The Bible can prove itself | Dean - North Carolina | Talk Heathen 03.38
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 09. 2019
- After the show is a new episode of Atheist Vanguard: • Obey Jesus | Atheist V...
Talk Heathen 03.38 for September 22, 2019 Eric Murphy & David Warnock.
Call the show on Sundays 1:00-2:30pm CDT: 1-512-686-0279
Don't like commercials? Become a patron & get ad-free episodes & more: / talkheathentome
The podcast may be found at:
www.spreaker.com/show/talkhea...
► Chat room rules:
atheist-experience.org/chat-ru...
-------
WHAT IS TALK HEATHEN?
Talk Heathen is a weekly call-in television show in Austin, Texas geared toward long-form and on-going dialogue with theists & atheists about religion, theism, & secularism. Talk Heathen is produced by the Atheist Community of Austin.
Talk Heathen is filmed in front of a live studio audience every week at the Freethought Library of the Atheist Community of Austin.
The Atheist Community of Austin is organized as a nonprofit educational corporation to develop & support the atheist community, to provide opportunities for socializing & friendship, to promote secular viewpoints, to encourage positive atheist culture, to defend the first amendment principle of government-religion separation, to oppose discrimination against atheists & to work with other organizations in pursuit of common goals.
We define atheism as the lack of belief in gods. This definition also encompasses what most people call agnosticism.
CONTACTS & SOCIAL MEDIA
Instagram:
Eric Murphy: Erictheheathen
Jamie Boone: Jamietheheathen
Twitter:
Eric Murphy: @dirtyheathen
Jamie Boone: @reason_evidence
Facebook.com/talkheathen
Reddit.com/r/talkheathen
NOTES
TalkHeathen is the official channel of Talk Heathen. "Talk Heathen" is a trademark of the ACA.
The views and opinions expressed by hosts, guests, or callers are their own and not necessarily representative of the Atheist Community of Austin.
Copyright © 2017 Atheist Community of Austin. All rights reserved.
"I've disagreed with a lot of people who were wrong"
Dave 2019
🤣🤣🤣
fatal gravity yea Dave!
Classic "DAVISM" great!
Can I use that?
I want that on a t-shirt.
I actually rigged the election in the "Republic of Dave" in FO3. I think it is the same Dave.
Aron Ra singing Taylor Swift would be hilarious!
Religion? Shake it off.
I would like to see AronRa perform vocals for a metal band.
If his hypothetical book about Caesar, written 85 years after his death, was the only thing we had to go on, then we would be justified in rejecting the claims about Ceasar as well.
Possibly. Caesar didn't do Supernatural things. He was just a human doing human stuff. So it's less likely we would reject any claims made about Caesar then Jesus who was said to do Supernatural things.
hegyak a thing about decades to centuries later accounts of Roman emperors, was that they were often written, by the opposition painting a worse picture. Thanks to my useless degree in history lol
Edit: yeah nothing supernatural just making them out to be more deviant and scandalous
Alexander is a bit more obvious, with the dozens of "Alexandrias" out there, the Persian Empire crumbling and a bloody large hellenic empire that then breaks up into three "diadoch" empires coming into existence, but Caesar has redrawn a couple of lines on maps in his time too and is a lynchpin for the transformation of the Republic into an Empire... doubting details about his life is ONE thing, doubting the whole existence is another thing. Specifically because he is mentioned a lot in secular sources, not just coming into being as another story in a religious text full of allegorical texts. When we start getting people mentioning jesus a lot and art etc appears, the church already has told and retold his story for a long time... so people believing he existed is a given. It still does not compare to Caesar whose statues, monument inscriptions and other mentions start appearing basically during his lifetime and that of his successor Octavian.
@@Ugly_German_TruthsWell said! Btw, interesting moniker--what's behind it?
Especially if the book contained stories of talking donkeys, cessation of the Earth's rotation for 24 hours and zombies.
"The napkin religion is the one true religion!"
"How do you know?"
"Because it says it right here on the napkin."
Bless you.
A napkin? That’s a nappy where I’m from (you call them diapers - an idiotic word) - I think a serviette is the word. P.S. Sorry for the nitpick, I couldn’t help myself.
Petition for y’all to release the quality footage of the guests singing Taylor Swift songs 😔✊
“The Bible proves itself” A whole lot of NOPE in four words.
The Bible had the opposite effect on me lol
@@richardgay7990 that's not nice for a pastor to make fun of people...he is a part of god's flock
@@richardgay7990
Why do you insist on people posting identifying information about themselves on the internet?
What exactly are you trying to accomplish, eh? Not content with having little boys play "Suck the cream out of the pickle", you want to steal identities too?
@@richardgay7990 gasp you don't believe in the law of attraction or the power of man's reason and intellect or worshiping gods? the universe is beautiful and chaotic and you suck
@@richardgay7990 you are stupid and dull
"I disagree with a lot if oeiple who are wrong." Holy ha ha.
It took me a second to....steal that line. Bravo.
Arguably one of the best calls of the ACA shows ever. Great stuff.
The Caesar argument shows profound ignorance of the way historians work. They question everything and never simply rely on claims. For example, did Caesar really cross the Rubicon? Quite aside from the lack of extraordinariness of the claim (it is a relatively ordinary event compared to supernatural events), we look at multiple independent accounts, and then look for artefacts etc to verify the claim. Sometimes, we find the smoking gun in terms of concrete evidence, and more often we don’t, and in that case we draw conclusions based on probability, but that conclusion is only ever provisional and will be abandoned or adjusted as new evidence comes to light. This uncertainty seems to be alien to theists, who tend to feel most comfortable with absolutes that are unchallengeable.
