Atheists Refuted Me, Here's My Response
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 09. 2024
- Here's my original video about skeptics of the resurrection: • Skeptics Respond To Th...
Here's Pinecreek's video refuting me: • Mike Winger Critique: ...
This video is not intended to be a full response to everything that Doug and Cam have said about me. I think that would be impossible to provide. But I have chosen a few important points that I think are worth mentioning.
I'm hoping that the comment section here can stay cordial and reasonable and I would appreciate if people on both sides could at least pretend to be nice. :)
Having met Dr. Habermas and hearing part of his personal story I would count him as a former skeptic persuaded by the evidence as an adult.
In college he had serious doubts about Christianity and was considering becoming a Buddhist. He recounted looking out across the back yard and challenging God to knock down a particular tree. When it didn't happen immediately he scoffed at God. But that night the tree and only that tree was taken down in a huge storm. However, at the time he was so spiritually blind he had forgotten his challenge. He didn't think about it again until years later after he became a believer. His point being, that until one is prepared to believe you can show all the evidence you like and they simply cannot believe.
Well put!
I was an atheist for 25 years....then I experienced God. Once that happens there's no going back. It's just as much evidence as if he was physically standing before me, but an atheist will never accept that as evidence yet to a believer it's the biggest piece of evidence that God exists. Even if all the evidence was 100% conclusive that Jesus was resurrected I wouldn't be willing to die defending historical evidence, but now that I've experienced the resurrection power of Jesus I'd lay down my life before I'd deny him.
Experience is not evidence for the supernatural. Otherwise we’d all accept the truth of the Hindu gods, Muhammad’s winged horse, Odin and Valhalla, Mt. Olympus, etc. Billions of people have experienced the gods of those religions as well.
@@docsspellingcontest592 so if Jesus Christ himself came walking through the walls of your house and into your bedroom and said “I am the way the truth and the life no one comes to the father except by me “, you would look at him and say sorry dude I’m holding out for some winged horses Or some Hindu goddess? My bet is you would be on your face awestruck from the very power and presence of who is before you. When you tell somebody who has experienced something as powerful as this [not saying this was his exact experience but as an example} that he has no evidence that is simply not true. He has evidence that changed his life. The evidence was for him not you. This person is simply giving you his testimony. He knows from the start that an atheist will not become a Christian from simply listening to him tell his story. Imagine what it must have taken for this former atheist to experience something that changed his life and turned his heart toward God. I’m sure he knows the difference between emotionalism and being in the presence of an undescribable powerful presence that is beyond anything in this world. I believe him because I also experienced God In a miraculous way. We all must find that hill we are willing to die on. The Bible says every man must work out his own salvation in fear and trembling. I really don’t care what the Muslims and Hindus experience because I know what I believe
@@mkent8300 I don’t doubt the experience. But that isn’t evidence. How can something be evidence for only one person? You’re completely changing the meaning of the word. What you mean is “experience.” What you’re saying is “evidence.”Those aren’t the same no matter how much you feel it or believe it. Otherwise, like I wrote in my first comment we would be forced to accept everyone’s experiences as evidence of truth. I would hope you have a higher standard but I understand where you’re coming from. I was a Christian for many years and I “knew” he was real in my life. At least, I knew until I understood that knowing and feeling aren’t synonyms.
@@mkent8300 Also, the whole Jesus walking through the door story is a red herring. That has not happened to one person in the last 2 thousand years, if it ever happened. Was it a real, physical presence? Did you touch Jesus? Did you get a selfie with him? Fingerprints? Something? No, it always ends up being some ethereal feeling, vision, etc. Something personal, you know, kind of like an alien abduction. You believe those people too, don’t you? I mean it changed their lives being in the presence of an indescribable powerful alien presence, right?
@@docsspellingcontest592
Evidence can be anecdotal or hearsay based on another persons experience nonetheless it is still evidence but it may not rise to the level that meet your demands. The the evidence I experienced in my encounter with God was enough to change my life forever. all I can do is tell others about it . I cannot make them believe it. I do not have selfies or videos or A photograph of anything. My family certainly saw the evidence as they observed the change in my life from being a drug addict One day and completely different the next and from that day forward with all addictions miraculously taken away with no desire ever again for those things. you have a right not to believe my story and I don’t expect you to but you do not have the scientific (Evidence) to tell me what I experienced was completely conjured up in my head. There have been several miraculous events that have taken place in my life through the years which could not have been a coincidence. I could never convince you that the God of the Bible is real only he can do that for you. All I’m saying is He convinced me with evidence that was un seen but tangible nevertheless. And I am willing to go to my grave with perfect contentment and peace with the knowledge I have of God and his son Jesus Christ. And before you come back with the Muslims and Hindus are willing to go to their graves as well with what they know I will go ahead and say it for you.
Pastor Mike: “I really don't have time for this.“ Also Pastor Mike: “+200 hours of research about Marridge“
No, but in all honesty thank you so much for the good work your doing here on youtube. It really helped me learn to think biblically. You have promised and deliverd!
that's why he didn't have time for this LOL
@@ambitionroad ppppll
Yeah, he clearly prioritizes good teaching over his ego. As men go, he seems to be a good one.
I like Pastor Mike even as an atheist. You and Doug need to do a CrossFire style show.
What is your bias for truth if minds dont exist claims cant be made, laws of logic dont exist only matter exists.
Secondly, evolution is falling apart, see “mathematical challenges to Darwin’s..” and “information enigma” on here.
Mike is passive aggressive whereas Doug is cheeky. There's a defensive victim mentality that Mike uses as part of his argumentation I watch to see him act like a child. If you're looking for anything more in a conversation show you will be disappointed.
The Bible uses the testimony of women, of what happened when they went to the tomb. That women were considered unreliable witnesses testifies against the disciples making up the story, since, if they were making it up, why not send someone with a less compromised reputation than a woman? Why not Joseph of Arimathea, checking up on his tomb, or Nicodemus paying his respects? And yet, the Bible tells us the story told by Mary Magdalene, and women were still disreputable when it was written.
