly had other motives. Paul might have wanted to create propaganda against Roman authority but whoever wrote the Gospels did not.
Do you know where I can get more info on the Jesus of the Pauline epistles being a differnt Jesus to the Gospels? I'm just getting into looking at the Bible closer and picking it apart.
@@Void-Realm jesus saying "do not think that I've come to abolish the laws..." and Paul saying fuck the laws!!! đđđ
We can all do miracles and are all the son of god. The son of god is the light in us that has to be resurrected to the crown chakra. Many will fail as a matter most will fail. The story is a conception of the spirits journey back to Godhood. We will keep dying and paying for sun until we resurrect off the wheel of time unto immortality
Having read the New Testament , since I was a child into adulthood for many years, I have no doubt that Christianity , as we know it today , is the biggest and the most successful scam ever devised by some very powerful men to 1) control the masses, 2) maintain their power and 3) enrich themselves.
@@Void-Realm Jesus said to follow Jewish Law. Paul said that having faith in Jesus is more important.
Jesus said not to worry about tomorrow. Paul said there was dignity in work, and was against idleness.
The Gospels focused more on Jesus' teachings and parables. Paul focused more on what Jesus' death meant.
Christians follow Paul, not Jesus. Edit: Paul also invented the term "Jesus Christ" instead of saying "Jesus the Christ".
He started out generally insulting anyone who doesnât have a PhD and then moved on specifically to Bart Ehrman. He may have continued to insult other people. I didnât stick around long enough to find out.
His Phd. means absolutely nothing...as "the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." 1Cor. 2:14.
Yeah, I was left thinking about how dangerous things get when someone uses their intelligence as the denominator to determine whether or not anyone else is worthy. A bit full of himself or at least that was my impression and was all I needed to turn a deaf ear
I watched the whole thing and found it very interesting and plausible. A lot more plausible than a fairy story written decades after the âfactsâ.
Having a PHD is basically book intelligence. Wisdom comes from real world experience and learning how to deal with the buttholes of the world. lol. The PHD education is half or more simply "theoretical". My grandma only had a high school education and she was smarter than anyone with a PHD. Smartest person I met in my life. Well, next to me. lol (just kidding) However, she did read extensively, 2-3 books a week. There are only 2 things in life I was taught that cannot be taken from you: 1) Your word. 2) Knowledge/Wisdom, what you learn. (and hopefully what you learn is actually correct. Always ask questions to find the truth.) but yeh, I hate it when people assume to be smarter than anyone else in the room/world. Learning is a lifelong endeavor.
@johannjohann6523 - yes, I agree with you. PHD's and, for that matter, whatever education, qualification, or intelletual reasoning are of little or no assistance, when it comes to spiritual "things".
For those of you old enough, Davidâs explanation reminds me of the M*A*S*H episode âCaptain Tuttleâ where they made him up based on a number of other people.
Do you mean a composite figure?
@@kuljim2602 Sure. Take the best of a number of people, add in some enhancements, and you create the preverbal âtoo good to be trueâ character. Since it was many decades before there were any books written about him, most of it would have been made up.
Did they? I don't recall them making him from another of other people, but the gave him a bunch of noble attributes, until his his untimely death trying to save someone and jumping from a helicopter.
@@Cheepchipsable "There's a little bit of Capt. Tuttle in all of us. In fact, you might say that all of us together made up Tuttle." (if I remember the line correctly).
We know that the character Saul / Paul was the main driving force behind behind the start of Christianity. Can someone please tell me of any extra Biblical evidence that this Paul was a real person ? Yes someone wrote some letters, but who was it ?
Just the most influential person in all history after Jesus.
There was never a St. Paul. Paul is really Apollonius of Tyana. Apollonius went to India twice and brought back the gospels of Buddha, Brahma and Chrishna, Chrishna being the one who Apollonius focused on. The Church appropriated his works, changed them by replacing Chrishna with Christ in the first century and the rest is history. If you want a detailed history of this, read a book called Antiquity Unveiled, written by J.M. Roberts.
@@michaelwallace2487 ha,ha. Obviously you never read anything from Paul. He
From 1 Corinthians 3:6-9
4 For when one says, âI follow Paul,â and another, âI follow Apollos,â are you not being merely human?
5 What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, as the Lord assigned to each.
6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth.
7 So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth.
8 He who plants and he who waters are one, and each will receive his wages according to his labor.
9 For we are God's fellow workers. You are God's field, God's building.
Actually, I have read Paul, when I was a Christian. Now, Iâm older, more knowledgable.
The watering and planting mentioned above was done by Apollonius, Apollos, Pol, Paul, Saul, all being the the same person, Apollonius of Tyana! Different names were used because of the various dialects that existed in the regions. Apollonius preached and spread the gospel of Christos⊠Chrishna, the Hindu prophet, made god, just as Jesus Christ does in the Bible. The church appropriated Apollonius of Tyanaâs works, altered them to create their man-god.
@@michaelwallace2487 judging by your first comment, you went dumber with age.
If they fabricated the story, why were so many of them willing to go through horrible deaths to protect the lie? Why would not one of them recant?
Maybe those horrible deaths never happened.
Its simple, many believed the lie was true. Just look at some of these comments. People become so invested and brainwashed logic goes right out the window.
If an invisible magic man that loves you will torture you forever then it can make you do anything.
There are people going to the grave believing that UFOs created the pyramids.
They believe it and belief isn't easily reversed.
@@stevedyches4635might be the same reason Jimmy jones cults all drank cianide koollade. They truly believed the BS
it is not those who fabricated the story went through horrible deaths, but those who they deceived and who believed their hoax.
Dr. Bob's favourite phrase is 'We'll never know'. In that he's almost certainly right.
But that doesn't sell books. You're tempted to come up with solutions which cover everything where none is possible.