In the case of crossing the Rubicon, we don’t have direct evidence of it occurring, but we have multiple independent sources writing about it within a short time, plus the copious evidence of the Civil War that was precipitated by the audacious event. Thus we assume that it probably happened as described and we do know that he was north of the river and had to cross it in order to go to Rome. However, one day we may find evidence from encampments etc that the crossing happened, but not with the entire army as described, and that the army came later or some other detail that contradicts the historic accounts. In that case historians would write new accounts based on the new evidence and simply move on.
In the case of the bible, there are no accounts from outside the bible. It is a book that was curated over centuries by people following an agreed narrative that was full of biases. The earliest copies are quite late, and the earlier fragments are still long after their composition, however they do suggest major revisions to the text, such as the ending of Mark to have been added long after the original composition. Then there is the matter of belief vs text. For example the authors of all the gospels are totally anonymous yet there is a belief that the Mark document was written by someone called Mark just because of a tradition that originated in the 4th century. Then there is the matter of known forgeries that are included as canon but have been demonstrated to be forgeries such as about half the letters attributed to Paul. Finally there is the matter of magic and the supernatural. Until there is any evidence provided that either exist, then any story that includes magic and the supernatural needs hard evidence to be accepted. Probabilities do not exist for things that are not demonstrated to be real.
Caesar himself wrote accounts of his exploits during his own lifetime, historians wrote independent accounts within a short time. There are coins and physical evidence of battles. Plus the events are all well within the bounds of what we experience in the natural world. The bible is not written at the time of the events, has no independent verification, has no physical artefacts relating to the events, and is full of inaccuracies and involves magic and the supernatural. How is it that someone can bring up the Caesar argument with a straight face, and think they are in any way comparable?
Nice job
chomsky2001 Thank you. :)
Wish I could favorite comments, this is great. I'll settle for an upthumb.
Well written sir. Well said.
@@artistjoh excellent summation. Thank you!
Probably the first caller who can argue coherently and who appears to have a modicum of education & intelligence. I still disagree with the apologists, but hats off to him...
Thank you, both.
Can we PLEASEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE get a Taylor Swift Talk Heathen supercut?
Did anyone else see the movie The Prestige with Jackman and Bale. I kinda get the same vibe from the resurrection. Lol.
It always amazes me that apologists claim there's "historical evidence" of the Resurrection. How even COULD there be??
Love that movie!!!
Hey Eric, have you though of an image of you holding the Book of Eric... As the cover for the Book of Eric? That would make for some circular imagery right there
Tempestive that’s brilliant! 😆✌️
I love Talk Heathen
In the progressive world this is the year 2019, what year is it in the Deep South?
Josephus.
Tacitus.
Neither of them were historians who lived at the time of Jesus' so-called life and resurrection. They got their sources from word of mouth decades later. Just how reliable can that be?
Look at the single tiny paragraph in Josephus' work that some Christians like to pull up as an extra-biblical source. The language alone is different from that of the paragraphs on either side. Plus, it is obviously inserted in there because of the grammar that the following paragraph contains. Someone was not paying attention at all to that. It's widely recognized as a Christian forgery.
And the tacitus references were simply saying that these people that call themselves "christians" believe this is what happened. He never confirmed that Jesus existed at all.
@Arrian was not alive during the so called life of Alexander the Great. His sources were stories passed down 400 years after Alexander’s supposed death. How reliable can they be?
@@ohiobuckeye5828 well, like they said in the video, it's less impactful on the daily life whether Alexander the great lived or not. He isn't making a proclamation about how I should live my life or who I can and cannot marry, for instance.
@Mazingdaddid
Translation:
God condemns your sinful lifestyle in His written word.
The only parameter for marriage is male and female...
@@ohiobuckeye5828 oh no, what I'm saying is that the implications of Jesus's existence are much further reaching than that of Alexander the Great, therefore there is greater need to verify the historicity of the person. Whether Alexander was real or not is moot as it has no effect on anyone's lives today.
The core disagreement boils down to motivation / intent / need:
- Find truth, vs reaffirm preferred outcome by any means
The most important message in the history of mankind would be conserve our resources and look for alternate sources of energy.. I could give a flip about someone's supernatural assertions
And if their supernatural assertions meant that innocent people die you'd be ok with that? What about Jehovah's that let their kids die rather than get blood transfusions? You're ok with that?
Amanda Huginkiss I'm ok with not living my life controlled by someone's obsession. I want to make the most of my time and worrying about what religious people care about doesn't do anything for me. Sorry if they're hurting people I'm still not giving up my freedom to justify their beliefs
Amanda Huginkiss even if I’m not okay with Jehovah Witness doctrine its their religious belief and by our constitution are allowed to practice their beliefs
a1612 back when the Bible was written they didn't have them concerns, a simple message that seems to have eluded them goat herders is a simple one, wash your fucking hands, it actually took until the civil war, for men to realize how germs are spread! And millions if not billions of people died because of that simple fact! Of course seems the Bible has never had a problem with killing people!
With several billion christians and other one-god religions in the world,that energy is not going to be all directed into problem solving....too much koolaid belifs.
Hey Christians! Listen up O.K.....The Gospels ARE NOT EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS and they don't claim to be. It is a well known fact that the Church gave the names to the Gospels.
And they were more than 4 Gospels.
