Why David Wood's resurrection case just ain't it
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2024
- Go to ground.news/ra... to stay fully informed on breaking news, compare coverage and avoid media bias. Subscribe through my link for 40% off unlimited access this month.
To support us on Patreon (thank you): / rationalityrules
To support us through PayPal (thank you): www.paypal.me/...
To visit the DEBUNKED card game website: www.debunkedca...
To follow Steve on Facebook: / rationalityrules
To tweet with Steve on X: / rationalityrule
--
@apologeticsroadshow's Resurrection of Jesus: Fact or Fiction?: • The Resurrection of Je...
Our full refutation: • David Wood ABSOLUTELY ...
My original response: The ABSURD Roadshow of David Wood | Casually Debunked: • The ABSURD Roadshow of...
--
Special thanks:
Thanks to Derek Lambert of @MythVisionPodcast for co-hosting with me.
And a special thanks to Dr. Richard C. Miller and Dr. John Dominic Crossan for very graciously giving us their time.
John Dominic Crossan books amzn.to/4cDTl7B
Richard C. Miller's book Resurrection and Reception in Early Christianity amzn.to/4c2SsFy - Розваги
Go to ground.news/rationality to stay fully informed on breaking news, compare coverage and avoid media bias. Subscribe through my link for 40% off unlimited access this month.
Rationality Rules? Your video doesn't make any sense. Think again.
@@fridaysylvester9341 Great retort. Good job. Well done.
David is at best a weakling Christian Sunday morning preacher. I was an evangelical church goer. It is nothing but picking a verse or two out of the Old, a verse or two out of the New, and then mixing them up and delivering a message.... Usually telling the audience what terrible humans they are and that Jesus loves them anyway...
AdHoc storytelling that all must accept as facts.
The Jesus loves you stuff is so cringe. It is the foundation of their psychology and its scary.
I hopefully will, some day. I do have the free addon on my browser. But that's not what I came here to say.
I really thoroughly hate ads with a passion, even sponsored segments in videos, but I also found one exception (besides Some More News doing really funny ad segments for often horrible products (which they admit and even have videos about)), and it's Ground News. It's the _one_ exception where I actually like listening to an ad, and here's why:
1. It works.
2. It's informative.
3. It demonstrates the use and benefits with a useful and relevant example.
4. I could probably find more reasons, but 1, 2, and 3 just make me so happy that I don't really want to tear those down with more reasons.
I love Ground News, and I love Ground news ads. They're not bullshitting you with nonsense and asking you if you want to sell your car of if your knee still hurts only to then tell you that you can get a scientifically supported product of the market leaders that is advised by 7 out of 9.4 dentists and you'll feel like a manly man who can drive expensive cars through exotic mountain areas, which would be pretty cool, but you can far more easily just rent a car when you're there. Cars don't go in hand luggage easily.
I wish that Ground News ads were the benchmark that functioned as the minimum for all ads. And that everything that was not relevant or 100% correct and demonstrated IN the ad was cut.
On the radio and on commercial television stations/streaming services that would leave us ad free forever probably. Or they could just get a sponsor deal with Ground News and make everybody happy 🤣 Me being everybody, I fear, but still 🤣
Anybody reading this needs Jesus.
This was a really great clip Stephen... hopefully it's not too long for David's attention span!
But why? He’s not interested in such a beef while there’s a religion who threatens him and people like AP. Why then taking of his time in this less important nonsense.
I mean: this is in no way a priority in society and it causes no harm. You know that as well.
I’m glad Wood uses his time for more urgent matters, to be honest. But that also take courage, and I don’t see it here in the video and comment section. Not even from those who try to look like some kind of Viking. Quite a shame.
@@thewatchtower8330 David is just a psychopath, doing typical psychopath stuff. And he uses his time to talk about Christianity frequently, he just won't use it to engage in good faith with someone who disagrees with him about Christianity, because he knows his arguments are weak.
@@thewatchtower8330
Christianity is a religion that threatens me, and people like me(At least some christians with their version of christianity). I think it's worth responding too.
@@thewatchtower8330christian apologetics, evangelists, christian fundamentalists, have caused and are currently doing harm all over the world. It's a fight worth fighting, no doubt
@@calebr7199 How? What do you mean with “people like me”? I need more context to know if I agree with it or not.
If you’re attacked, you must respond. Ofcourse. I only doubt if that’s truly by the order of Jesus… But again, feel free to provide some context.
"You didn't respond to all of my points... Now the video is too long... Now you didn't respond to all of my points again..."
-Dawid Wood, probably.
"They took what I said out of context." (after refusing to watch the video which covers the context)
And all of his cronies who come to these comment sections to parrot just one braindead dismissal from David "If I had a hammer" Wood, and call it a win against Rationality Rules and all of atheism.
Man as much as I now dislike Wood, his cronies are even more insufferable as they just parrot his stuff (which is funny since he complains that atheists do that with Dawkins or Harris or Hitchens. It’s almost as if some people are just gonna parrot what you say no matter what group you’re in) and when I once point out that scholars do what they do to give an objective answer on bibles or any other religious texts in response to what David said about scholars with him not realising the irony of saying what he said is what apologists do except with no credibility since apologetics goes against every single academia possible I apparently got called out because scholars deny miracles (not realising if you accept the miracles of Christianity, you also have to accept the miracles of Islam and other religions)
@@Theleaver5088 indeed. The doubles standard and hypocrisy are blatant and ironic.