It may not be unusual for women to go to the tomb, but it is unusual to use women's testimony as the first witnesses to the resurrection. The gospels could have left that out if they were just trying to make up a story.
PineCreek
But you're claiming the story was made up. So even if it made sense for a woman to go why would you use a woman in the story if you're making it up? You'd use multiple men which makes sense since he had 12 male disciples and many friends.
Also why didn't you answer Mike? If all 5 of those facts are true what is your answer?
PineCreek
What's more important if you're making a fake religion. Being culturally accurate or making it believable?
Also give me more on the Essene Preacher. First time hearing of this.
PineCreek
I'll read into but I ask of you this.
Even if Christianity isn't true that doesn't justify your atheism. Atheism is the only position on the scale of theist positions that has no evidence supporting it.
PineCreek No offense, but refuting Tim Keller is not that hard. He is a Calvinist and his interpretation of the Bible is odd. He doesn't seem very accurate in his facts, and the Bible is clear that we should test everything and hold on to what is good. The four gospel accounts do not contradict each other, they are four accounts that mention different aspects, like you and your friend might give different accounts after going to the same event. Mary hurried to tell the disciples, other women fled to their homes. There were more than 3 women (Luke 24:1,10) so it is reasonable that they did not all react the same. By the way, the Bible does not teach that the earth is only 6000 years old, even though a lot of Christians think it does for some reason. See Reasons.org where astrophysicist Hugh Ross gives a scientifically accurate model for the beginning of the universe. The Bible does not say the earth is created prior to the sun, only that the light from the sun would not be visible from the earth until some of the debris in the atmosphere cleared away.
I love watching these deep dives into these subjects. Not many CZcamsrs are this in depth! Thank you for all you do!
I admire your compassion for atheist.✝️✝️
I find it very fascinating how the majority of 'skeptics' are only 'skeptical' when it contradicts the basis of what they collectively reject - instead of what they personally understand. There is very little consistency in their objectivity against the Christian faith - the only thing that remains immutable amongst them is what they are "willing" to reject - NOT what they coherently "know" to be true. That is one of the many sores that exposes them the most.
I don't believe in a super genie (or sky daddy) sitting on a cloud no more than I believe in a red devil with horns and a pitchfork. The fabrication of a truth or the invention of a subjective to explain an unknown does not dismiss an absolute that has been supported by history. The fact that the father of science (Newton) supported that absolute through science, yet modern scientists such as Hawkins use Newton's fundamental theory to introduce new claims is no different from a skeptic arguing against the origin of scripture, yet believing that "nothing" produced not only "something", but a "system of life" - which completely contradicts biogenesis science (which has been routinely "observed" at all levels of life); that states life can only come from life and non living matter cannot produce living matter. So for life to exist there must be an eternal life giving source. So, either you are going to accept science is true, or "blindly" place your "faith" in Richard Dawkins' rhetorical notion of magic or sky wizards - which is an anemic counterintuitive attempt to claim that life came from “nothing” - which altogether repudiates that which has been observed through science.
Perhaps you misunderstood my statement. If you study Dawkins writing and debates, he uses and I quote, "magic" as a rhetorical observation to explain a theological worldview, while at the same time he proposes that we come from "nothing" and then tries to explain nothing (which he has been mocked by scientists, philosophers, and theologians, alike). Although his "magic" narrative was indeed intended to "ridicule" those who support the origin of scripture - he fails miserably and loses any credibility by going against the principles of science (in particularly biogenesis science) to create his own "poof" narrative of existence - that we (life) "appeared/came" from nothing - which I stated earlier repudiates that which has been "observed" through science.
@@ajboggie87
In reality all scientists agree that the Big Bang and Evolution are empirically verifiable scientific facts.
And no, scientists don’t think that there ever was nothing, that’s part of your own creation myth.
I also doubt that philosophers mock Dawkins since most philosophers are Atheists.😂
Hi Mike.
I am not a practicing Christian, but love your videos for the research and passion you present. Keep up the good work.
Eli Haslage hi Eli thanks for your encouragement for Mike! What if I may ask is your personal belief on the subject of God?
Eli Haslage Glad to hear you aren't
Darken what may I ask are your personal beliefs on the subject?
Be more specific
Darken sorry, what are your beliefs on the subject of God?
It seems to be a rule of atheology: "Thou shalt not even hypothetically imagine there is a god." Why else would they avoid your persistent question.
I smiled when I heard the part about your friends searching for the end or limit of your knowledge so they could go after you for what you don’t know. I have experienced the same thing in conversations with atheists on line. Funny (:
Thank you for what you do.
This is exactly what I have experienced. Most often, and i hate to say this, i don't even try anymore, because as pastor Mike here has pointed out before, most are just mocking and scoffing.
Keep up the good fight, Mike! I am so thankful for the teachers like yourself, that God is raising up in these last days.
Three years later.........no apocalypse
“The wisdom of this world is foolish to God. The Holy Writings say, “He is the One Who gets them in a trap when they use their own wisdom.”
🤣😂😂🤣😂😂that’s rich! He quotes Habermas after dismissing him as a valid representative for biblical scholarship.
So Cam says this "historian" isn't valid because he doesn't release his data. And Mike uses him when it's convenient and ignores him when he isn't. And that's rich on Cam's part?
@@charliethecoyote2896 in what context is he ignoring his data?
@@alexandergrahamcracker5581 For instance the dating and authorship of the gospels. He talks about the consensus of scholars when it furthers his position and ignores them when he doesn't like the consensus.
@@charliethecoyote2896 that's not what you said. You we talking about how he quotes Habermas when he agrees and ignores him when he doesn't, which is what Cam actually did. What statement did Habermas make that Mike chose to ignore?