Some Gospels cast aside by the Council Of Neica:
Gospel of Peter
Gospel of Judas Iscariot
Gospel of Thomas
Gospel of Mary
And I guarantee you these other Gosples read NOTHING like the four Gospels in the New Testament.
This was a GREAT call. 😂😂😂
Oh Dean. I look forward to our second debate.
Yeah I'm gonna need that lip synch battle as a DVD extra.
Well have you read the book of Zorg?
If you do it explains all about how Zorg exists.
ALL HAIL ZORG!!!
Why vote for the lesser evil?
Praise Zorg, burner of children!
I have all the evidence of Zorg's existence I'll ever need right here. _(grins as he poses with the ZF-1 that was produced by one of Zorg's many corporate holdings)_
I look at the question like this... today we need three sources to collaborate a story in good, ethical journalism (it never happens which is why media suck but that's something completely different). What we have here is somebody claiming they heard from someone that something happened hundreds of years ago.
haha, loved that outtro
I mostly agree with this opening. But the idea that everyone should get a pass just by not wanting to talk about it is wrong. It sounds sweet, and in many, many cases is sensible. I literally have an acquaintance who donates quite a bit to evangelical preachers who promote the stoning of gay people! Luckily what he supports by word and deed is never likely to happen, but if it did, millions of people would die horribly. This is not always just about do you believe in god or not, but what are your beliefs leading you to do. And "I don't want to talk about it" is often not a god excuse. You also can't have meaningful dialogue with people who won't talk.
I have been on the flip side - when I first became an atheist almost 40 years ago, my mother and godfather regularly tried to engage me in discussions, hoping to "bring me back". I avoided them because I knew that if I told the truth, they would be hurt and possibly angered, and even though I was on my own by then, I did not want to alienate them. In the end, I caved, and started having these talks, and my mother is now an atheist. She was 79 before she "saw the light", but she realized why she could not let go of her faith. Before I was born, my brother Billy was born - he only lived about 36 hours and she never got to hold him, and only got to see him for a few moments. he could not let go of the idea that someday, she would meet him in heaven and be able to tell him that she loved him - simple as that.
Wishful thinking motivates a lot of christians to stay faithful. It is sad though. I am sorry about your brother but I find it amazing that good, god fearing christians don't ask why their god would let someone go through 9 months of pregnancy only to have the child die so soon. And then start to wonder if he existed at all and dump their faith.
@@joecoolioness6399
Agreed. But, a mother's love is a powerful thing. My oldest brother is 62, and he and his wife built a little suite in their retirement house for her to live with them. Like all her kids, he is much better off financially than she ever was, and of course younger and stronger - but she still mothers him and all of us. She tells me if she is still alive when I turn 70, I'll still be her baby. Considering that she is 85 and in pretty darned good health, she might just make it to 97.
When you love something that much, sometimes your mind just can't accept that it is gone forever. - especially when it dies never knowing you. The very sensible reaction you mention would require her to accept that.
as far as apologists go, he was quite warm and easy to listen to. that was a good chat.
this guy was so nice courteous at the beginning.
I literally only saw that prophecy video this morning 😅
The circle is the most powerful shape...
Good talk!
I'm impressed by your patience, and I can only aspire to such levels of calmness.
I wouldn't be able to keep from making the example of Harry Potter, whose books claim that London exists, which is independently verifiable, and makes claims of supernatural war for the safety of all human life...
“Spider-Man comic proves Spider-Man.” -The argument.
Where to buy the t-shirt dying out load?
You get a lot of calls from NC
witch kind of mike do you use, sound great. and good job guy
Even if we disagree in with some very serious issues.
Translation - even though I'm still delusional and irrational about certain subjects.
This is cool though Dean is good with the argument and trying to get it out there. We offten find that people think it's about hate but it's about discussion.
I'm seeing Dean shifting sides soon.
The difference with Caesar is we have contemporary evidence, hell, we've got his own books. What do we have for Jesus other than a story that wasn't fixated until at least 3 decades after his supposed death, which contains details that should have been noticed and recorded by others (such as daystars, massacres, night during the day, etc... but they're not found anywhere else...
Using the Bible to prove itself, if Circular Logic/Reasoning. Something, can not prove itself. That makes no sense.
Counter example:
Spider-man comics, proves Spider-Man true.
@Hegyak
And nature cannot create itself. Neither can time, space, and matter.
It requires an intelligent infinite designer for all three to come into existence.....
@@ohiobuckeye5828 Who or what created the creator? No Special Pleading Fallacy. Or other fallacies from this list:
Current list of fallacies I have seen/encountered here and made by Abrahamic Theists:
Special Pleading, Gish Gallop, Straw man, Redefinition, Ad Hominem (A LOT around here, TBH), Black and White (Bifurcation), Argumentum ad baculum (Appeal to force or fear), Anecdotal evidence, ad hoc post rationalization, God of the Gaps, Argumentum ad antiquitatem (Arugment from Antiquity), Argumentum ad nauseam (Argument repeated over and over), Argumentum ad numerum (If lots of people believe it, it is more true), Argumentum ad populum (It's good for the People), Argumentum ad verecundiam (Appeal to authority), Circulus in demonstrando (Circular Argument/Reasoning), Equivocation (Rarely used), Irrelevant conclusion, Appeal to Nature, No True Scotsman, Non causa pro causa (X caused this or did this but wasn't proven to actually do it), Petitio principii (Begging the question), Post hoc ergo propter hoc (X caused this because it happened before Y event), Red herring (Possibly used?), Shifting the burden of proof (More then I am tolerant of, TBH), Appeal to Faith.