I wonder if Wood is aware of it. I know that he probably wouldn't care and just grift on. Chistianity is a way for him to enable and feed his mental conditions. And he very much enjoys it.
But with his followers I'm not sure. I have a neighbour who is that dumb, so I can see blind people _can_ be to their own behaviour and that of people around them, even when they're told and shown. But that's one neighbour. Most neighbours have at least some capacity of self reflection. So I find it weird that Wood then has that many braindead people gathered around him. And then smart people like Apostate Prophet join him. It's a strange phenomenon. And very unhealthy.
And they're right to say that many atheists do it too. Dawkins has plenty of parrots that would never look into anything, but I doubt that many Rationality Rules viewers would embarass themselves by going to Wood's channel and just repeat a misrepresentation RR made without knowing what it's actually about.
I found the amount of Wood's followers doing exactly that quite impressive. I've read quite some comments and they're all the same, and there wasn't even _one_ exception where a theist actually made an argument or just showed they watched the video they're commenting under.
I've always found it strange that David Wood is very good at debunking Islam, but he does not seem to apply the same standard to the claims about his own religion.
He's either a grifter or too dumb to figure it out. Either way, it's what you'd expect of someone who tried to murder their father with a hammer.
You're only saying he's "good" at "debunking Islam" because you already have a bias against it
@@Luckyland2014no his analysis of the qu'ran is genuniely impressive and massively so given hes not an arabic speaker. Hes genuinely a great critic of islam. Its just that he has cognitive dissonance towards his own religion and refuses to apply his natural ability for analysis in christianity.
@@Luckyland2014 Don't you think mejsjalv has exactly the same kind of bias against Christianity then? Why do you think he or she can't fairly assess David's competence equally fairly in both cases?
It is strange that the first video was too short and the second video was too long. Let's hope this one is just right.
Come on, David, stop ducking!
He is a Christian Dawahgandist. He is the Mojab of Christianity.
The Goldilocks of Christianity
Having beef with David Wood is like having beef with a little kid: it's not fair, but I'm still entertained.
That little kid is quite brave to call out Islam for what it is. At least he deserves credit for that. Far more courageous than most here in the comment section, for sure.
@@thewatchtower8330what is islam?
@@thewatchtower8330 It's not that brave if he can't direct such skepticism towards his own beliefs. I won't deny that islam as presented in their holy works is, without exaggeration, horrifying. Though I see Christianity as a neutered predecessor that was once equally vile. (and still is rather vile, i must add.) David is a hypocrite at best, and likely is dishonest towards himself and others. I see no bravery in such a person.
@@youfromthefuturee i believe he meant to insinuate that islam is an immoral doctrine that calls for genocide of the non believers. Though this trait is shared with Christianity, many seem to overlook this.
@@devoncahill7088 i thought that might be what was happening, but i was hoping it wasn't
“Since you won’t watch videos the same length as the ones you frequently make…” Just what I was thinking. Wood normally runs two and a half hours or more per posting.
Can't wait for David to stream this and flounder with hack comedian jokes trying to avoid the points of your video, while AP sits in silence and only pipes up if David steps out of line with negative generalizations that include AP himself.
AP doesn’t care. Wood doesn’t threat him. Islam does. He knows Wood has a different opinion and that’s okay. But you seemed bothered by it. They are friends and they stick up for each other on more important issues than all of this nonsense.
You have more problems with your ego and hurt feelings, like many others here, it seems. Should I start a group therapy session for you all to join? Seems you need it.
@@thewatchtower8330 A Christian comes to the comment section of an atheist and whines about people being hurt, LOL.
Keep coping I guess. It’s definitely everyone else that’s mad.
AP is there for the money, that's all. If David was truly following his faith, he's be preaching his gospel to AP
@thewatchtower8330 You picked up on "ego and hurt feelings" in that comment? Have you always been psychic?
Or is that just classic projection?
@@AKVisuals Wrong conclusion. I know a lot of Christian’s who never do that aswel. And I think that’s good, because they then not push you. You should be glad about that, if you’re an atheist. They don’t force themselves upon others.
AP has a mission to spread the truth about Islam. And yes, he also makes money from it, but it doesn’t mean it’s only for that. As if a combination isn’t possible 🤷🏻♂️.
So if your video is less than 5 and a half hours, it's not covering all the points so you can dismiss it but if it's 5 and a half hours or longer you can dismiss it because it's too long? Heads I win, tails God created the earth in 6 literal days I guess.
5.5 hours on top of the previous 2,000 years trying to prove the Bible is true
I wonder if David “My brain is made of” Wood would be open to a live debate with Steve as much as Peter “comment lost” Boghossian is.
No, I was in the chat after RR's first video, and he said he would never. He is a coward.
Live debate is kinda lame. It just becomes a stupid rules-lawyer thing where the most dishonest person wins by having more complaints.