Well I watched the video and made the comment 3 months ago.
I’m a new subscriber and I’d just like to say, thank you and God bless you for being such a great example here on CZcams of how to respond in love. I’ve watched maybe 7 or 8 videos of yours by now and I am amazed at how much care you put into your teaching, the honesty you display, the loving nature to share the truth while not watering down truth just to invite more viewers. Especially in this video you’re showing how it is possible to love your enemies, in a way perhaps because you don’t come across as seeing them as your enemy. If I dare say you come across as Jesus did when He was on the cross and asked the Father, Lord forgive them for they know not what they do. You come across as having a genuine compassion to share the truth and to help others legitimately understand just so they may seek Jesus all the more. Again thank you for your work and for being a light, I’ll be praying for you and your team, as you guys are really helping all of us. Cheers sir!
Always blessed to listen to you pastor Mike. I'd listen to you all day. However, i'll be honest, i'm not going to waste my time hearing out what these skeptics say. In all debates and things i've heard from them they always lean towards putting words to someone else's mouth, going personal and just utterly not answering on point. Intentional or not it's disgusting. I'm not an expert on these things but if in every argument/debate/reaction these are the things that they will do then there's no point in listening to such people. I pray i can be more gracious to them as you are. May God continue to bless you!
Brought to mind a quote I've long remembered...
*“To give truth to him who loves it not is but to give him more plentiful material for misinterpretation.”*
-George McDonald (1824-1905), Scottish author, poet, and Christian minister
Its nice of you to keep your cool and treating the atheists with kindness, they can be dificult to deal with sometimes. I think most or all militant atheists (i dont like that word) are actuallt searching for thuth..
yep you got me! lol
You mean are not actually searching for truth. I agree with that. Some famous atheist even said he doest not want to believe there is a God I have to answer to. Sorry don't know who it was.
@@Max-kn9yi Sounds like most of them but deep down they know that science doesnt have the answer and that the big bang theory has too many loose ends. The bible doesnt explain in understandable ways how the world was created, it uses metaphors and philosophy and turns God into an angry man in the sky. Philosophically it checks out but if you read it from a material perspective it will look like the universe hates you and wants to throw you on a giant BBQ and that life is a trial..
Difficult to deal with because theists never come close to providing credible evidence for their beliefs.
@Pro Semite Yes, that's what I require from theists. What do extraordinary claims require?
Mike, I didn't even see the two videos but I am familiar with Pinecreek and now you from his stuff. You are by far the best apolgists Doug has had on his show. I would love someone to challenge Dougs beliefs instead of it always being him challenging others. He left Christianity, wherr did he go? What does he believe? Secular humanism? I bet Doug only became a Secular Humanist because he lives in the western world. If grew up in India, he would be Hindu....just using Dougs rational against him. Keep it up Mike!!
Franklin Dzioba huh? So mike only became a Christian because he lives in the western word? If Doug was from where you are from he would have left that faith too and become an atheist or agnostic. Your argument doesn’t make any sense.
Eric S I was attempting sarcasm against Pinecreek/Doug, NOT Mike. I probably failed. One of Doug's favorite attacks against Christians is that we are only Christians because we were born in America. My point was that Athiesim is also an American/ Western Civilization product as well. So Doug's criticism applies to him also.
Not really. Doug went from the religion of the western world, left, and became atheist. So he would have had the religion of the other area, left, and became an atheist.
Eric, you are missing the point. Mike and Doug could convert to Christianity or Atheism regardless of area. It's all about the information one is exposed to. So, using Doug's analogy as an argument, well, doesn't go anywhere, its just speculation based on assumptions.
Eric S Today's Western Civilization is HEAVILY influenced by the Enlightenment. Mainstream Athiesim is a stream of Enlightenment thinking, and is therefore just as much a part of our culture bas Judeo Christianity. So I could just as well say Doug is only an Athiest because he grew up in America. Educated by American public schools that convinced him of microb to man evolution. All Doug has done by CONVERTING to Athiesim is proven the Bible...you cannot serve two masters. Unfortunately Doug choose the wrong master. This is Also why Doug can't answer Mike's hypothetical. And Doug asks Christians hypotheticals ALL THE TIME!
I'm into politics also and I see the same kind of tactics our enemies use to subdue nations, especially the "Christian" ones like ours and sadly it works. It's the psychological, emotional places they use a lot, preying on people's human nature, ignorance, weaknesses. And just as with that, it's the same with other important issues and one of our best weapons is knowledge of the truth - and the "truth shall set us free". Indeed.
So that's where the battle is - what is the real truth? Thanks so much for doing these videos showing their tactics, which helps a lot.
IMO the atheist activists do not want to know the truth - evidence that proves God/Jesus/Bible true. Matt Dillahunty has even said that even if he saw some, he'd still not submit and would rather spend eternity in hell than do that bc he thought God was cruel, immoral, harmful to humanity/world. At least he's honest. Wow.
I watch your vedio in his channel but he has no rational defence in your statements.
He just attacks, twist & spin,
the personal &
psychological state of the person.
Whom they are talking.
He was too blind about the truth.
You did a good job Mike Winger👍
Is that ad hominem
@@nexteffects Amelia's statement is that Doug's arguments were invalid and uncompelling, and that some of them were ad hominem. I read that Amelia's points do not include any ad hominem by her, she isn't attacking the person; she's attacking the tactics he used
You are so patient and kind. I would not be able to say those nice things about someone like that. Sometimes you just got to dust your feet off.
Well done, Mike. Your grace, humility and love for others, particularly for unbelievers, when arguing these points is always refreshing and a good testimony for Christ. Thank you for your work. Keep up the good fight. 🙏👍
Stand your ground Mike ! Thanks for the response and clarifying your thoughts. Keep interacting with folks like Doug and his minions - it’s nice to see good dialog that sparks true reflection on all of our beliefs etc . Btw you’re prob not gonna here an atheist say “Thats a great point and I will thoughtfully consider it “ ha Thanks again. Peace ✌🏼
Make a great point and I’ll thoughtfully consider it
It is a real pleasure to follow these livestreams and your clear, ordered and open presentations are a real joy to view.