I await fallacies but can be surprised when I don't get them. Though, that's unlikely.
@UCzctxX2ZI5dM5WvGLkV68aw Infinite Regression. Nice callout.
@Hegyak
God has no point of origin. I think we have already been through this?
@Hegyak
I did find it amusing that you made an attempt to dictate my response....
Epic fail, but amusing nonetheless.
I get where he's going, he considers the Bible self-authenticating because he thinks it has historical accuracy and prophetic power, but both of those things are easily found to be lacking with the stupendous data we have now.
Hey Eric, did You spray the sofa down with a can of *Christian Away* after Dean left? lol ;)
Dean is way too smart for his belief
So, how do you become an apologist va a religious person with a religious opinion?
why why why can they not see how illogical they are?
Proof of God...the existance of Israel! They have fullfilled many prophesies over the centuries, and are fullfilling more and more every day..can u not see this miracle of facts?......think! Investigate my friend..
@Jim Merrilees first of all ther are no coincidence's. I dont know which bible u mean, there are no vague predictions(they were actual prophicies writen hundreds of years before they came to pass) You sound like this evidence of God.( Israel) has really pissed you off. If you would actually study into it...archaeology has been prooving the Bible to be true and factual! You just sound li
ke you ar
e pissed at God...IF He is real. Your supposed ideas are sloppy sir....
@Jim Merrilees well Jim-bo, if you cant look and read the facts...then stay off the writing false angry at God bull-crap
@Jim Merrilees I singing Jim I basicly told you to study...I have to tell you where to find the truth...really? Archaeology is one way...u cant find the truth by asking everybody else..your lazy-thats your problem..dont lazy yourself right into hell for eternity. Smartin up and find out for your self HELLO!
@Jim Merrilees who's we you need to go and get the book archaeological findings proving the Bible is fact start there Tri some dude you don't want to do that that's your problem I'm just trying to help atheist if I can it seem like you all have the same answers for everything it's like you're reading a script all of you why don't you ask Jesus if he's real tell him to come on down and show you if you got the guts to do it and really mean it from your heart and see what happens Jimbo
The hosts miss the most obvious aspect and clear response to the historical argument.
Namely that historians don't accept the claim that Julius Ceasar was actually the god Jupiter.
"But it's got what plants crave, it's got electrolytes. But what are electrolytes? They're what plants crave, Brawndo gots what plants crave... it's got electrolytes....
... eventually I just told them that I can talk to plants and they said they want water."
As for the 2nd host objections about the COMposit sign, he says the 2nd coming once again he is being influenced by him the improper understanding of the Scriptures by bad teachers basically those inside of Christendom. They teach a 2nd coming but actually the word coming has a secondary meaning if I recall correctly from the Greek parousia (para' (alongside and ousi'a word ei-mi', meaning "be") instead of it being translated as coming it for probably should have been translated it as so, parousia means literally, "being alongside," that is a "presence." Is used 24 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures, frequently with regards to the presence of Christ in connection with his messianic kingdom Matthew 24:3 translators very the rendering of this word from translation to translation. Translating it as a presence in some texts, they move more frequently rendered as coming. This has been the basis for expression 2nd coming or "2nd advent" (Adventus ["advanced" or "coming"] being the Latin Vulgate translation at Matthew 24:3 with regards to Christ Jesus while Jesus presence of necessity implies his arrival at the place where he is present the translation of paraousia by "coming" places all the emphasis on arrival and it scares the subsequent presence that follows the arrival. Though I lying for both "arrival" and "presence" as translations parousia, lexicographers generally acknowledge that the presence of the person is the principal idea conveyed by the word. Vine's expository dictionary of old and New Testament words (1981, volume 1 PP. 208, 209 states "Parousia.... Denotes both and arrival and a consequent presence with. For instance, in a papyrus letter [written in Greek] a lady speaks of the necessity of her parousia in a place in order to attend to matters relating to her property there.… When used of the return of Christ, at the rapture of the church, it signifies, not merely his momentary coming for his Saints, but his presence with them from the moment until his revelation and manifestation to the world." Little and Scott's Greek English lexicon (revised by H. Jones, Oxford, 1968, P. 1343)) shows that parouSia is used at times in secular Greek literature to refer to the "visit of a royal or official personage
Harry Potter proves Harry Potter.
He died and resurrected!
And it was foretold in prophecy!
god created me atheist, so what's the problem. what bothers me is "you will love me, i love you, if you don't love me i will send you to hell, oh, and by the way as i'm omniscient i know whether you go to hell or not already".
Well said!
I love how being Omniscient means you know everything that has and will happen. So, where is the free will? I think the Matrix answered that question. "You already made the choice. Now, you have to understand what it means."
@TalkHeathen I have a song suggestion for you, Weak Fantasy by Nightwish or The Greatest Show on Earth by Nightwish or Endless Forms Most Beautiful by Nightwish.
16:18
Can't clearly hear the guy's name, but he's a member of something called the Jesus Seminar. On one hand, Dean says the guy claims the whole bible is metaphor, and at the same time also says crucifixion of Jesus is historical fact?!!?? Those are in direct contradiction!
Also, if the bible is metaphor, then there was no original sin and no real need for Jesus.
As for historical as can be, where are the written records?
Moreover, even if a wandering Jewish rabbi named Jesus was crucified, that doesn't make him divine.
He wasn't a rabbi, he was a carpenter that several people simply called rabbi because he enjoyed talking and getting people to think about Jewish law and culture/customs
@@lucifers.morningstar3805 He didn't exist.