Careers and bookdeals demand answers to things that are probably
unanswerable.
Stupid phrase. No way to know whether we'll ever know ...til we know.
I usually believe the guy with his baseball cap 𧹠on backwards when it comes to such serious issuesâŠ
In the near-death experience many people have said that they have been in the presence of Jesus.
How do you explain that?
Many near death experiences have had a variety of encounters. Varying from family members, angels, aliens, demons, etc.
Even beings from other cultures have been described in perfect detail, without any previous knowledge of them in life.
My guess is that our spirit/soul is greeted with a guide that our consciousness is either projecting out for coping to the change or the guide is choosing an image suitable for getting the message across.
No wonder the author's book is so thin! Based on this interview, I am led to conclude that it consists of nothing more than unsubstantiated and/or nonsensical speculation based upon assumptions in which any extant contradictory textual evidence is conveniently dismissed as some kind of intentional deception. I fail to see how the conversion of anyone, whether they be Jew or gentile, to Paul's abstract cosmic Christ theology would have benefited the cause of the Jewish revolt against Rome as this author would have us believe. If anything, the religion being promulgated by Paul seems consciously designed as a pacifistic Roman-compatible substitute for a Judaism that would no longer be possible and/or practical once the temple in Jerusalem had been destroyed.
Note that the Romans believed THEIR emperors were gods. Stating some crucified Jew was a demi-god would NOT be Roman-compatible. The pacifist part of Paul's teaching would be to captivate the minds of those under Roman rule. After that meme has been created, you can go for the capital. I suggest a contemporary example where the Q meme in America resulted in an actual attach on the US capitol. Notice how the enabler of a LIE, that the election was a fake, claims he loved the people who physically acted on his words...which the enabler claims were not his intent. Humans don't want to believe they would die for a lie. Did the woman who was shot at the Capitol die for a lie ? Did the people at the Branch Davidian compound in Texas die for a lie ? The 9/11 attackers ?
Why did you watch the video if you have beliefs you are not willing to part with? Just to talk shit? Pathetic
@@onedaya_martian1238 except that didn't happen did it. 40 years later the Jews went to war with the Romans and lost.
@@thebritishbookworm2649 And the point is ?
@@willowgrey989 ... Some ppl only subscribe to these kinds of channels so that they could try to insult the speaker đ€·ââïž
What a boring talk. You talked more about other writers and your own books and very little about the subject matter
It gets even deeper - when you question the existence of Moses
My introduction to Acharya S. (Dorothy Milne Murdock) was via this great two-part interview:
Part 1
czcams.com/video/pOAZ1L-0hgs/video.html
Part 2
czcams.com/video/QrBFwhBMgz8/video.html
Which led me to one of her extraordinary treatises âŠ
âDid Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiverâ
@juliusskoolafish9672 - he's open that he's an athiest. I wouldn't be shocked to hear he doesn't believe in Moses either. However, the crux of it is that he's an anti-Semite and minces no words about it in his book. only on the videos he's Mr. Nicey-Nicey
So let me get this straight. Paul wanted to overthrow Rome but hardly spent anytime there.
Because Paul had seen so many other rebellions against Rome, he just knew ONE MORE was worth a try. So he pissed off both the Romans and the Jews while establishing struggling little churches. This is absurd.
THERE is nothing at all in the Bible to show that Paul was fomenting a rebellion sgainst Rome.He claimed his rights as a Roman citizen.He asked Christins to pray for those in authority over the.
Paul never existed imaginary been never ever speak for itself but only in people's heads always in there's heads đ.
Yeah like biden doesđđđđđ
The apostle Paul was martyred (Killed) in Rome for preaching Jesus Christ as God.
Thereâs nothing new coming out of this talk. It seems as the guest hasnât listen to what already has been said. It was a shallow repetition of what we already know but much better said by others.
He started good, but later on he starts doubting if there possible still was an historical rabbi. No, as a Dr. you figure out where it all orginates from and tell us your clear view. Yes, there is an underlaying character (we know his name) but that was more lets say an artist then a rabbi, well okay he was well studied, an arogant snobnose and liked to teach his innercircle of intimates, a wise man or teacher at best. Why not, if it fits so.
He is No Sherlock Holmes ~~maybe he is just trying to cash in on a book ~Dr Watson
If, as is postulated, Paulâs intent was to create a masses-driven anti-Roman Empire movement, isnât it ironic that 3 centuries later Constantine co-opted this movement by making Christianity the Empireâs official state religion? Itâs that historical fact, more than any other reason, that made Christianity so enduring.
Great point. And with that in mind, combined with my own no small research into this history, I'd assert that the circumstances of Paul, his followers,& early Christians were more complex, than just effective political rebels. It was a different "world" + the 1900+ years since, to our contemporary perspectives...Modern "Christians" from those ancients at Paul's time. Different things.
You should study Islam and its background. Do that and you'll find your answer.
The standard explanation for why his followers didn't write things is because they were expecting the end times. The 900+ followers of Jim Jones at Jonestown did write things, or record things with a tape recorder?, which is how we know what happened.
Skribina needs to make HIS case before he tears down other people's works.
Thinking the same thing whilst listening to opening ten minutes
The Jews did not believe in a demon or spiritual heaven and hell. The Messiah was to be a real man, a deliverer. The only spirit they believed in was god, the one god who would separate them from all the polytheism. They believed dead was dead. The only reward was from obeying the Jewish law. They thought their god killed all who didn't obey.
Itâs always interesting to hear a different take on the origins of Christianity. I think he slightly misrepresented Dr Carrier though. Heâs not just in the âJesus gameâ. He writes on other aspects of history and philosophy.
origins of Christianity ???
saying that gives away the farm
bv14 john 18:37"You are a king, then!" said Pilate.