You clearly enjoy the scriptures and take delight in God's provision of intellect and scholarship.
Best regards, CE
Mike is such a nice guy. Your politeness is so entertaining! 😂
The fool will always look to disprove the evidence for God . Romans 1 , 1rst Corinthians and many other scriptures talk about it . I love that Mike is looking to defend his faith which is commanded by the scriptures but understand that even if you prove them wrong they will still find another issue to deny God simply because they hate God . We can only pray for them .
True. Atheism has more to do with suppressing truth rather than a lack of awareness.
*No, the fool will always accept non-evidence as evidence to support their already held absurd belief.*
"simply because they hate God"
*Do you hate Odin? How about Vishnu? Stop being such a gullible fool.*
"We can only pray for them ."
*Why would anyone pray? Isn't your supposed invisible magician 'unchanging'? Pretty stupid of you to think it would change it's mind.*
"Atheism has more to do with suppressing truth rather than a lack of awareness."
*No, it has everything to do with a complete lack of any evidence invisible magicians exist. My desire for the truth is exactly why I don't believe invisible magicians exist.*
*@asix* Your lack of desire for truth is exactly why you call God an "invisible magician" to feel better about your disbelief.
jadywolf007@gmail.com but an intelligent person will realize their is nothing to disprove as god does not exist.
Thank you for this video. Your response is very well put and your sincerity and humility in the search for truth is refreshing and beautifully gives the glory to God!
Time for a formal debate on the resurrection. The back and forth will only continue but a debate will settle things.
Oooohh, that sounds interesting.
Mike Winger It’s the only thing left. I’m sure he would be willing to do it. Both of you just have to find the time for it.
There have been a few good debates on the resurrection. I recommend Matt Dillahunty to argue against.
PineCreek 1. www.exegeticalapologetics.com/2018/05/the-historicity-of-appearance-to-500-in.html
2. The Empty Tomb
There is much evidence for Jesus’ tomb being empty after at first being occupied by his corpse. Also, there is good evidence to affirm the reason the tomb was empty was because Jesus rose from the dead as opposed to other theories such as the “conspiracy theory.”
As previously noted, Mark’s early pre-Markan source affirms the empty tomb, and it is likewise implicitly affirmed in the primitive 1 Corinthians 15 creed which comes from Peter and James. The relevant portion of that creed says “that he was buried, [and] that he was raised on the third day” (1 Corinthians 15:4). Craig Keener notes “Paul believed that Jesus was ‘buried’ . . . and must therefore have assumed that the risen Jesus left the tomb.”(26)
Moreover, the first century gospel biographies report it was women who discovered the empty tomb (Mark 16:1-8; Matthew 28:1-10; Luke 24:1-10; John 20:1-2). If the gospels were misleading people with fiction they would not declare women discovered the empty tomb since the testimony and intelligence of women was highly questioned in the ancient Mediterranean world.(27) This meets the principle of embarrassment, for, later Christians would not invent details that embarrassed them or caused them difficulty. Hence, the gospel writers were reporting truth concerning the discovery of the empty tomb and had to live with the fact women discovered it.
Moreover, that it was known the tomb was empty early on is confirmed by the fact that the Jewish authorities living during Jesus’ time speculated his followers may have stolen his body as an explanation (Matthew 28:11-13). William Lane Craig thus argues, “The earliest Jewish polemic presupposes the empty tomb.”(28)
What is more, scholars note the empty tomb account in Mark, the earliest gospel, is very basic and lacks legendary embellishment commonly found in fictional works, which is not what one would expect if Mark was putting forth myth or legend. As Craig notes, “all you have to do is compare Mark’s account of the empty tomb with the account found in the so-called Gospel of Peter, a forgery from around A.D. 125. In this account . . . two men descend from heaven to the tomb . . . the heads of the two men reach up into the clouds. . . Then a cross comes out of the tomb, and a voice from heaven asks, ‘Have you preached to them that sleep?’ And the cross answers, ‘Yes.’(29)
Lastly, Jesus’ primitive followers could not have preached Jesus’ bodily resurrection in Jerusalem the way they did (e.g. in Acts speeches, early formulas and creeds) if the tomb was not empty. This is because skeptics and Jewish authorities could have gone and seen Jesus’ body in the tomb to refute the primitive Christian preachers.(30)
This evidence is so compelling even non-Christian Jewish scholar Geza Vermes(31) and atheist scholar Michael Grant(32) affirm the empty tomb. Many, many others do as well. www.exegeticalapologetics.com/2018/05/an-historical-case-for-christs.html
3. www.tektonics.org/gk/jesustrial.php
Those are just some free resources that can give you more information.
PineCreek To everything I just sent you? No I don’t know your responses to all of that.
Proving that the early christians did believe that Jesus got resurrected, which I think christians have not done that yet, is not enough for christianity to be true.
What christians need is to prove that they( i.e. the early christians or Jesus' disciples) believed that Jesus died and got raised *for thier sins* because this belief is what defines christianity. It is interesting that biblical scholars such as Bart Ehrman say that this belief is not even found in Luke's gospel.
Is the book of Romans good enough for you?
Also, 1 Corinthians 15:3-8? 1 Corinthians and Romans were both written in the early to mid 50’s AD, only 20ish years after the resurrection. Is that not proof enough?
@@sneakysnake2330 Book of Romans is Pauline christianity. It does not really present the early followers of Jesus.
@@sneakysnake2330 Nope!
@@Khaledf
Good God you're brainless.
You're awesome Mike! You always handle these issues very well!