Refined, considered, long-form responses are ideal, but religious right-wingers don't like that format because they always lose.
@@insensitive919 agreed, live debates are exactly why gish galloping exists, if you can lie fast enough you can make it look like you won due to your opponent having to take so long to refute all of it, it takes full advantage of the point rr makes about cleaning up a mess inherently taking longer than making it.
debates like woody had on unbelievable channel are dignified quality, but a discussion with a amateur like dwood is as silly as giving kenhovind attention.
It's been amazing following this series. I watched David's original video, then I watched RR's short original response, then I watched the 5 hour responce and now this. Truly I feel much more informed about the facts surrounding Jesus ressurection than I did before and I can absolutely see why the original short video was a prety good rersponse, although I also very much appreciate the longer response video with the interviews and Mythvision, he was a great addition.
Happy to David finally be challenged by someone other than Dawah guys
Dawah guys made you cry
ua-cam.com/video/4ajCdQPudGo/v-deo.htmlsi=WfEmOh_im4kWGeoU
Clown has appeared here too , you have been debunked naked , you can cope tho
What baffles me the most is how Apostate Prophet, an atheist, chooses to collaborate with a dogmatic Christian.
Yeah it's pretty disappointing to see him act that way. I thought he was more reasonable but he clearly is so against islam he will partner up with it's more tame cousin to bring it down.
Polemicists make strange bedfellows....
@czipcok1994 it might make for a good strategy at times. If the jesus people are focused on the muslims, they are less focused on us. And the muslims can be worn down by the Christians while we work against them.
Maybe it's not ideal, but I see value in teaming up with the Christians from time to time against greater evils.
@crazycrab9467 a weak approach... all this does is reveal 2 things:
1. Their arguments aren't strong enough to stand on their own
2. Their goal isn't even the propagation of their own belief, but rather the denigrating of the "other". No principles or integrity.
@@crazycrab9467 You really misunderstand how quickly these Christians would turn into thug, warlord crusaders if they had the power. The fact they have to live in a society with atheists, is what has molded them to behave in a civilized humanist manner. Dont give them false confidence that their bronze age backwardness is correct. Look at what the white Christians are defending now in Gaza, they're no different than terrorists, they just are white and speak our same language with no accent.
David is so dumb he constantly falls for the Spiderman fallacy, that the existence of New York in the spiderman comics proves spiderman is real.
Spiders also exist, so obviously Spider-Man exists.
And radiation exists, and mutations, it all fits!
Spiders also occasionally bite people.
I went looking for Spider-Man the other day. He called out to me and told me to buy pizza. He was right. It was a good pie 👍
Please don't promote the Spiderman fallacy, it's honestly one of the weakest refutations I see getting thrown around every resurrection debate, and it just makes us atheists look stupid. It crumbles at anything more than a passing examination and just provides apologists with cannon fodder.
I react religion because of simple reasons:
1, I don't like being lied to.
2, Even if religion is useful, if it's not true it's not true.
3, Faith isn't a pathway to truth.
So my three reasons are basically one reason: I like truth.
I seem to recall that when Stephen announced he was going to criticise David's introduction. David's fans were complaining that Stephen had just done what he said he would do, and didn't take a deep dive into the very large collection. When he did so, they complained that it was too long. Sigh.
They just don't want any cross argument, they just want you to shut up and listen to them and appreciate them
I love the analogies comparison between Alexander the great and Jesus you make Stephen! The analogy makes it so easy to see why David Woods resurrection arguments are so silly and all Christian apologists arguments really.
David Wood is one of, if not the smartest human, to ever grace this earth with his presence. Just ask him, and he'll tell you all about it.
A shorter version, so it must be true!
"Dawah" is not referring to an individual, but to the genre. i.e. Islamic apologetics.
There's a guy who goes by Ali Dawah, so I suppose Stephen is referring to him.
Dawah literally means preaching in arabic
Oh ali dawah oh is the worst of the worst he literally defended Pedophilia and is calling for sharia law in the UK
Maybe you should've made this into a youtube short to accommodate David's attention span
I don't often ask myself why I'm subscribed to a specific channel.
In this case for this channel, I guess it's self-evident and self-explanatory.
Imagine the audacity it takes to quote Bart Ehrman and think it's working in your favor as a Christian...
I liked the 5 hour version, it gave me something to lay down and relax to and fall asleep amd wake back up to without amy dreadful silence
Thank you so much for the 5hr 38min video! I was tempted to skip it due to length, but wow. The depth that you and Derek went to and the scholarly guest speakers really made it both informative and entertaining. Kudos!
Your content is consistently high quality.
We can accept the evidence for Kim Jong-il's existence without accepting that he invented the hamburger.