@@216trixie the son of an all powerful super wizard did not ever exist true, but there may have been an ordinary normal human carpenter who was also a con-man.
@@lucifers.morningstar3805 "May have been." There may have been lots of things, but unfortunately there's no evidence. Just some stories.
@@216trixie no there was no Jesus Christ that is true, except in a collection of stories wrote by people who had much to gain from lying or embellishing things.
Yeah so at that time Joshua aka "Jesus" was a very common name and Josephus refers to the "Christ" noone mentioned specifically. There are zero contemporary non- biblical sources of any of these events. That's good for me as to all validity!
I would love to see the Taylor Swift lip sync musical mashup video! :D
Two registrations are mentioned in the Christian Greek Scriptures as taking place after Judea came under subjection to Rome. Such were not merely to ascertain population figures but, rather, were mainly for purposes of taxation and conscription of men for military service. Concerning the first of these we read: “Now in those days [c. 2 B.C.E.] a decree went forth from Caesar Augustus for all the inhabited earth to be registered; (this first registration took place when Quirinius was governor of Syria;) and all people went traveling to be registered, each one to his own city.” (Lu 2:1-3) This edict of the emperor proved providential, for it compelled Joseph and Mary to journey from the city of Nazareth to Bethlehem in spite of the fact that Mary was then heavy with child; thus Jesus was born in the city of David in fulfillment of prophecy.-Lu 2:4-7; Mic 5:2.
Two registrations under Quirinius. Bible critics have said that the only census taken while Publius Sulpicius Quirinius was governor of Syria was about 6 C.E., which event sparked a rebellion by Judas the Galilean and the Zealots. (Ac 5:37) This was really the second registration under Quirinius, for inscriptions discovered at and near Antioch revealed that some years earlier Quirinius had served as the emperor’s legate in Syria. (The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament, by W. Ramsay, 1979, pp. 285, 291) Concerning this, the Dictionnaire du Nouveau Testament in Crampon’s French Bible (1939 ed., p. 360) says: “The scholarly researches of Zumpt (Commentat. epigraph., II, 86-104; De Syria romana provincia, 97-98) and of Mommsen (Res gestae divi Augusti) place beyond doubt that Quirinius was twice governor of Syria.” Many scholars locate the time of Quirinius’ first governorship as somewhere between the years 4 and 1 B.C.E., probably from 3 to 2 B.C.E. Their method of arriving at these dates, however, is not solid, and the actual period of this governorship remains indefinite. (See QUIRINIUS.) His second governorship, however, included 6 C.E., according to details reported by Josephus.-Jewish Antiquities, XVIII, 26 (ii, 1).
So historian and Bible writer Luke was correct when he said concerning the registration at the time of Jesus’ birth: “This first registration took place when Quirinius was governor of Syria,” distinguishing it from the second, which occurred later under the same Quirinius and to which Gamaliel makes reference as reported by Luke at Acts 5:37.
Looks like many of the commenters missed the most important part: friendliness of Eric & others.
I was long a christian, as to me it seemed like most of the atheists were demeaning and arrogant if not plain malevolent. Later I learned to realize my blind spot in reasoning, and that was not due to my atheist friends but _in spite of_ them.
Had I friends like Eric and many other Talk Heathern / AXP guys, I would have converted much sooner.
"Taylor Swift, don't judge"
*J U D G E S*
I'm an atheist, but I don't think I agree with the argument that is made that there aren't independent accounts outside the bible. My reasoning is that the Bible didn't always exist, but the writings existed before the Bible did. Before the Bible was put together, these WERE independent accounts, so the Bible is just a conglomeration of those accounts combined together into one book. The accuracy and legitimacy of those accounts is a different story.
That call should have been over and done with in five minutes.
I've disagreed with a lot of people that are wrong... LOL
Dean is such a nice guy. I suspect he may be the next Anthony Magnabosco's spawn. ;-)
You guys need to check out Samantha Fish
You will not be disappointed
Samantha Fox is much hotter. "Touch me"
otrondal - I’m saying how she plays guitar
Jimbus Rift - but she is still smokin’ hot
I checked her out.
I was disappointed in both her looks and her music.
Diviance - wow! That’s so funny, she said the same thing about you!
You know who's fun? Pat Robertson, he's fun. He sits there on his 700Club and he makes proclamations that are totally out of touch with reality. Hilarious! It's like watching Will Ferrell do one of his off-the-wall characters--it may not make any sense but Will just keeps selling it. Pat's just like that. He goes on, and on, like he's relevant in any way.
Something that causes you to believe a particular thing really doesn't qualify as proof of that thing. People's minds are very easily swayed by the smallest things. Thinking of somebody, and then immediately getting a call from them is hard to dismiss, but there is no real evidence that it's anything but a coincidence. I wish it were otherwise. Magic is cool.
Also, this issue isn't mentioned enough in these discussions, FORGERIES! Ancient text are rife with them (re: Richard Carrier). Josephus is accused of that if I remember it right.
*FORGERIES! Ancient text are rife with them. Josephus is accused of that if I remember it right."
Bullshit! . Josephus is not accused of anything. People are accused of editing Josephus' works.
why do we always have to go down the rabbit hole or on some long path ,shouldn't it all be crystal clear. Isn't it clear all this gobbley -gook is all man made
I'm so frustrated as to WHY didn't they tell Dean the reason that we accept the evidence for Caesar's existence, and not Jesus'. That there are other sources - many of them! - rather than just one detailing Caesar's life; that we have actual PHYSICAL evidence for Caesar's life... None of which we have for Jesus. Why didn't they tell him that? Because he kept coming back to "I guess I just don't understand why we can accept that and not this"; why didn't they tell him why?!