The women even being recorded proves authenticity . It they wanted it to be considered more reliable they would have invented male witnesses
According to the story the disciples fled and were hiding.
And it was the job of women and slaves to anoint the body of Jesus… no one else would have had a plausible reason to go there… especially if you believe that there were actually guards at the tomb it would be ridiculous to assume that male followers would dare to go there.
In reality there isn’t any evidence that Jesus was placed in a tomb.
But if you would have to invent a tomb story then the women going to the tomb is your only option.
@@amyrenee1361 prove it you just be talking 😂
I pray for those who are stuck in this atheistic purgatory of ignorance. Thank you God for pulling me out!!!
I've realized that you're definitely called to take time these men Mr. Mike. For me, I usually just say, " I believe cause of my experience, if the Bible is wrong then I wouldn't have touch the way I was, and now I now have peace I didn't have before". I don't the knowledge of the history in detail. Thanks for taking the heat and still responding in love. Be blessed. One day I'll finally meet ya. I'm sure you'll know who I am.
GOD BLESS YOU MIKE. THE WORLD NEEDS MEN LIKE YOU IN THESE TWISTED TIMES
I'm all for trying to get people to not harden their hearts to the gospel in whatever way the spirit will allow but in days like these I tend to point to 2nd Peter 1: 19 " We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto you do well that you take heed, as unto light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts." the bible is playing out right before our very eyes. what greater witness could one want. I think the challenge is how do you combat willful ignorance. anyway God bless all you do.
We can't combat willful ignorance. It's willful that they don't want to know.
It does seem like willful ignorance to say that passage from 2 Peter is anything but so vague as to apply to any all time periods ever. I have zero doubt that if Muslim made a comparable claim you be shocked. But here you are.
@@charliethecoyote2896 no I wouldn't be shocked but I would search the scriptures daily to see if what I hear and or read is so. The bible is an integrated message system outside our space time domain knowing the end from the beginning. People should learn it and trust in the one who gave it to us while there's still time. I pray you surrender to our creator and trust in him so as to obtain the eternal adventure in life. Seriously, where's your hope? Is it in yourself? What other men say? Truth is when the word and deed become one and the bible is always proving to do just that and that's because it's Gods word. Many of us who trust and believe thought like you before we dared to believe and then see as God is faithful to open up his word to our hearts and lives and open up our hearts and lives to his word. I've searched out Islam and found Mohammad to be the most obvious false prophet to exist as he plagiarized the old and new testament to create Islam but you must discover these things for yourself.
@@nikao7751 The bible is an integrated message system outside of space and time? What if that's not true? What if 1 Corinthians was a letter (probably a combination of letters) written by Paul in space and time about specific theological concerns Paul had with the church in corinth at the time he wrote? And what if later that letter was packaged with other writings to form the christian bible?
@@charliethecoyote2896 if God br God, and he is, does he not have the power to get to his creation his word ad he would have it brought to us? I trust that he does and has and not blindly but always and continually in his word daily to search out the matters at hand always finding that the problems I have with scripture are not that of scripture but are my problems of a lack of understanding and this is an ongoing learning process. We should all be after the truth and my search of ultimate truth keeps leading me deeper into Gods word. I pray and hope your search does as well but do keep searching with open and readiness of mind.
This half of the crowd that you still have begs you CARRY ON!! God Bless and MUCH LOVE from the Oklahoma Grandma!!
This channel deserves 1M+ subscribers
At 22:00 I know this is not where you are going, but it applies: You don't have to know how an automobile engine works to know how to drive a car, and expect it to start when you turn the key. And it does.
Your lack of understanding doesn't cause the car to disappear in a puff of logic. It doesn't make you a bad driver. And yes, what he's doing is finding some obscure and irrelevant substory and then trying to nail you because you don't "know about it", when, in reality, you don't care about it. I don't know what a Calvanist is, really. So what? I don't argue for or against it. It's not my specialty. I do think tulips are pretty, though. :)
I try to be a good atheist, but I just don't have enough faith to pull it off...
You haven't lost me Mike. You are my man with biblical truth go get them. I love this you are on point. Gary Habermass is very credible. Great defense very well spoken, I love that you are great at defending biblical christianity. So true about God leaving us great information and proofs of these events. I find that those who have a fixed mindset like atheist they have a rebuttal for everything I run into that a lot. I often say there is much historical evidence to help anyone to know for sure if we are not telling the truth and please don't take my word for it look it up for yourself. I encourage everyone to read the bible and see for themselves what it says. We as christians do not need to make up stories we have the evidence to back up why we believe what we do.
More deep dives brothers. You do a great job and encourage me and my wife. Thank you brother. May God Bless you.
Amazing discussion (both sides), totally agree with you that fleshing out logical fallacies and discovering truth in logical debate is awesome. Thanks for making this video.
What do atheist mean when they say that Christians only had visions? If they don't specify that they think Christians hallucinated, and if they can't explain why certain things were reportedly seen, it seems "visions" are just as miraculous as anything else.
Hey Mike, looking forward to the video on the martyrdom of the apostles. Is that coming soon ? To me that's one of the most compelling evidences.
Great video. As always, respectful, evenhanded, thoughtful, delivered with humility and integrity.
Dr. Habermas is a brilliant scholar. I had the privilege of taking one of his courses in college. I also saw him speak on, “The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus,” at an apologetics conference. His book, of the same name, is an excellent resource for anyone interested in the topic. Blessings all.
Aaaand it's all nonsense.
FWIW, I've been debating this off and on on the internet since 2005 with a lot of "atheists" that feel empowered by their "comparative religion" college course. I've heard every argument that he brought up. The arguments are like the tricks a magician uses. Once you see the trick, it's easy to debunk. But they are tricks. All of them. Every. Single. One.
Rob Wells sounds a lot like Ray Comfort and the strawman atheists he comes up with in his anecdotes. You might be good at writing fiction!