I had an argument with a friend I have known for about 30 years. What absolutely shocked me was when he argued his case he seemed very informed. When I explained my objections he refused to accept even the most basic facts and claimed ignorance of the points I made. It seemed so intellectually dishonest, but I have to accept that his brain simply wouldn't allow his worldview to be challenged in such a dramatic way. I am saying this because it made me realise why these people do seem intellectually dishonest and make the most obvious fallacious arguments. Our worldviews are strongly defended by our brains despite our best intentions.
the human brain is an amazing machine, but if it isn't installed with the software patch of critical thinking, well
@@haydenwalton2766 Human brain has built-in emotional override of neocortex. Good for the forest primeval where snap judgments and fight or flight responses could be key to survival. But maladapted for the complex modern world.
Wood doesn't understand Ancient History..he doesn't understand the difference between Fact and Fiction
Bruh The resurrection was not fiction but a fact, he is risen ✝️
@@johnbruh7351it’s not even a fact that Jesus definitely existed bruh 😂
@johnbruh7351
Cool assertion. Too bad you don’t have anything substantive to back it up.
@@HistoritorJimaldus He did exist, and was prophesied, the prophet isaiah spoke of him, Isaiah 53: "But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed." Read the gospels, maybe the holy spirit Will open your heart, may God bless you and your family.
@@HistoritorJimaldus99.9+% of scholars in relevant fields (including Atheist scholars like Ludemann, Ehrman, etc) agree that Jesus of Nazareth existed.
paul had no idea what jesus even looked like - eyewitness?
The chronology of Paul as presented in Acts. He is present at the stoning of Stephen shortly after Jesus’ death, and before that being a pharisee. Later converted on the road to Damascus, then writing his letters in the 50’s. If that is true, then Paul must have been a contemporary of Jesus. Paul claims to have been a Pharisee of the Pharisees, a leader of Jews. Studied at the feet of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). He must have been around Jerusalem at the time of Jesus, no matter how you figure it. As a young, ardent Pharisee he must have run into Jesus, maybe even had an argument, witnessed Jesus riding into Jerusalem on a donkey, been there at the cleansing of the temple, the trial, the crucifixion -been aware of the empty tomb, etc. He must have met people like Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, etc. Strange that he never refers to any of these encounters. Paul could have said something like this, “Yeah, I was around Jerusalem when Jesus was crucified.” And, “I remember the fuss when the Roman guards reported about the angel coming down and rolling away the stone.” Paul knows absolutely nothing biographical of Jesus. Doesn’t mention ever having met him. He knows nothing about him, other than what was revealed to him in his hallucination and what he figured out from Scripture. So maybe as he is portrayed in Acts is all hearsay.
oh come on, we all know he was blonde with blue eyes i.e. Anglo Saxon.
@@ryeclansen7371exactly, what paul wrote (or more to the point, didn't write) is the most damning, for a case of a historical jesus.
@@ryeclansen7371 Paul's story about himself is as sus as Joseph Smith's. Leading a cult can be fun!
One of the most damning things for Christianity is that Paul didn't believe that Jesus was resurrected until a supposed personal intervention by Jesus himself, supposedly a descent or vision of Jesus from heaven.
Prior to that supposed intervention by Jesus, Paul personally attests to condemning Christians to death for their beliefs.
Which means that a person who was contemporary to Jesus, and knew exactly what Christians claimed - from their own lips - and yet Paul didn't believe their stories at all.
If it takes a personal intervention by Jesus himself for Paul to believe, in that time and place, that Jesus was resurrected, then on its face the resurrection story is simply unbelievable.
Paul didn't believe it!
Also, given Paul's supposed conversion because of Jesus's personal intervention, then why didn't Jesus keep going and keep on with the personal interventions, given that personal intervention was dramatically sucessful in Paul's case?
Clearly the story is so pathetic, and the weak attempt by Jesus to convince all of mankind of his supposed resurrection, it is perfectly reasonable to conclude that the resurrection is Jesus is just an invention.
Believing in a stack of unlikely claims about Jesus while accusing folks who only believe that he likely once lived of being mythicists says a lot about the intellect of this man.
well my question is why wouldn't you be a mythicist ? The fact that the mythical Christ version came first in the form of a vsion to Paul, long before a historical personage was retconned decades later is very telling. Also the NT is obviously what we would charitably label today as fan-fiction.
I think it says more about his integrity.
David is freaking bonkers.
well, he is a psychopath. self confessed.
@@HarryNicNicholas Unfair. Lots of people call themselves psychos (Bill Burr), OCD (everybody with a pet peeve), or a "stan" to be funny, self-deprecating, or to justify an annoying trait.
@@matthill5426 Did those people try to murder their innocent father with a hammer? :)
Think he was actually diagnosed when he tried to kill his father@@HarryNicNicholas
@@unsteadyheady Yep. Antisocial personality disorder.
If you think a 5 1/2 hour critique is over the top, maybe you should consider that you got a few things wrong...
How does that follow?
@@stylis666 I means there was a lot to correct.
@@huguesdepayens807 Do you mean that the longer a video is, the higher the chance that mistakes slip in? Because that would indeed make sense, but then the OP still doesn't make sense.
I think I understand what they're trying to say. Perhaps they mean to say that Wood just uses the length as an excuse, or that Wood is afraid that the longer it is, the higher the chance that there's fair criticism that he is afraid of.
But I can't derive that from the wording, and I really dom't understand the implication that is made.