WHY?! I kept waiting for them to, but they didn't. I don't understand why. It was the most obvious thing they could possibly have told him, and yet they didn't.
It made me want to bang my head against the keyboard.
W.H.Y.
I think you guys missed the opportunity to point out that when you read a book like _The Gallic Wars_ written by Julius Caesar about his exploits fighting "barbarians" in Gaul there are a few things to consider.... #1 There is secondary corroboration that Caesar _actually_ commanded Roman troops in Gaul #2 there is actual archaeological evidence of a Roman Campaign in Gaul #3 Other people, in that period _also_ wrote about Caesar's Gallic War. So I can compare Caesar's claims with other 2nd party accounts.
So when reading a book written by Caesar about Caesar, I can be pretty confident the events actually happened. The argument that Christians use the Bible to prove the Bible is NO WHERE near the same. Josephus mentions Jesus in a *much* disputed section of text 60 years *after* Jesus was supposedly crucified. No exactly an "eye witness" independent account. There is absolutely no Roman or Jewish accounts concerning Jesus during his lifetime --- and I am pretty certain that the Roman Catholic Church would have such documents on display today if they existed. Paul of Tarsus was a Pharisee, if _anyone_ in history could have had insider access to records kept by the Sanhedrin concerning one Jesus of Nazareth that was tried and executed by the Romans, it would have been him. Why don't Christians ever ask why Paul didn't preserve this information? I mean, I have kept documents and tokens from events that have a deep personal meaning to my life - I think we all can agree Paul's conversion would have been a pretty significant life event.
I have a book by James MIchener called _Texas_ - it is a fictional book set during historic events in Texas history..... with actual characters from that history making appearances in the novel. But it is still a work of fiction.
Lazarus died then Jesus raised him from the dead.
It's obvious that Lazarus is not alive now, so he must have died again.
Imagine that, dying twice.
Painful.
You can use lord of the rings to prove it's self or stories about Santa claus
That is a 20min conversation that could had taken 20 seconds.
Dean's eyewitness analogy demonstrates why eyewitness accounts are untrustworthy. Police much prefer forensic evidence, such as CCTV, in Dean's example.
There are no eye witness accounts anyway. There are stories of eyewitnesses. Hearsay.
@@loki6626 Absolutely. Totally agree with you. But theists often use the eyewitness argument. So even if there were, they're unreliable.
With what you said as your first argument 'many of those accounts were written after the fact' it sounds like they should go back to reading the dead sea scrolls instead of studying the bible.
The core issue I find is how he's trying to focus on the historical accuracy of the Bible and ignoring implications that come into play, particularly those that would create a contradiction or immoral situation of a deity killing itself to solve a problem it initiated (original sin)
But there's a BIG difference between granting mundane and secular events that the Bible claims happened are the case (which isn't even universally so, like the census brought up in the call, supposedly not a thing), that doesn't mean we should conclude EVERY event described in the Bible necessarily happened, particularly those of a supernatural nature that don't even play much into things apart from the narrative about Jesus speaking on such matters (asking for a sign, miracles indicating some presence of God, etc)
And it's demonstrably special pleading to say that the Bible is sufficient to prove the probability of claims its makes when they cannot and have not been corroborated with secular sources (Jesus' miracles, supposed resurrection, etc). If the best argument you have is the equivalent to a detective filling in gaps from eyewitness accounts, then there's a MASSIVE gap with Jesus' life from when he was around 8 or so to his preaching at around 33 that pretty much no gospel seems to account for (even the apocryphal ones)
In a society that is behaving less civil...
Now that's a line from someone who doesn't understand how culture and society have worked in history
Let me start by saying I'm an Atheist however, the whole Bible can't prove the Bible troubles me a bit, because conceptually, as I understand it it wasn't originally put together as a single document, surely each part needs to be debunked on its own merits
Jeff Dee lip syncing?
who is Taylor Swift?
@FACE GALLON I was thinking it might be a bird discovered by James Taylor, or was it Zachary.
Superman comics prove themselves so superman is real.
should I know who Taylor Swift is?
Matthew and Luke copied Mark. Virtually every verse in Mark is in Matthew. And Matthew even "corrects" some details in Mark.
The story of the crucifixion story of jesus doesn't jive with everything we know to be true about the practice at the time.
The purpose was to set example. So first they were very careful to place spikes in such a way that they did as little damage as possible. They wanted the victim to languish and suffer for as long as they could.
Bringing up the second point; they would never come back and spear the victim, that would hasten death defeating point 1. Third; the victim was left on the pole until the rotted off and nobody would ever be allowed to take the body down for any reason nor were victims allowed to be buried. Finally they didn't use crosses they used poles. Wood was a rare and valuable commodity in that region at that time in history. The final point is that the Romans didn't really like the Jews so unlikely that they would collude with them. They probably would have found Jesus's heresy rather amusing.
The entire story of Jesus from start to finish makes no logical sense and is just a rehashing of numerous earlier "son" god stories.