Hi Pastor Mike two folks I shared shared with me. We were all CZcams watchers of you!! Three friends who knew. We love watching!
Keep it up Mike. Your videos on the resurrection are great and convincing.
The problem I always face is more and more people deny Jesus ever existed period. I point out the people outside of the Bible who wrote of him, but apparently all it takes to dismiss them is "Nah, fake." I have no idea where you're finding these atheists who accept that Jesus actually existed as a man.
Most all of secular historians believe that Jesus existed, but that he was not divine, did not preform miracles, or did not rise from death and ascended bodily into heaven. They believe he was a Jewish man that was rebellious towards the Roman occupiers of Judea, causing the Romans to execute him for sedition by crucifixion and ending his life. The first historian to write about Jesus was Josephus, about 60 years (93 AD) after Jesus' execution and even then Josephus was merely writing hearsay accounts and some of what he wrote has been claimed to be a later forgery.
You're awesome Mike. Much respect to you.
I can understand why skeptics would deny the deity of Christ, but for the life of me I cannot figure out why they deny He existed at all. Well, maybe I can. It seems to me that the denial of existence is the best way to deny the mountain of evidence. They just say "It was all a myth, therefore, no God Man, No condemnation for me, and I can continue living the way I please". And just like that, hey are off the hook. Easy peesy lemon sqwueezy.
However, in order to deny He existed you have to question the existence of ALL historical figures. And for people who claim to be "intellectuals", that is a very intellectually dishonest position to take. It's not a tenable position. It's special pleading.
On the other hand, if you are a skeptic who is honest and you accept that He must have existed, then you have to contend with the question, "is Jesus who He said He is?" Either He was a lunatic, a liar, or He is the Messiah. And after examining the evidence, it's hard to deny that the Gospels are only written if He is who He claimed to be. THAT is a hard pill to swallow for unbelievers who don't WANT God to exist.
What other accounts (preferably contemporary) are there of appearances by Jesus? Paul just says there were appearances to 500, a round number in 1 Cor. 15. No other testimony of who saw him, how they confirmed it was him, what was said, etc. That's one account claiming 500, not 500. Then, decades later, the gospels in third person Greek. Maybe I missed something.
I have had the exact same argument with two Atheistic apologists mates as well. I think you rebutted their rebuttal well. I find atheism criticism (online in particular) of good evangelical bible scholarship seems to be 'I found a slight problem in your argument therefore everything you said is wrong and in fact the complete opposite is true".
Hey mike God bless. Love your video, your ministry is needed. Thanks for letting your self be lead by God. Keep it up sir. Also is there an email or website for your subscribers where we can go to ask biblical questions ?
Hi Joel, I realize you wrote this a couple weeks ago but I wanted to answer anyways. There are two main ways to get questions to me. One is to send an email through biblethinker.org but I am sorry to say I can’t quite keep up with the current number of questions and messages coming in, but I do try to answer several each day when I can. But because of the number coming in and my own time commitments I’m unable to answer them all. Another way is to join the live stream I do on CZcams on Tuesday’s at 5pm PST. At the end of this stream I generally take several questions from the audience and answer them on the spot.
Philipians 1:21
To live is Christ & to die is gain.
I am a child of God.
Alive in Christ.
Declared innocent.
Made righteous through Jesus Christ.
Heaven bound.
If we line up
atheist human vs. Eternal God
Who are you going to believe?
Can’t wait for your 3rd video on the world mission church. I know someone in that false faith.
People who reject the evidence for the resurrection are doing it not based on the evidence but based on their lack of knowledge, since the evidence for the resurrection is excellent by the most rigorous Historical standards.
We'll dine, Mike. They'll hate you because they hate your Master. Hopefully your reason and kindness and patience helps them come to Christ. So sad they're usually so angry and joyless.
a true miracle would be a video containing the evidence for the resurrection. didn't happen here.
Well presented!
Great video Mike. Reminds me of John 4:48. Being in physical flesh we automatically desire physical signs, therefore it is grace that saves us though our faith for we believe in Him and His resurrection which brings us to His understanding blessing John 20:29.
J. Warner Wallace is an excellent source for this very topic, among other things, such as reliability of the Bible, etc.
Very true! His site is coldcasechristianity.com
Sean A J Wallace’s book has many internal errors which I’ve critiqued in detail on his Amazon review page for his book.
If you're going to do a fair and balanced critique I'd suggest delving into the dozens upon dozen's of Theological and Archeological sources he's used (which of course includes secular material), not only in his older book but his new material and video's.
In regards to the Bible the vast majority of Scholars on all sides of the fence are in relative agreement on most issues, the exception being "miracles" or the "supernatural".
Sean A there is zero archeological evidence for the resurrection. I’ve listened to Mike extensively and he presents zero theological evidence either.
I agree 100%. I was referring to the Bible.
Every person interested in apologetics should hear this! -- An argumentation that is very rarely found nowadays.
You're doing a great job.
Thanks Mike. You're really helpful and so thoughtful
most if not all new atheists even the one you are reasoning to don't properly understand the resurrection argument
Which is why most people boil to down to a strawman of "you can't use the Bible to prove the Bible"
"There are other possibilities"
Even though the resurrection argument refutes these possibilities
PineCreek
Yeah, I'd recommend you read more scholarly books about it and watch inspiring philosophy's video series
PineCreek
Sure when you dig into the spiritual aspect of Christianity
But philosophy of religion is distinct from spirituality of religion
One can have one without the other but both are essential for a coherent faith and a useful one
PineCreek
Mostly the methodology of the argument and reasoning behind it, specifically when you implied "so what if the tomb was empty?"