I feel like I'm overlooking something, but I can't for the life of me figure out what it is.
They saw something… therefore Gifus Crispy. 🤣
David Wood is painfully hypocritical
I always enjoy your presentations. I try to see if I can find the fault before you say it. It makes me think!
I will never understand someone's willingness to remain ignorant, especially public figures and educators. Things like these are what made me weary of most popular apologists
You want to understand that? Its a long comment but I try and explain this behavior.
I am going to ask you a question, and I am going to predict the answer you will have pop in your mind at first, and predict that will be a wrong answer. This works on most people and you can try if for yourself on others to see too, its an interesting conversation starter.
A bat and a ball together cost 1.10, the bat costs 1.00 more then the ball, how much did the ball cost?
You might have an answer of ten cents flash in your head right away with bias inaccurate fast mind but if you check that answer with your slow but more accurate conscious awareness, you can see that answer is wrong but it takes effort to do. The answer of ten cents is not the right answer but most people have that pop in their head because of the fast thinking mind that we rely on most of the time.
The fast unconscious mind is taking everything in and trying to make sense of it really fast. Its 11 million bits a second. But sometimes it makes mistakes. The slow conscious mind is 40-50 bits and lazy but it can check things and bringing the unconscious mistake to conscious awareness it can correct it.
The next thing to understand is about carl jung and the 4 ways the unconscious complex he called shadow deals with reality. The shadow is an unconscious complex that is defined as the repressed and suppressed aspects of the conscious self. there are constructive and destructive types of shadow. Carl jung emphasized the importance of being aware of shadow material and incorporating it into conscious awareness lest one project these attributes onto others. The human being deals with the reality of shadow in 4 ways. Denial, projection, integration and/or transmutation.
Now I believe what is happening when a question that exposes a conflict in a belief, idea, something that someone said, or even about someone they idolize and the question gets avoided, that is the fast unconscious mind going into denial and the response is often a projection. This also can trigger and emotional response activating the amygdala more and the pre frontal cortex less where rational conscious thought is said to happen and the amygdala starts to get the body to flood itself with chemicals/hormones.
Its like the fast mind knows conscious awareness will say its wrong. so it blocks it off to defend itself from admitting its wrong. in cases of denial and because it blocked off the rational mind, the responses are often irrational. Like personal attacks do not address the issue or answer the question. I think we can agree people have a very hard time now days admitting when they are wrong, I am not exempt from this myself I do realize. And we can see how badly questions avoidance effects us if you watch political meetings and watch them avoid questions all day long.
Ok, so the first thing to go over is denial as that is the main one I expose with questions. A disowning or refusal to acknowledge something I think is a good definition for it here. There is a really good 2 minute video I use as an example of this. A streamer named vegan gains claiming lobsters have brains after some one said he can eat lobsters because they do not have brains. He googles it and starts to read what it says. When he gets to the part where is says neither insects nor lobsters have brains, he skips it and says they literally are insects then skips over that line and continues to read the rest. Just like in the fast thinking video, his fast mind already read that line and refused to acknowledge it in unconscious denial, and just skipped it.
The person then tells him he skipped it and he reads it again and sees the line this time. Still being defensive of his claim and refusing to accept he was wrong, he tried to discredit the source and its the lobster institute of maine. If you would like to see the video for yourself its 2 minutes by destiny clips and the video is called " Destiny Reacts To Vegan Gains Ignoring Search Result That Contradicts Him". Justin turdo avoiding the question of how much his family was paid by the we charity 6 times in a row I think is denial as well. I think jordan peterson not being able to answer his own question of does he believe god exists and asking what do and you mean then saying no one knows what any of those words mean while being seemingly angry is think is another really good example of denial... and projection. And while JP find those words difficult, other people understand them easy. Even he does pretty much any other time they are used.
So projection is next up. Psychological projection is a defense mechanism people subconsciously employ in order to cope with difficult feelings or emotions. Psychological projection involves projecting undesirable feelings or emotions onto someone else, rather than admitting to or dealing with the unwanted feelings. Many times a mind in denial will use projections for responses. Someone getting mad and telling the other person to not interrupt when they have been doing that a lot themselves would be an example. I have done this myself. The people who tell me I dont understand my own questions and my point is wrong when they do not even know what the point is are all examples as well. I ask them to steel man my position to show then understand my point and they just avoid that question as well clearly showing they do not understand my point.
Now we have integration and/or transmutation. Integration is when you bring an unconscious behavior into conscious awareness and accept it. I know that I interrupt people talking sometimes even though I think that is wrong to do. I have a conscious awareness of it, but I have not been able to completely change the behavior.... yet. That is where transmutation comes in. Transmutation is to completely change that unconscious behavior. From being impatient to being patient, of from distrust to trust, hate into understanding and love even.
So was this understandable or confusing?
if you understand it, do you think its possibly true?
Do you have any questions? If you have any tips I am would gladly listen.
They want to change how people think by saying "you already think like a christian so you gotta buy the rest of it", and if they can't sell that, they accuse you of just being a sinner who wants to play in the muck of self-destructive behavior.(defined solely by their Space-Daddy of choice)
I didn't watch the video yet. I have arguments against the resurrection that I would like to show you, if you are interested.