Yeah, being taken down is weird, unless they thought he was dead, but if the point was to let them stay there exposed, it wouldn't matter if he was confirmed dead then. Unless someone bribed the Romans, in which case, just more conspiracies going on that wouldn't make sense, if indeed the Romans just tolerated the Sanhedrin and their superstitions
If it was a pole, where were the spikes placed beyond the ankles? I would think it would've been a rough cross, though not nearly as wide a depiction of the horizontal one. And they might not have even used the spikes, I've seen crucifixion depictions vary, sometimes just binding them (though that might be risky if they broke)
@@ToHoldNothing Doesn't matter if they were dead. Victims were never taken down under any circumstances. The corpses stayed up until the literally fell apart.
As for the 2nd point reference of the resurrection as being something that unreliable because of some of the things that are said in the Bible I would have to disagree with him on that. I do believe that his filling of the Bible is not being credible hinges on some miss understanding and misinterpretation by some of Christendom's clergy concerning what happened with passages. Christendom does not always get the interpretation of the passage correctly, and those who think. They do may be misled by them. That can lead to critics wanting to discount the Bibles account. I had this discussion with a workmate. Where it was said that souls are resurrected from the graves in graveyards because of an earthquake and that many were seen walking about in the graveyard. I said that I would have to disagree with him and that was most likely not true. But he fervently believed it. I proceeded to give my explanation as to why I did not believe the way he did. Yes indeed many souls may have come spilling out of many graves, but this must be noted, it does not say that those souls that came out of those graves where I a live. Nor does it record any accounts where any of these souls that came out of the graves were astonished and questioning how it was that they came to be outside in a graveyard. Seems like the most normal thing for these ones if they were truly resurrected would be to ask how they came to be there. Not only that, there most likely would have been some account that would've been more personal not to mention probably some giving of thanks in a pro found manner. My alternative explanation for this is that many of the dead souls were bodies that had been buried in the graveyards and in the tombs came spilling out as a result of the earthquake. But the people that appeared to be walking and running about in the cemetery were most likely people who were at that time either just passing through the cemetery are visiting somebody who had been buried there. Also last but not least what they saw may have been people who were burying somebody there, having a burial service which would tend to have a number of people most likely in attendance if it was possible for them to be there. To automatically assume that everyone who was currently in the cemetery that is mentioned in the account is somebody who was automatically resurrected from the grave is a mistake. They may be reading much more into that account than what is actually seen and miss interpreting what they see being said in the account as being a resurrection event. And as they spread this as being the case for that account they open up the Bible to criticism for something that is not actually being said in the Bible. That may be more as the result of wishful thinking of pastors and preachers and priest of various denominations.… So they could be unknowingly in error in their fervor to convince their parishioners of miracles happening at the death of Jesus .So here we have an instance where the Bible may be correct but men who are interpreting it I spreading misinformation,, knowingly or unknowingly. If a teacher gives out wrong information the pupils of such a teacher may also carry that wrong information and spread it to the extent that now today instead of the teachers being discredited, critics of the Bible target the Bible and attempt to discredit it instead. Because there are influenced by the bad teachers. Jws would look at that account this way..........in a dispassionate way.
It is possible to go up to Heaven when you are still alive.
We know this because Jesus was alive when he went up to Heaven (Acts chapter one).
All we need is a machine that can take us up to the clouds where Jesus lives on.
It must be lovely up there, all warm,white and fluffy.
Dean carries a vial of atheist - repelling holy water?
I can write a page full of 'predictions' for the next few months, anyone can, and at least something it likely to be right, give me centuries or more, and most if not all of the 'predictions' will come true. That's not mystical, that's just common sense.
Especially if your predictions are completely vague. Or contain things that already exist. War and famine have existed since the beginning of time so predicting that for example is meaningless.
My god is a 1969 green GTO, dual exhaust, 455cu orbiting Sirius. Can you put a small model of my god on your desk? I would die a happy man. :))
First Last My god is my i7-700k intel 9th gen core processor unlocked.
Dean, IF your argument about for the Bible being able to validate the Bible was valid, then that would also validate the Quran, and many other ancient texts, which creates a logical contradiction, as they cant all be right, but then can all be wrong...
Not to mention there would be no such thing as fiction, because a fictional story could very well be written internally consistent with themselves!
And, for how long has this James actually been Jesus?
There is NO extra-biblical evidence of Jesus, only of people claimed to have an association with Jesus.
Not even the Apostle Paul believed in a physical Jesus.
Caesar wrote 8 books about himself and his campaigns known as "the commentaries". They were published during his time. You might claim that Caesar embellished his accomplishments but it's idiotic to claim he never existed. But that's not the point. The point is that I'm not basing my moral guidance on Caesar.
i talk to GOD everyday!!! GOD REASSURES ME i will get out of this mental hospital along with everyone's imaginary friends.
Thank jack (white, my music god) l didn,t have a religious upbringing. I would read a book that jesus wrote. Anyone .?
actually the bible is a collection of books 66 to be exact.....thats what the bible is.the example dean gave i what happens with the gospels.....
Daughters can be bought and sold: If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do. Exodus 21:7
A raped daughter can be sold to her rapist: 28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. Deuteronomy 22:28-29
Collecting wives and sex slaves is a sign of status: He [Solomon] had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray. 1 Kings 11:3
Used brides deserve death: If, however the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. Deuteronomy 22:20-21.