Jesus answered, "You say that I am a king. In fact, the reason
I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth.
Everyone on the side of truth listens to me."
@@raysalmon6566 John the Baptist knew who Jesus the Messiah was. He called Him the "Lamb of God which takes away the sin of the world." John 1: 29.
@@louisaccardi2268 agree, however Jesus as human did not stand out. the Pharasees were always looking for him but he blended in with the crowd
[357]Briony Sherrell@ray salmon Sure but do you have any evidence that that is true? And using the bible as evidence for the bible doesn't work. That's like me saying "I saw a purple donkey. The evidence that I did is this peice of paper I wrote it down on." t9Jehan Desains Please prove the existence of God, using the scientific method. Thanks. t9
"Origins of Christianity", Revelation 2:6-15,20-23; 3 in the "Synagogue of Satan"(v13) from the Romans who wanted to control this Jews by controlling the Jewish Religion=modern Constantinian Roman Catholicism of Vatican I; Herod(Edom-Kings of Judea, Idumea and Samaria)=modern Charismatic Catholicism of Vatican II, which controls Charismatic prosperity glossolalic pentecostal "prophetic" protestant churches; and the the Apostate Sanhedrin of Jerusalem (Ephraim Samaria who were against Judeans)-the Bishops like Nikos Bishop of Laodicea-modern Orthodoxy & Coptic church controlling Mainstream Protetantism. These are the MAIN powers behind the RISE of the "Synagogue"-full of "Jews who are nevertheless NOT Jews(Yehudim=Judeans)" but they made up "Christianity"-(Christ=a Greek anointed "saviour") SUPPLANTING the Apostolic-Discipleship church originated by Messiah the Prince of the JUDEAN BEREANS(1 Thess 2:14-17).
This NEW "Jew-ISH" religion was distinctly different from the JUDEAN APOSTOLIC Church because, it believed in the PAGAN doctrine of SALVATION by "sacrifice" of a human or a Deity "for the SALVATION of the people, the nation and the world"(John 11:47-50=Nah 1:11) This SALVATION by "sacrifice" was called the "Nicolaitan doctrine" that became a STUMBLING BLOCK in the Apostolic church which was thereby DERAILED permanently. NICOLAITANISM is probably the REASON why Judaism RIGHTLY REJECTED this "Christ" who brings SALVATION by a MURDEROUS "sacrifice" is NOT their MESSIAH the PRINCE, so they could not be dragged into this Constantinian-Herodian-Sanhedrin(Ephraim-Samaria and apostates in Judah)
So Christianity is basically the "Synagogue of Satan"that preached SALVATION by the murderous "sacrificial" murder of the Innocent and blamess to JUSTIFY the wicked many!-which is how the CRUCIFIXION MURDER was SANITIZED as "an ordained 'sacrifice' for the people, nation and world" cloaking the evil of murder in a garment of "salvation" narrative! which was purely how the pagans saw their sacrifices, which were offered to "apppease the ANGRY gods!" BUT for the Jews, this "sacrifice" was the PURE WHINE(angry, bitter, murmuring) OF BABYLON(EPhraim-Samaria and the Pagan "Jezebels" against the MostHigh) where they question the responsibility for sin and claim a in Romans 5 that if SIN entered the universe thru ONE MAN, then logically SIN should be REMOVED by the DEATH of ONE MAN!-hence the MURDER of ONE RIGHTEOUS MAN was justified as THE NECESSARY SACRIFICE of ONE to JUSTIFY all others!...the problem of the doctrine of "ORIGINAL SIN"-its origins, and therefore WHO should BEAR RESPONSIBILITY for SIN and therefore responsible for RECEIVING THE PENALTY of THAT SIN. For the Jews this man considered Most Holy in Israel provided them with the PERFECT "sacrifice"!
â@@louisaccardi2268 do we have any writings from John the Baptist?
Hes probably the least convincing speaker on myth vision.. for all his claims of being more controversial than Price and Carrier, he is actually more conservative.. and as he keeps saying it is his Speculation. Lots of maybe and ifs..
Everything is "speculations" and "ifs" when it comes to this stuff. Now I agree his argument that Paul completely invented the divinity and theology of jesus seems a little far fetched as even Derek pointed out that Paul mentions in his own letters he had opposition and disagreements with jesus followers before him. All Dr. Skrbina really has in his corner is that there's no surviving documents or even reason to believe there were ever documents from actual followers of jesus. I'll admit that's a pretty big hole in christianity in general. But did Paul really write letters making up stories about having beef with people who were jesus followers before he was? That's hard to fathom. But Skrbina is 100% right on this point. That whether Paul or others did it, someone or some people invented the narratives and divinity stories of jesus whether he existed or not and that key point seems to always be avoided by scholars.
@Sjakalen Not very bright are you?
I get the impression he made more stuff up then Ron Hubbard did. To me as an atheist it is a kind of irrelevant if Paul wrote stuff he heard as bedtime stories from his granny or wrote stuff revealed to him after smoking bad weed, it's the conspiracy overtunes with which Skrbina ticks me off.
@@kamion53 Well yeah, Paul definitely made crap up. The question is what was his motive more than anything. Did he genuinely believe what he was writing or did he have an agenda
@@exillens If he had an agenda I think it was a more noble and pragmatic one then Skrbina suggests.
It may be a wild card I am throwing in, but having followed a few of the readings of Richard Carreer I got the idea that Paul more or less was an organisor of existing "Christian" communities in stead of a founder of new communities.
Communities of Hellininized Jews with a wide variety of Jewish, Hellinistic, Messianic or Zoroastic idea's, wondering which set of rules to follow. Paul with his link with Pharisaic and Hellinistic beliefs ( being a Pharisee from Tarsus and familiar with Jerusalem) could function as a counselor, traveling around, hearing idea's and discussing and judging them and and leaving his end rapport behind in a nice and clear Epistle.