1. They say that the guards at the tomb were witnesses for the three days and three nights, but after he supposedly rose up, his followers did not tell anyone for about two months I think, so the guards didn't really matter after all. They could have taken the body on the fourth night and no one would know.
2. The guards at the tomb were idol-worshiping enemy soldiers. I can't imagine Jewish people trusting idol-worshiping enemy soldiers, so the whole idea of depending on them as proof seems silly to me. That is why I think these books were really written to convert Romans to Christianity and not Jews, because Jews would not trust enemy soldiers as witnesses to anything.
3. They say people should believe with a child-like faith, but supposedly his followers saw him a lot and even touched him for proof, so they didn't have child-like faith.
4. The only real proof of a resurrection is seeing the guy alive again among the people in Jerusalem, for example, and not just among his followers who you have to trust.
5. They say the followers were willing to die for their beliefs as proof, but the punishment for being a false prophet was death, and the Bible mentions many false prophets, so obviously lots of people were willing to die for their beliefs.
where do you get the idea from the gospel accounts that "his followers did not tell anyone for about two months I think, so the guards didn't really matter after all"?
@@Justas399 I read it was 40 days later that he supposedly went up to heaven. Are you saying that they publicized his resurrection right away while he was still appearing to them? Maybe the people of Jerusalem and the rest of Israel knew about him being with his followers during that time. I don't know.
One can keep it even simpler:
1. If the guards fell asleep, how would they know what had happened? (Of course, falling asleep on guard duty was a capital offense in the Roman army, but we can leave that for another time).
2. There is no evidence that any of the supposed eye-witnesses died for their belief in a resurrection, or indeed for any belief at all. Aside from James the Less, we have no mention of any deaths of any of them for any reason until legends written a century and more later.
3. The truth is we have no eye-witness accounts to speak of. The first story story is written four decades later, and the first story with disciples experiencing anything is another ten-fifteen years later than that. We have no idea what anyone actually saw. The evidence just as easily (even more easily) supports a personal vision by one person (Peter?), as Paulogia has cogently explained.
David Wood tries to use the acceptance by historians of mundane facts (Jesus existed, he was crucified) to claim they also accept the resurrection...and they don't.
@@njhoepner let’s start with 1. How do you explain the empty tomb? Why was it necessary for the Jewish authorities to pay off the Roman authorities to keep the guards alive? Why wasn’t the supposed dead body of Christ produced?
Peter and Paul were put to death in Rome for their faith in Christ.
What other event in history has more eyewitness accounts than the resurrection? Please cite your sources.
@@Justas399There are no eyewitness accounts of the resurrection. There’s Paul, who had a fever dream, and then there’s claims that eyewitnesses saw it, no actual eyewitness accounts
So David doesn't know the difference between a myth and a legend.
To be fair, I had to look it up to be sure. But it was easy to do.
"The two differ in that myths generally tell stories about gods and supernatural heroes, or perhaps explain natural phenomena, while legends tell stories about humans from the distant past which are often based on some form of fact".
@@joelonsdale That's the point I was making. Let's say it's a fact that Jesus was a real guy. You don't have to be a mythicists to doubt that Jesus rose from the dead.
Even if Jesus was a real guy, the character in the gospels is a legend. Mythicists are people who don't believe he existed at all, and yet David portrayed people who don't believe in the miracle worker as mythicists.
@@StannisHarlockI completely agree. I don't think anybody can be sure that Jesus did or didn't exist - that's a problem. If he didn't exist or is an amalgamation of more than one historical character, the resurrection couldn't have happened for just that reason alone. Religion is just a great big "maybe", or perhaps more realistically, a great big "unlikely". And yet they want it to be true SO much they'll sacrifice their humanity.
He's a self professed psychopath, that's really all the psychology of David Wood i need to know
Since our culture isn't designed for psychopaths, they're kind of supposed to find their way to morality on their own. Maybe there is a rational way to do it, or maybe he really does need a strict dogmatic code to follow. Who knows?
@@AlexanderShamov I'm not so concerned with how psychopaths find their morality, David Wood can hold whatever irrational belief he wants if it keeps him from his more violent tendencies. I'm interested in how society deals with psychopaths given their antisocial tendencies. Given their tendencies to lie, manipulate, lack empathy, and disregard social normals, all things David Wood demonstrates it's probably best not to interact with him at least not at a level of treating him as an honest interlocutor. The "you didn't respond to my whole video," "your video is too long," to make a short response is just giving into his manipulation.
@@wilkimist That's fair. The way I see it, apologists are already dishonest by the very nature of their activity, regardless of neurological dispositions.
@@AlexanderShamov I agree with you, mix apologist with psychopathy and it's all the worse.
Being a psychopath doesn't make him wrong, that seems like a bit of gaslighting. He's wrong for much better reasons than just that.
0:57 why is Apostate Prohet (that’s him right?) associating with a jesus worshipper? Isn’t his big thing that he left religion behind? 🤔
His big thing is more so hating Islam and Muslims than leaving religion behind
Your guess is as good as mine and he frequently talks to and about Muslims like they’re religious because they’re stupid.