Women, but only virgins, are to be taken as spoils of war: Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man. Numbers 31:17-18
Menstruating women are spiritually unclean: 19 “‘When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening. 20 “‘Anything she lies on during her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean. 21 Anyone who touches her bed will be unclean; they must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be unclean till evening. 22 Anyone who touches anything she sits on will be unclean; they must wash their clothes and bathe with water, . . . 30 The priest is to sacrifice one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering. In this way he will make atonement for her before the LORD for the uncleanness of her discharge. 31 “‘You must keep the Israelites separate from things that make them unclean, so they will not die in their uncleanness for defiling my dwelling place,[a] which is among them.’” Leviticus 15: 19-31
A woman is twice as unclean after giving birth to girl as to a boy: A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period. ‘ 3 On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. 4 Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over. 5 If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding. 6 ” ‘When the days of her purification for a son or daughter are over, she is to bring to the priest at the entrance to the tent of meeting a year-old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a dove for a sin offering. Leviticus 12: 1-8
A woman’s promise is binding only if her father or husband agrees: 2 When a man makes a vow to the LORD or takes an oath to obligate himself by a pledge, he must not break his word but must do everything he said. 3 “When a young woman still living in her father’s household makes a vow to the LORD or obligates herself by a pledge 4 and her father hears about her vow or pledge but says nothing to her, then all her vows and every pledge by which she obligated herself will stand. 5 But if her father forbids her when he hears about it, none of her vows or the pledges by which she obligated herself will stand; the LORD will release her because her father has forbidden her. . . . . A woman’s vow is meaningless unless approved by her husband or father. But if her husband nullifies them when he hears about them, then none of the vows or pledges that came from her lips will stand. Her husband has nullified them, and the LORD will release her. 13 Her husband may confirm or nullify any vow she makes or any sworn pledge to deny herself. Numbers 30:1-16
Women should be seen not heard: Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. 1 Corinthians 14:34
Wives should submit to their husband’s instructions and desires: Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. Colossians 3:18
In case you missed that submission thing . . . : Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. Ephesians 5:22-24.
More submission - and childbearing as a form of atonement: A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing-if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. 1 Timothy 2: 11-15
Women were created for men: For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head. 7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; 9 neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 1 Corinthians 11:2-10
Sleeping with women is dirty: No one could learn the song except the 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth. 4 These are those who did not defile themselves with women, for they remained virgins. They follow the Lamb wherever he goes. They were purchased from among mankind and offered as first-fruits to God and the Lamb. Revelation 14:3-4
Dean,
You say that you would not use "Fulfilled Prophecy" on Eric because you know it would not work on him. Now, I question whether or not you are being honest here. Are you just not going to use that argument because you know it will not be effective for that one individual, or do you actually recognize the errors inherent in that use? In other words, knowing the logic that Eric uses to defend against that argument should stop you from using such argument on others who do not know how to defend themselves against that argument, if you were being truly honest. At the very least, you have a moral obligation, knowing Eric's defense, to supply that defense to the person you are talking to, if you realize they do not have that defense at hand. Also, if you do not agree with Eric's defense, you have a moral obligation to continue with Eric until such point that you have confidence one way or the other BEFORE you put that argument forward, EVER. That is being honest to Eric, any opponent in front of your, and Yourself. Cheers, Dean.
Why would God have to communicate in a manner that you guys say that he should have done. If you have a Bible and he sends good teachers to teach you about it and you decide to not listen to those good teachers because he is not carrying out this education work in the way that you see fit does that mean that he is not made it possible for you to understand the Bible correctly? I would have to disagree with your premise that he must carry out his educating of mankind in communicating with mankind according to the dictates of any individuals who are only humans wishes. After all he could have preferences of how he chooses to do things just as any of mankind may have their preferences. Either way he gives you the opportunity to learn it's up to you to take advantage of it or not according to your own desires. This is something that the host do not take into account that the God of the Bible may have just as much personality as they do. And it should be taken into account is absolutely in this case giving you free will to choose to do as you see fit and please.
In the final analysis is not that God has not provided the means for you to clearly understand the Bible. If he gives you the opportunity to gain as much knowledge as possible at the time you are alive and you decide to take it in an act in accordance with it then you will no doubt not be found wanting. You can only learn as much as he reveals during the time of your life. The problem doesn't lie with his way of communicating what it does lie is with what kind of condition of the heart and mind do you have at the time that he is trying to reach you when the proper teacher comes along?
If someone is an atheist who tries to influence others toward atheism...if you die and find out the God of the Bible, Heaven/Hell/Satan are real how will you feel knowing you were complicit in helping to influence others toward the very one who deceived and destroyed you as well as influencing others away from the one who tried to save you. What an awful realization.
I would feel fine, Because I know that won't ever happen.
How would you feel if, when you die, you find out Allah is real and you spent all that time trying to convince people to be Christians. Why, you sent all of them to hell!
@@Diviance
Where did you get this knowledge, from someone or yourself?
I don't have to worry if Allah is real since I know the truth about God. "You will know the truth and the truth will set you free."
@@keithherring7677
"Where did you get this knowledge, from someone or yourself?"
*Your holy book.*
"I don't have to worry if Allah is real since I know the truth about God. "You will know the truth and the truth will set you free.""
*And I don't have to worry about your God being real because I also happen to know the truth about it... and that truth is "It isn't real".*
@@Diviance
Remember when we went through this before and you asked me if I could be wrong and when I said "no" you said there was no reason to continue? What changed your mind about continuing?
Tommy Harring Ah, because you believe Allah is fake, your God is the right one. Spoiler: Judaism, Christianity and Islam all have joint custody of your imaginary friend. That’s why they’re called the Abrahamic religions.
Very interesting criminal, very criminal religious Topic in the Bible! CORRUPTION!!!
I can fake my own crucifixion so Dave if I show you that will you believe I'm god?