He never wrote an Epistle to Alexandria, maybe because it did not have a Christian community although later it became one of the largest Christian cities, but it had a large community of Hellinised Jews. Paul may have been well educated in the Law, but the Alexandrians probably were far better educated then he was.
Acts is the main source for the life of Paul, but it is written decades after he lived and very unrealable with quite a broad streak of anti-semitism, which in itself is weird.
Weird because the purposed audience was no more them 8000 souls, the total amount of Christians at the start of the 2nd century. Christians that still had strong relation and family ties with the Jewish communites of 8 million people.
Listening to this again. The image that popped into my mind was the scene from Life of Brian where John Cleese's character asked the question, "so what have the Romans ever done for us?" Hilarious!
Blessed are the cheesemakers.
I couldn't stop thinking of Life of Brian throughout this entire video.
Adam and Eve were supposed to be the first humans, they had two sons, Cain and Abel--who did the sons mate with? Their Mother was the only female in the myth!
â@@wandaharris4260 Adam and Eve had more kids after Cain, Abel and Seth according to Genesis. Its all fantasy of course but yeah according to the books they had more sons and daughters after Seth.
Thank Ăœou
Can't believe he simply admits that there was a historical Jesus where Paul based his hoax....
Yes, the entire story was a hoax, but by the way, there actually was a historical Jesus, which kinda makes that part of the story not a hoax.
The story in Luke about a census cannot be true. It was made up in order to get Jesus of Nazareth to be born in Bethlehem. If there were no historical Jesus of Nazareth, there would be no need to make up such a transparent lie. Just call him Jesus of Bethlehem and be done with it. For this reason, I think Jesus of Nazareth was a historical person.
It is difficult to square Skrbina's thesis with the "blood curse" in Matthew.
Why would a Jew of any kind write that passage?
QUESTION?
WHY WOULD YOU CHOOSE
PAUL, AS (ACTUALLY) EXISTING ?
IS THERE DOCUMENTED PROOF ?
THANKS
Speculation speculation speculation....no facts, citations or seemingly any real knowledge of the time. And he dares to dig at others motives or credentials.
Isn't it all speculation? What is there to cite? There's literally no surviving documents or even reason to believe there ever were documents by actual followers of jesus. All we have now is a bunch of educated people putting their best most logical hypothesis's forward. The fact does remain that someone or some people invented the divinity narratives of jesus whether he was a real guy or not. I'm glad someone is finally tackling that elephant in the scholastic room
@@exillens This is the reason most scholars won't speculate to a huge extent. They need to cite something, some actual evidence or document.
One thing I get annoyed at is the idea that people throughout history reasoned like modern day people.
@@Cheepchipsable One thing is clear about the ancient world around that region is that they took their myths seriously. As in it was very common for them to incorporate ubiquitous stories well known to everyone into their narratives and beliefs. These things we called myths were tools of literature for persuasion or telling history. I speculate as well that the low literacy rates back then is the main reason. Since most people couldn't read, educated authors incorporated familiar myths and figures people around heard about often and could relate to and be able learn and recite orally. It didn't matter whether the author's intentions were for propaganda, persuasion or trying to relay actual history and facts. Whatever the motive they used stories and characters from common myths to base their own literature off so common people who couldn't read could easily memorize the message
Rome did not collapse quickly after conversion to Christianity. The (Christian) Roman empire lasted another ~thousand years in Constantinople. And ~all the subsequent European empires were Christian too. If anything, Christianity has been a cornerstone of empire.
It was not holy, it was not Roman, and it was not an empire.
Constantine did not convert, he started Christianity, and the Roman Empire did not collapse, we are still living in the era Roman Empire.
One theory I heard was that Romans wrote the bible. It made a lot of sense when the motive and linguistics were explained.
"The language" was in Greek.
@@trilithon108 Armenian.
Rome decided which languages were allowed to be spoken in which parts of their empire and which Gods would be allowed to be worshipped within their empire.
Anyone even slightly familiar with Latin literature from the classical period would see that the Bible is totally alien in spirit as well as linguistic expression
Romans scholars used Greek extensively. However, I doubt that the New Testament was deliberately forged.
This book could even be a lot smaller: there is no evidence... full stop. No idea why I should read this...
Then don't... no one gives a shit if you do or not
@@willowgrey989 ... Exactly!
@@willowgrey989 you sound like someone who would read and believe it.
A horrible on going crime to humanity actually
Indeed, a horrible crime done to believers.
Why would anyone fabricate a story and then push it to the extent that they get thrown in prison tortured in order to make them give up the story and then push it even more until they're executed?
Blind faith! Duh!đ
Thousands of Nazis went to their grave worshipping HitlerâŠ..
Today we have the hysteria of Covid VaxâŠ.
@@Purespirit777rom the very people who saw and knew Jesus?! Many people will die for a lie they believe to be true, but no one dies for a lie they know is a lie!
My apologies if you were being sarcastic here!đ
One Christian enjoyed getting beat up by Hell's Angels.
@@Cap661 Well jesus is not even his real name. It's yeshua! Christ never asked for a name change....
I just started watching this vid, but before I get into it, I have a burning question I hope somebody, anybody can answer.
One of the arguments against Jesus being real is that the Romans, who kept maticulous records of everything, made absolutely no mention of Jesus during his life time. Josephus barely mentioned him 70 years after his death and Tertullian mentioned him 114 years after his demise.
What I want to know is: did the Romans mention any spiritual figures contemporary with Jesus: Mani, Marcion, et al., or did they describe other contemporary cults and religions. They did write about the well-established Jewish sects of that time period, but other than that, what else?