It follows circumstantial (court room like) evidence, most people fail to see this and their critique is aimed at the methodology not the data
Its not empty tomb therefore resurrection
It's more of a gathering of possible theories and gathering all the data we know and seeing which theory better explains the data
Each element is crucial as each piece of data doesn't count as evidence in its own
The reason why I recommend inspiring philosophy as a secondary source is because he emphasizes the methodology and sadly most laymen don't
PineCreek
Both of these don't matter in the resurrection argument, simply because the resurrection argument only uses bible passage we are historically certain of
For example we can be sure that women were the first to witness the empty tomb due to the criteria of embarrassment
And circumstantial evidence is accepted by everyone
PineCreek
Of course to a guy who didn't do research he would say "so what?" But to one who knows about the criteria of embarrassment and the status of women on the ancient world he would conclude this account is historically accurate
This isn't evidence for the resurrection as I said above the case for the resurrection is a compiled and comparative one
It's not About the data but how you connect them
The synoptic problem is a problem for trying to figure out what the sources were, how many sources there were, who the editors and compilers were and when they did their work for each edition and final product. It is not a problem in the sense of making Christianity or the resurrection hard to believe in. I can perfectly well accept that I have a working car, while it still might be a problem for me to try and recreate everything that led to the creation of the working car. Not the best analogy, but that's a little bit of the idea. Maybe a better analogy would be if I uncovered a Roman chariot from 30 CE, and believed it was a functioning chariot put together by the Romans in that time period, but how no idea who the individual creators of the chariot were, nor where every piece of the chariot came from, nor what trees or quarries were used to get the raw materials that it's made of.
Explain Noah’s ark.
You can find it on Google maps. Also researchers have found and concluded it is the Ark.
You mike definitely are a man of God with fruit of his spirit it definitely helps me and how I should share and defend the faith 🙏 thank you gor being a great teacher
16:20 Kinda of ironic Mike when you refuse to answer the hypothetical that Doug gave you the other day about drowning vs poof
If parties care little for finding truth but instead are looking to defend their own feelings of superiority, there is no sense in debating. At some point you are just casting pearls to swine or being distracted by trivia.
Well. it looks to me that Our Lord cares very little about what the world considers reliable and does consider His daughters reliable witnesses and followers of His Word
Good science and good scholarship are simply methods, not Truth. When the whole premise of the argument is reduced to putting God in a box, nobody wins. I understand that we are to be prepared to offer a defense of our faith (I Peter), but I *think the operative word is "faith". Yes, we are to study to show ourselves approved (2 Timothy) but is that meant for the young preacher to rightly proclaim the Gospel and to disciple the body of believers, or is it to convince the unconvinced? I was taught that is the function of the Holy Spirit. We do what we can, but ultimately Christ will build His Church.
That said... I so appreciate your teaching. You provide such context and insight, indeed "a workman that needeth not be ashamed". Thank you.
We have 4 accounts that actually report the empty tomb and one account from the second century that relies on probably on the synoptics. The fact that these accounts have discrepancies shows INDEPENDENCE. Because we have different accounts it is safe to conclude that the empty tomb was probably a Historical event. Also compare that with Paul (1 Corinthians 15) it actually fits the evidence.
- Mark 16:1-8 - Matthew 28:1-10 - Luke 24:1-8 - John 20:1-13 - Gospel of Peter, 9-10
I have surveyed hundreds of Biblical commentaries and the vast majority of Scholars agree with the empty tomb.
Some archaeological insights :
The Gospel of John portrays Mary as stooping to view the tomb. According to modern archaeology, tombs of the era were accessed via doors at ground level which were generally less than a meter tall, fitting the description given to Mary's viewing. These tombs either had a lone chamber for a single individual, or a passage lined with entrances to a number of tombs. Mary is able to see into Jesus' tomb from the outside suggesting the former type. This is considered a traditional view
The fact that women were the ones who witnessed the empty tomb makes it unlikely to be an invention.
Love you man - In my experience, no Atheist ever handles the evidence - especially about young earth creationism, the weakness of evolution. If you think about it, they have no choice because the evidence is overpowering, not just overwhelming. BTW - It would be awesome if you provided some of the info literature/evidence that you think has been most compelling and helpful to you concerning the evidence for the Resurrection.
Does Winger mean that women weren't considered reliable witnesses in _Jewish_ courts or in _Roman courts?_ To which of those would have they most likely gone to testify for claiming to have seen the risen Jesus?
And another quick question, if I may: I find it interesting that only the people that already believed in Jesus claimed to have seen him in risen form. If Jesus sought to convince his naysayers of his Sonship, should he not have appeared to the Pharisees? As far as I know there is no record of any of _their_ testimonies.
@Coobest 64 You can't absolutely prove or disprove anything, all you can do is provide sufficient evidence for or against a proposition. You're right that it doesn't disprove that Jesus was the Messiah, but it gives the claim almost no credibility. It sort of sounds like something is being swept under the rug; where are the conversion testimonies of Jesus' critics?
Strawman fallacies are too prevalent in this day and age....
The evidence is inaudible when it comes to the cartoonish claim of a.literal godman resurrection?
Why should anyone be expected to present some effectively meaningless speculation based on a set of hypothetical premises they've already rejected, and how could declining to provide that hypothetical speculation lend any merit to the resurrection claim?
Never mind the scholarly debate. I watch just so maybe I can learn how to be a little more gracious and kind. Two people who just want to chip away at my confidence
Mike Winger, "I purposefully didn't say consensus." Correct. You said scholars "generally agree." Now, anyone reading this can simply Google the definition of consensus.
Imagine that I were on trial for murdering your best friend and that the forensic evidence of my guilt seemed pretty solid. How acceptable would it be if I defended myself in court in the following way? A. I denied that your friend was even dead and that the whole thing was an elaborate prank. B. I presented several witnesses who claimed to have spoken to your friend since the time of the murder. C. I demonstrate that, in spite of all the forensics and autopsy results, your friend's grave is now empty. Would it be a slam dunk acquittal?
Adnarim00 Well what is this strong forensic evidence about you being guilty?