Your guess is as good as mine and he frequently talks to and about Muslims like they’re religious because they’re stupid.
politics.
And possibly some sort of blackmail situation.
Money, their livelihood is around UA-cam content creation against Islam. So if collaborating brings them money, views and superchat thru live streams..they'll do it
12:44 David is right. There is only one conclusion to be drawn.
David is very gullible.
At the very least he is very selective in his critical thinking.
So he gets from scholars agreeing that there probably was a jesus and he was crucified, and makes a messive leap to them agreeing he resurrected even though they don't, you'd probably find most Atheists would conceed the first 2
Most people would accept without question that a guy lived, and then a guy died.
But it's not normal to leap from somebody living and then dying ... to actually believing that they were resurrected afterwards!
Why is AP collaborating with DW??
My thoughts exactly.
You're much more rational than DW.
Thumbed up.
You think DW is rational? His rationality just applies to other religions except his own.
He has much more common with the Dawah guys that he hates.
He's just an Apologist.
To be fair, any theist that practices truly can't be rational. 🤷
@@sharipn8348 Re your "To be fair any theist that practices truly can't be rational."
BS!
Just total effing BS!
That's the biggest scam that the devil uses to keep ppl from God.
Au contraire true theism MUST be founded on rationality and logicality.
HC-JAIPUR (24/07/2024)
.
The man drives me nuts; he's excellent at pointing out the flaws of Muslim claims.... but then commits the exact same d*mn fallacies himself. You would think 5 1/2 hours isn't much to ask to fix such egregious behavior.... very of him too :) Many of us have been there, but it is best not to step in the quicksand of prejudice at all.
So you agree He exposes The hell out of Muzzis
@mathewpt4478
Sure, why not, but it’s not like he’s the first or even most vocal person about it since the beginning of the 21st century. Look back at the New Atheists from ~2000, specifically Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris, and they all were not only exposing “Muzzies”, but we’re doing so in public at debates and talks instead of behind the safety of a screen. There are plenty of people who expose the nonsense of Islam who don’t also go all in on something else as equally absurd. You don’t need David Wood for that
@@mathewpt4478 He misrepresents them all the time
IF you think he is excellent on Islam than you might need to check your IQ , his ignorance on both Christianity and Islam is funny to watch and to watch Atheist consider him "good" on the matter just makes the atheist position look bad
He loves God so much, he unable to spend 6hr of his life, to refined his arguments in defense of his Lord and Savior. I think God need to find a bit more zealous champion 😂
Apologists usually seem to be bottom-of-the-barrel thinkers and/or grifters. You’d think if God had any kind of hand in this he’d inspire up some better representation
People way back then didn't have social media and UA-cam - they were forced to entertain themselves with self-fabricated, fantastic stories. And 2000 years later, people are still embracing some of those beliefs because... well, who the hell can imagine? David Wood IS an unimaginable sort of human being.
I exist, some claim I'm a god. Must be true
I heard a couple dozen people say they saw you getting executing for saying The Truth(tm) and saying about seven last words when you died, but then you appear here! You resurrected! That means you're a god for sure! It's the _only_ explanation that makes sense!
Yay! Testimony! 😂
Thanks
Thank you for supporting atheist youtubers ❤️
Apologetics only exists because gods do not.
Probably.
The Resurrection is a man made story about a god that cannot die.
The followers of a wandering end times preacher who was executed as a public nuisance by the Jewish and Roman authorities carried on after the destruction of the Jewish temple and organized a new religious movement called Christianity, a mystery religion with amazing miracles.
I didn't know I was a mythacist or even how to spell it, or if it's a good thing or bad thing?
I personally don't care, but it means you will have a much harder time talking with Christians. The way I see it, nothing is lost if you at least acknowledge Jesus existed or probably existed, as him existing is completely distinct from all the crazy stuff said about/attributed to him actually being true.
Thank you for teaching me Brandolini's law!
*Historical Fact:* _No God has ever personally threatened me._
Not that you're aware of... Maybe there's a GOD and He personally threatened you, and then made you forget it...
Which is _de facto_ the same thing that you said, but with extra A-hole behavior from that GOD.
I'll have to go through the long video but I'm looking forward to the second part of this video.
I'm currently enjoying a long series of discussions with some Christian friends about the historicity of the resurrection and other Biblical history. As far as I can tell, there is no primary evidence for the empty tomb. My friends' position is that honesty and truthfulness are core values of the faith, so "why would the gospel writers lie"?
My position is that spreading any religious message which has a "deeper truth" could be justification for being a little flexible with certain facts. Couple that with people (Peter and Paul) having some sort of convincing hallucination of a risen Jesus and the ability of oral traditions to exaggerate the most juicy parts of any story; and it makes sense to me that people would start to believe things despite the lack of evidence.
I have a "divine snake" right here
This is fire
I see no apologists targeting atheists. Their efforts seem instead to be aimed at comforting believers by attempting to quiet their doubts. This applies to any religion as any benefit sought after by believers is proportional to their level of acceptance.