If the Romans documented other cults and spiritual leaders of the day but didn't mention Jesus at all, that would be a strong argument that there was no Jesus, or no Jesus as we understand Him. Any thoughts by anyone? Thanks.
can't give a clear answer, but for Romans documenting other cults, those cults first had to come under the radar of the Romans.
And the Roman magistrate was pretty thin smeared out over the Empire,
their first interest was collecting the taxes, this they did by farming out the taxes to local taxcollectors,
their second interest was keeping the peace, this they did by stationating troups at hot spots. Actuall keeping the peace mend collecting taxes peacefully and not spend too many troups on forcefull squeeuzing the money from the locals.
Another factor for these cult not coming under the rader was that they were patheticly small. At the time Pliny the Younger wrote his letter to Hadrian he hardly knew who those christians were ( nevertheless he had two deaconesses tortured) He wrote his letter in 112 AD and at that time there were maybe 10.000 christians on a total of 60 million people in the Empire, sometime about 0,2 % of the whole Empire.
The Romans surely did not have a corps of "thought-police" out there to investigate the people or a Consilium de re publica Securitatis ( that's Latin for KGB ), they did not have the man power or bureaucraty for it. Real bureaucraty comes late to Rome which for a long time was a governement run by amateurs.
Great question....
Well the real historical Jesus *was* mentioned in the authentic Acts of Pilate that was distributed to schoolchildren during Diocletian's reign, but the Christians could not tolerate it, Eusebius denounced it as a forgery, and someone ordered it to be destroyed, perhaps by Constantine himself. The current Acts of Pilate is nothing but dark-age or early medieval Catholic twaddle.
@@edwardmiessner6502 do you have a video or know where I can look further into this?
I have heard the answer to this question answered by Carrier I believe in one or more of his earlier debates (?) The answer (forgive me I am not a religious scholar) was that YES one of the early historians mentioned a bunch of other prophet types who preached during that time and in the same locations. I am not sure which historian at this point. And it was someone who was a bit sarcastic about these religious types and who should have mentioned a Jesus but leaves a glaring blank spot instead. Maybe you can do a call in question/ suoerchat question when Carrier is on next to find out who.
I get the feeling that early Christians wanted to emphasize to the Romans that they were not rebellious like those troublesome Zealots. Consider the famous phrase "render unto Caesar".
Richard Carrier is not even close to a one-trick-pony! He does careful scholarly work.
I want him to not pull punches, but he doesn't want to misspeak.
Skrbina is acting "thick". He says Ermann, Price and Carrier fail to blame anyone, so that discredits them. He is acting ignorant and setting stupid rules that apply to grade 3 school-yard fights. Carrier best describes the Jewish mind-set which constructed the messiah - taking bits and pieces of Jewish scriptures, and reinterpreting them to make a superman who was killed by sky demons and saved the world. This strange Jewish faith was the one that was embroidered by unknown authors later on, given a name and a Gallilean ministry, and whose story overtook the fanciful, weird, sky-demon story of Paul and was eventually adopted as the state religion of the late Roman Empire. Passed down from Pope to Pope to Luther, to Calvin, to Wesley, toTrump, we now have the wreckage of an incredibly stupid story governing our lives and society, and Skrbina's whinge is that there is no-one to blame!
I like the way you interpret this content. I sort of agree with Skrbina, because he is more punk rock to the sort of Prog Rock aspect of Dr. Price or Dr. Carrier. But Johnny Rotten in a fight with Robert Fripp can't work, for intellectual craft is always beautiful if it has truth as a rule. Applying historical method to the Jesus Story was perfectly realized in my view in Dr. Price's "The Ever Shrinking Son of Man", what does Skrbina offer that was not expressed there? Gore Vidal wrote a very cunning novel regarding these themes in "Julian" which gives proper perspective to the arguments here.
Oh wow yâall struck a nerve! The amount Christians in the comments trying to defend their mythological stories is actually very sad.
This was a very interesting interview, and I love how everything was broken down into Lamens terms. Thank you for all you do to help find and share the truth about this dangerous cult.
What a fool believes.đ
You need to read your New Testament. At present you have no idea what you're talking about.
Derek, I wouldn't bother bringing this guy back.
awwww, is your fictitious savior being attacked?
@Eugene Oisten awwww, your fictitious savior is also under attack!!!! Grow up dude!
@Eugene Oisten awwww! Did I upset your little tummy? Truth sucks!
@@scottlouissmith2382 I think they're upset he critiqued Dr. Price. But I do find Skrbina's argument logical in light of the fact that no scholar is addressing the fact that someone had to be lying when these Jesus divine stories were written
Skrbina... how do you know those church writers were knowingly lying? Your first premise is shaky. You skip right over that burden of proof and go right for motive - if this was a courtroom you'd lose this case. There are other very plausible explanations. Your certainty is just is not academic. The reason Carrier and Price and Ehrman cant commit is because they have basic academic principles.
You have an impressive academic career... how does this elude you? You would make a dirty detective.
fucking exactly.
Well said. I kept watching, waiting for the evidence, the reasons _why_, beyond just "I think Paul, et al, are just lying." This was the flimsiest mythecist case I've heard. :/
This guy couldn't even indict a ham sandwich before the trial even started.