Irildi Grazhdani Let's say that my fingerprints are on a rare type of knife, which was found in my car, and which is found by autopsy results to be likely the murder weapon. Let's also say that about thirty witnesses claim to have seen me commit the act.
Well, as long as you're included in the critique and have opportunity to respond, then go for it!
Why do we accept expert consensus? Because experts spend their entire lives digging into information that may not even be accessible to the layman. Consensus is not infallible and should be challenged, but when you challenge it you should at least be at the level of expertise of other experts in the field or have evidence that is so incontrovertible that it is able to sway the experts and eventually change consensus. Why is consensus on this subject tainted in the minds of sceptics? Because Christian colleges require staff to sign statements of faith. When the conclusion is predetermined and dissent can have serious consequences (e.g. Mike Licona's firing), how can we trust such experts? This was Doug and Cam's criticism of Habernas - he has not made his research public and he likely counts people who are not historians (such as theologians) as experts in the field.
If the bible had pictures it would be nothing more than one of the first comic books.
I guess there’s no reason to love people, help the poor and weak etc etc
Refuting the Bible is literally setting yourself up for failure
Many atheist denials of the resurrections are rooted in the larger issue of "materialism" which assumes there cannot possibly be any reality outside of the natural realm which we access by our 5 senses. But "supernatural" is just that; i.e. it supersedes the natural realm and we hear and now we even see first hand evidence of supernatural incidents which cannot be explained by natural means, such as undoctored video footage of paranormal activity. When I was 17 I experienced the supernatural when God touched me physically which was part of the reason why I became a follower of Jesus. I have experienced His supernatural power many times since and while such experiences may be subjective to me, they ARE REAL none the less and agree with scripture's characterization of such. God's supernatural power so changed my entire life for the better that THERE IS NO WAY any atheist will ever talk me out of the TRUTH; both of what I see in scripture and what I have experienced first hand - both confirming the other. I am a WITNESS to the risen Messiah and His power to change lives...
Atheists are more concerned with personal mockery in my experience. I used to try and have serious, objective discussions. Not know. Seems they just want to repeat Dawkinwsque, perjorative mantras on a personal level. I won't talk to them now. So good for you for persisting with them. It's more than I can do anymore. Yes, their reponses are preloaded. I find they reposnd to statements I have never made and assume beliefs I do not hold and make wide ranging generalisations.
I am TRULY sooo sick and tired of the extreme disrespect and misogyny found in practically every facet of life. It often makes life and even the Christian walk very sad, disappointing, distressing and all around enraging.
Ohh no sorry you feel that way. I am just curious, how so?
Misogyny? I'm curious too.
15:53 - Denial saying that it was only Paul, maybe get help from Bart Ehrman to defend yourself
Bart Ehrman in his Jesus Apocalyptic Prophet book: "What I think we can say with some confidence is that Jesus did die ... some of his disciples ... claimed to have seen him alive afterward. Among those who made this claim, interestingly enough, was Jesus's own brother James, who came to believe in Jesus and soon thereafter became one of the principle leaders of the early Christian church."
For denial of violence endured by the apostles, Ehrman says he believes that Peter was indeed martyred in one of his articles on Ehrmanblog, and in his informal comments (responding to informal questions) he says it is his "hunch" that Paul was martyred, and that he "assumes" both James of Zebedee and James the brother of Jesus were killed in connection to their faith.
So Bart Ehrman formally contends to James was converted and he informally contends to James being killed in connection to his faith. Make sure you hold atheists accountable to the Ehrman standard.
---
The martyrs are used to demonstrate apostolic sincerity, i.e. "they wouldn't have died for a lie, therefore they were telling the truth". While we don't have a clean record for the martyrs, apostolic sincerity is generally a scholarly consensus, and most historians agree that at least some of the disciples were fully convinced regardless of the the martyrs.
You can do this with the (skeptic historian) Paula Fredriksen card: "I know in their own terms what they saw was the raised Jesus. That's what they say and then all the historic evidence we have afterwards attest to their conviction that that's what they saw. I'm not saying that they really did see the raised Jesus. I wasn't there. I don't know what they saw. But I do know that as a historian that they must have seen something."
The Gerd Ludemann card: "It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus's death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ".
Notice Ludemann doesn't say "three of the disciples", he says "the disciples".
Even if they contend that Paul had guilty hallucinations, (which is probably not true has he *actively* persecuted Christians), you can still use the Ehrman standard to assert James the brother of Jesus's conversion and probable death for the faith.
Didn't your review video of your debate with Matt Dillahunty last for over 2 hrs?
Matt's on the other hand was just over 17 minutes.
Mike, I don’t have the time inclination or will to sit through their video. You relied on habermass as your authority on the resurrection I’m just wondering what authority did they use to dismiss habermass?
Atheist being dishonest or “misrepresenting” your comments. I am shocked! 🤦🏼♂️
I am a former JW…I am a believing Christian….please help me prove the resurrection to my former JW now Atheist Agnostic son🙃
Hey Mike I've been listening to you for a good bit and I really enjoy. I can tell ADONAI has really sent you as a teacher. My question could we talk privately out of the public eye about some (thoughts and beliefs I have?) A theological debate/discussion if I may?
It would be interesting to find out what they'll say about the act of pilate? I know it's not a theological source... it's not meant to be. And i know at some point someone changed its content... that in itself is a question as to why would someone go so far to change it if it was not correct. This literature is written by an athiest during Jesus'time. Wonder what Mike's thoughts are on it though. I kinda enjoyed the writing.
Could you talk about the Ascension and proof for it? I am trying to study this and most scholars I have seen just skip over it.
Any chance for a debate or dialog between you guys? That would be interesting to see.
🤔 it seems God is using atheists to introduce folks to the Christian position. It’s got to be making some people think.
Hey, I go to your video, the first think I'm hit with is an ad for the Book of Mormon. Now THAT'S Providence!