He should stick to writing the Cliff's Notes for his betters
Iâm not a scholar but I have followed several of these brilliant NT scholars youâve had on your show. I love it, because I have known since I was a kid that this had to be a fictional story. In my mind though, I feel that maybe it was someone like Philo of Alexandria, who was a proud Greco-Roman Hellenized Jew living in Alexandria at the times, that composed these fictional stories and based it off of the first century failed messianic movements. Lots of the characters sound familiarly like the characters in the messianic movements. The dates of 6CE & 66CE are crucial dates in that in 6CE the Census of Quirinius birthed the initial revolt, the virgin birth of Jesus being symbolism (the name Mary literally translates to ârebellionâ) for the movement and fourth philosophy that led to the First Jewish-Roman War of 66CE, which was the same year Halleyâs Comet was seen in the skies. One of the accounts by Roman historian Cassius Dio depicts Armenian King Tiridates, with magis, traveling to Rome following a celestial body. The historical account sounds somewhat identical to the nativity story of the magi following a star to meet a king. The death of the messianic movements evolved into a continuation of the movement but through a spiritual resurrection ideology. It seems as though that the allegorical stories were taken out of context and a new Christian movement evolved into one where they believed the stories to be literal truth rather than allegory.
I'm just waiting for Santa Claus Hoax next I told my son the truth when he was nine..He asked and I couldn't lie to him
Fatima, Portugal destroys all biased claims against christianity
Why? Becouse God can talk for himself.
@johnthompson9513 Well, you do know that Nicholas of Myra is the inspiration for good Ole St. Nick! He was an actual person, so on a sense, Santa is real!
You can look it up. I always got a kick out of the fact that he was a Bishop, so he wore a red miter on his head. Thus, the red Santa Hat! I'm not so sure about the jolly appearance, but some legends say Nick had a jovial laugh!
@@marydonahue1 legends
OK then? How many people would allow Lions to eat them in the Roman coliseum If the story of Jesus was no better than a Superman comic book! Duh!
By starting out from the NT, itâs more likely that Pauls first motives was to impress the sadducees in Jerusalem, and by handling the Jewish people for Rome, reaching a career as a powerful man.
By his own initiative he started to attack Jesus-messianics in Jerusalem.
Then by getting the approval of the high priests, he went further, but on his way got a collapse of some sort and that changed his mind.
So, as he might have realized to be militant didnât work out, to reach his goal, as a Roman citizen and probable Herodian, he wanted to side directly with the Roman elite.
By joining them in the pursuit of a message that finally would end the messianic rebellion against Rome, still while doing all this, he could build up an heroic image of himself as a brave man, knowing fully well he always was protected by Rome.
I wonder how much of Ehrman you follow? As far as I am concerned, he always gives detailed explainations as why, how and what!
He is a good communicator with a depth of knowledge.
It's forever fascinating to watch Christians both practising and ex , focus so much of their time and effort on what is to others, obviously a fictitious narrative devised and implemented by very human creators/authors.
I was like you once then I actually read it! I suggest you do the same before you make uneducated comments. đ
â@@Darren-dh1zhReading it would convince any rational person with reasonable intelligence, of its obvious absurdity.
@@beachcomber1able so you read all 66 books?
@@beachcomber1able watch the opening ceremony of the Hadron Collider and why have a statue of Shiva the destroyer? I never became a believer just by reading a book! I came to be a believer after 20 years of research into history, then I read the Bible, it's true wether you agree or not.
@@Darren-dh1zh what nonsense đ
i am from Christian culture and recently thought "why have i not read The Book?" Have now- took as long as it took and open to your thoughts. Thank you
Skrbina is completely wrong when he claims that "it's really hard to apply probabilities to past events" when criticizing Carrier's analysis. Bayesian pattern recognition and Bayesian statistics applies probabilities to past events all the time. Spam filters based on Bayesian models are an example, and they are very widely used. Skrbina seems to be clinging to a frequentist view of probability, and is either implicitly denying the validity of epistemic probabilities or is ignorant of the concept.
The probability of a past spam being spam is 1.
Metaphysical logic of probabilities applied to evidentiary truth claims is a problem in philosophy of science called logical positivism or empiricism that continues to undermine academia and their truth claims to this day. Skrbinaâs theory is plausible and heâs right to withhold a probability claim and criticize Carrier for doing so.
@@amyherrell4106 Not sure what your point is when you talk of "judgments about truth claims." Judgments about truth claims are ubiquitous in both science and historical research. How does one go about making such judgments? What constitutes valid reasoning when doing so? That's what logic -- including the logic of uncertainty -- addresses.
@@kevinvanhorn2193 I ran these comments by the AI and it says the prior beliefs formed on conditional probabilities have been updated to form new beliefs of the conditional probability that your human mind is unnecessary. This belief has a probability of .95. Probability of belief that my human mind is necessary is 1.
I recall reading elsewhere the theory that Jesus is an Egregor. The idea being, that if people believe in something enough they can create it through energy. Perhaps that is what the Apostles were trying to do if Jesus did not in fact exist. Which we may never know for sure.
The Egregoire is found in Kabbalistic magic as the Mud Puppet. In Kabbalah the Mud Puppet is created to protect and serve Jews. You could make the case that many gentiles act as mud puppets in defending financial and Zionist malfeasance. Tibetan Buddhism has the concept of the Tulpa, an animated being created by advanced practitioners for various purposes. Egregoire Jesus is definitely a thing.
Got to say that I've thought basically the same sort of thing for a long time. Book written 50-100 years after the fact that were written to publicise a new religion are going to be dubious at best, but don't think this guy presented his case very well.
As to Ehrman and Carrier, well they want to be taken seriously so they have to work with what can be shown and although this theory is very plausible, I'd say it has to be something along these lines, there can be nothing to back it up unless you can find something that shows Paul as being a con man. Basically we need something like when Hubbard said âYou don't get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you start a religion.â
David seems to be unaware of a lot of evidence. he makes the conventional claim that writings were produced 20 years after the crucifixion, and the gospels within the first century.
It wasn't written 50-100 years after..things were written shortly after and gathered and put in one book many years later..It was when God wanted it to be done for certain reasons..
@@souldesire5932 really? This is news to me, I suppose you have evidence.......sorry being stupid again. Using god can do anything so he did it only works if you can prove god exists, Using it to prove god doesn't work.
All history accounts of key figures come many years after and is accepted by historians. That's just a fact. Not up for speculation.
@@thebritishbookworm2649 No many accounts are contemporary and many are basically regarded as fiction. They we have religious stuff which many just accept with nothing to back it up. It's working out which is which that is the issue.
Perplexing. I clicked on this video to hear this fellowâs hoax theory,not for irrelevant character assassination of fellow skeptics. Donât choke on those sour grapes,David.
He's not character assassinating your beloved fellow skeptics at all. Listen again. If you're beating on him for disagreeing with Carrier for instance, then you're just taking it as a personal slight and not actually listening to what seems to me to be a fairly common sense thesis.
@@hardywatkins7737 đ I see others here have said the same thing. Iâve watched many interviews and debates on subjects surrounding Christianity. This is the first one where a guest spends time speaking poorly about others in the field - making himself look tacky, bitter,and pretentious. It added nothing useful to the conversation, and was irrelevant. He made a fool of himself. Stick to your scholarship, thatâs why you were invited.
Get into the video
I thought judas and Mary had writings that the Vatican locked away. Or did someone else write about their story?
Their are books like âThe Gospel of Judasâ and Mary that were popular in some early Christian groups, like the Gnostics (though this is a very generalized statement). The texts more or less fell out of favor along with those early Christian groups.
I already know that. I will give that answer to the question: "Why?" 1- Because they wanted it to be true. 2 - Because they could not accept that there was no resurrection and that they believed in vain. 3 - In order to gain power and spread that lie to the world and thus rule and liquidate all those who think differently...etc.
re: _" "Why?" 1- Because they wanted it to be true."_ >> Why did they want something so humiliating to be true?
re: _"2 - Because they could not accept that there was no resurrection and that they believed in vain"_ >> But Jews already believed in the resurrection without Jesus, so on what basis was it that they "could not accept" ??
re: _"3 - In order to gain power and spread that lie to the world and thus rule and liquidate all those who think differently...etc"_ >> How does one "gain power" by being persecuted first by fellow Jews and then for hundreds of years by the Romans? It seems like a very odd 'strategy to gain power' !!
The guest seems to speak with absolute certainty about things no one can be sure about. Dr. Price's views are more balanced in light of the available evidence. As an example, why would deliberate intent to deceive be more likely than one having an hallucination and believing it was a vision?
Go back to church
My brother, history is best understood as transition from Pax Romana to Unum Sanctum to the New World Order by the same old bloodlines. The victors write the histories. Paul or Saul or perhaps Flavius Josephus was elevated as he was a Roman agent of Jewish pacification. I suggest the speaker is just grounded in common sense. On the one hand Skribina points to the lack of any common sense in the Gospels and yet accepts some of the Roman accounts. Because I assure you nothing but Roman reports pass the muster of Roman censors. All words are spells. What you call hallucinations is likely a form of magic. Which only has power over the minds of men.
Unless someone explicitly writes their motives, it's almost impossible to know.
I think the reason no one talks about it is that it's almost impossible to prove.
I'm pretty sure there is a theory that tha Romans invented Jesus.
Because Paul continued to talk to Zombie Jesus throughout his life. That means more toward mental illness.
Paul wrote emotionally, making his readers believe he was a slave to the Christ and was torn in his actions and beliefs. Make them identify with spiritual struggle. It wasn't about one man, but the one chosen to be The Christ.
Excellent point. This hoax has duped 80 generations of humans.
80? Way more than that.
Paul claimed to be" Apostle to the gentiles", in other words advocate for non-jewish adherents to the faith. Which was led at the origin by "James the just"!
A true cancer on the human mind throughout human history. 2000 years of utter mental insanity. The crusades, the inquisition, the genocide of the American people and destruction of their culture, slavery, the witch trials, the persecution of countless people, countless wars, countless cults, even today conservative vs liberal tensions, all because of this hoax and Jewish cult.
Funny. I watched the video before reading any comments and had many of the same thoughts that I now see written here. Maybe not as strong as some others have worded. One of the ideas I have always wondered, and Derek brought it up, but I didn't hear any good response: If Paul's letters are authentic, then he was writing to an existing group of believers. How does that jibe with Paul "inventing" Jesus? As an aside, why are there no existing letters back to Paul or any correspondence between anyone who even mentions this guy named Paul? I realize he doesn't have a PHD, but IMO Ken Humphreys is as convincing in his research into historical Jesus and Paul as well as any of these people with DR. in front of their names.
Yeah Kenneth Humphreys is the best, knowledgeable and very entertaining to listen to.
The fact that none of his disciples never wrote about their leader but these guys that never laid eyes on him wrote a whole book about him, is the nail in the coffin for me.
how do you know they never seen Him?
âA book written
2000 years after christs death.
Who wrote the OT
Adam and Eve.
@@user61512 OnThe New testament ,The earliest manuscript of a New Testament text is a business-card-sized fragment from the Gospel of John, Rylands Library Papyrus P52, which may be as early as the first half of the 2nd century. Of course they had to copy even earlier texts from before then,and so it was from the first century most likely if they were witnesses of Christ. As for the old testament,it was written and Adam wrote on clay tablets and his stories passed down to Moses who compiled a lot of clay tablets and oral histories for the first 4 books of the Bible. âDead Sea Scrolls,â it refers, collectively, to all scrolls found in the area, not just in the caves at Qumran.
The earliest Old testament scrolls found at Qumran date back to 250 BC, if not earlier.
â@@ElvengemDM MURDOCK (aka Acharya S) proved hook, line & sinker that Jesus Christ was 100% MYTH. Start with her THE CHRIST CONSPIRACY, THE GREATEST STORY EVER SOLD. Her research was meticulously done.She had a working knowledge of 11 languages. She was hated by not only Christians but also die-hard Atheists. Go figure. She proved that ALL Religions are pure MYTH
You think the apostles being illiterate had anything to do with that???
HI GUYS MANY THANKS FOR ALL THE EDUCATION GRANTED TO ME ON THIS DAY. I ALWAYS WONDER WHY PEOPLE GET SO DEFENSIVE OF OTHERS OPINIONS. ALL EDUCATION IS PRICELESS. I WAS BORN INTO A VERY STRONG IRISH CATHOLIC FAMILY. I ALWAYS QUESTIONED THE CONCEPT OF ROMAN CATHOLIC TEACHINGS EVEN FROM A LITTLE CHILDHOOD. I AM A 78YR OLD WOMAN WHO EVEN TODAY STILL QUESTIONS WHY, HOW, AND WHAT IS THE PROOF. EVERYONE HAS A RIGHT TO THEIR OWN BELIEFS, WHO IS RIGHT OR WHO IS WRONG
WE ARE NOW ALMOST 20MINS INTO THIS VIDEO WHAT IS YOUR PROOF JESUS IS A HOAX.
Your guest has very good arguments. But he reveals the same prejudice as Bart Ehrman toward thinkers who arenât professors. What they do for a living in no way refutes their position on the issues. Only better evidence and arguments can do that. I taught university for 50 years and heard a lot of lousy arguments from tenured profs. Their only advantage is the bully pulpit their job affords.
Paul lied...just because. That makes for a "good argument"?
@@zamiel3 Paul didn't lie because he never EXISTED. The entire thing us a story invented by the Romans. đ
I was surprised to hear Dr. Skrbinasâ observation regarding the absence of earlier writings from Jesusâ followers, and why didnât they write anything? After reading Misquoting Jesus by Ehrman, my understanding is it was likely they were not literate nor scribes. Why develop this theory if this is the case, historically? Also, regardless of Paulâs motives. Even if he had his own self interested in mind, it does not invalidate the accounts of his personal conversion and the impact it had on his life to share it, and get the word out. Yes it can affect the credibility of his writings too especially for the skeptic in us today, but it doesnât disqualify his claims. We need to be careful about these ah-ha theories.
Here is also quote from Ehrmansâ book, Heaven and Hell, A History of the Afterlife from Chapter 8, regarding to support my earlier point.
"For one thing, there are problems with the dates of these works. It is now widely acknowledged that the earliest Gospel was Mark, written around 70 CE; the last was probably John, around 90-95 CE. If, as just about everyone thinks, Jesus died around 30 CE, this would mean that the very first surviving accounts of his words come from forty to sixty-five years after he spoke them. To complicate matters further, the Gospels were not produced by Aramaic-speaking lower-class, uneducated persons living in Palestine (such as Jesusâs disciples); they were written by highly educated Greek-speaking Christians of two generations later, living in other regions of the Roman Empire.4
How did these authors know what Jesus actually said? Almost certainly they had sources of information. Most of these would have been oral traditions. That is, the authors of our Gospels heard stories of what Jesus had said, so many decades earlier, by people who had been repeating his words year after year for forty or sixty years.
"
I'm triggered. Saying the great Bob is a one trick pony is a bit insulting. The Pre-Nicene New Testament, The Amazing Colossal Apostle, The Paperback Apocalypse, sure, just "Jesus Business".
Thing is motive is always thr most difficult to prove, for instance you dont have to prove motive in a court of law, it can help but you dont HAVE to have it
Then why I hear what was their mind set we have to find out from all those apologetics when a yt guy shoots up a crowd of Hispanics or Afro-Americans
@@jorgerodriguez3392 that's just the game the ypippo run
The motive is power.
Thanks! I'm working my way through the back catalog.
Thank you again my friend! I'm glad you're enjoying this work.
It seems to me that this professor is constructing a story base on his speculation about what Paul thought and how he made up a story.
So this professor is able to get into Paul's head and made up a story that it suppose to be more real than the the story he is attacking.
Paul's whole schtick is based on a vision he claims to have had that no one else with him shared, so...
As soon as I realized he was speculating I stopped the video. This guy is in the "Don't believe in Jesus business"lol
Buy my book!
@@rickcudog8886do you believe the speculations from the bible? From the NT? From Paul?
Do you believe the âmiraclesâ that jesus preformed? Btw..many of those âmiracles were preformed by Dionysus first, if youâre interested in mythology.
I often wonder if consciousness did not exist, would anything else exist and if it did - why?
Most things do not have consciousness. Why wouldn't they exist? There just would not be anyone to know it.
@@DocZom When I think about it, as far as we know, for billions of years before life evolved, there was no consciousness, but inanimate stuff must have existed that would eventually evolve into mankind.
Glad I sorted that one outđ
Only just found this channel, and am really enjoying it. Is there a similar one for Islam and Judaism?
The trumpers are creating a similar story about their cult leader, trump. Letâs see in a few hundred years what comes out of that. đ
It gives me nausea to think of it.
Grandpa Bob Price is a Trump supporter, so much for education and rationality.
a few hunderd years? He is hardly a year out of office and already now the myths lost contact with reality.đ·đ±
This is an interesting study in narcissism. Thankyou Mythvision for bringing the unexpected once again.
@Full English, please say more about this.
"All these others guys have a vested interest that impedes their ability to write and speak clearly about this topic...but I, and I alone, stand unshackled and speak the simple truth." (Paraphrasing, but it's basically the entire first part of this presentation.)
Sadly, look how many well intentioned people were denied access to their own spiritual connections based on truth and maybe even deprived of consciousness immortality due to the power grab and greed of our fellow mankind
too speculative. and i don't buy his speculation about paul's motives since it ignores the long standing relationship of paul w the church in jerusalem.