Apologists are there to maximize believer's benefit without a hard requirement for any claim to be demonstrably true.
Just like cameron batuzzi this is textbook goalpost shifting 0:40
Okay, earthy understandings for eathly beings. Brother Jesus plays dead to get released from his torturous crucifixion. Does not get buried 6 feet under ground, but gets put in a tomb. 2 muscle men wait outside the the tomb according to ancient tradition because sometimes those who get laid to rest as the deceased are not quite yet deceased.
It's just cognitive bias.
David Wood has said in multiple of his debates that he would be a maniac without god.
I shudder at the thought when in his brain, he finally realizes that there is no dictator daddy in the sky with perfect morality and everything is in a subjective framework.
He'll probably go bananas.
"Debates" between him and muslims is also very entertaining as it's basically 2012's tumblr and it's an online shouting match between a Doctor who fan and a Harry Potter fan, arguing what the best fantasy series is.
There is no unbiased evidence for the resurrection, the bible is not enough to prove what jesus ate for lunch.
Christians just want it to be true and cannot not think it is possible to be false.
Imagine the walls crumbling when he realizes he changed himself, and he doesn't need God looking over his shoulder to not be a maniac.
You can't accept Kim Jong-il's existence without accepting his divinity. Come on.
Of him driving at the age of 3 and never defecate even once? Of course I believe in his divinity. The entire of DRPK people believe that and they would rescue the portraits of Il-sung and Jong-il before anything else even if it means they would perish, is sufficient evidence.
Nicely done. 😊
David Wood is why i unsubbed from Apostate Prophet. Blegh
you missed the opportunity to corner them - once they compared the historicity of Jesus to historicity of Alexander the Great it is enough to point out that according to their "logic" then Zeus the God should be true along with Jesus the God - which is an obvious contradiction. Q.E.D.
...and thats why Islam makes sense.
@@keksi6844 non-sequitur.
I think it's fair to say you showed all the good will that one could imagine with this here summary. I hope David Wood sees that and replies. Your first video on him had a lot of fair criticisms which I don't at all see here, so I'm hoping David will appreciate that and respond in kind. Afterall, the points you made are the most fundamental critiques of Christian faith and an apologist wood do good to adress that.
So David Wood's case mainly consists of the Spider-Man fallacy and that the early followers of Christ sincerely believed?
That's not much at all.
Meanwhile David is waiting for the UA-cam Short version
Jesus is a cup into which Xians pour their own wine. Or even Trump orange soda!
I call it "Play-do Jesus." From 26 years as an evangelical I can say it's what's happening there.
Best evidence for Alexander are the cuneiform tablets in the British museum. Written by the Persians he had just defeated , describing Alexander and his armies victory procession into Babylon.
David is lost
I think atheists are more lost. I mean, those who focus on these topics, while there is another religion causing real damage to society, everywhere in the world. Wood and AP show courage to attack it. RR chose not to. It’s telling of a man’s character.
@@Maddog115 Christianity feeds many of the symptoms of psychopathy. He likes feeling like a supremacist and having his supremacist feelings enabled and encouraged by his community while lying to their faces about these arguments and about their religion and knowing they swallow it hook, line, and sinker. He feels right at home. Theists are lost. David just chose to be lost with them and encourage them to stay lost with him like they encourage him to be lost with them.
Why does an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, omnibenevolent god need apologists?
What _"moved"_ the _"Unmovable"?_
Why would an Omniscient Being *do* _any thang?_
The outcome is already known. What would be the point?
That is why the xian god dwelt for an eternity in darkness.
We should leave it there.
I really don't care if Alexander actually existed or not. Was he a pupil of Aristotle, did he win great battles, did he have coins made with his image, did he die young ? It makes no difference to my life. In the case of Jesus, we have an active religion of some 2bn people which is a reactionary force in society, imprisoning adherents' minds, anti-science and knowledge, accepting exploitation and privilege as normal, and of course taking peoples' money. So far, neither Wood, nor any other apologist, has provided me with any evidence of the "miracles" claimed in the Bible.
Great video, Stephen!
I am a bit surprised why Apostate Prophet does all these long videos with David Wood.
"Stay away from Islam" is great, but staying away from Christianity is also a good idea.
Because Islam is truth.
@@keksi6844
It truely is a great shite
I was never pressured into accepting claims that couldn’t be demonstrated to be factual. For this reason, I consider myself at liberty to question the authenticity of magical religious claims that cannot be demonstrated to be factual.
He has enough to justify his faith…
In terms of proving Jesus’ resurrection beyond reasonable doubt - well, no. But then faith wouldn’t be required and it wouldn’t be a religion would it?
And yet him and other apologists still feel the need to make dishonest videos pretending the opposite is true.
@@oliverthompson9922Precisely. If apologists actually said “You can’t really prove that the resurrection happened, in the end it’s a supernatural claim and you need faith to believe in it”, most non-Christians wouldn’t care.
It’s when they start yapping about how the resurrection is “the most logical explanation for what actually happened” that most people start having problems with what they say.
@@LeoVital yep. I much prefer theists who say they believe through faith alone and don't have any good evidence. It's the only honest answer.
@@oliverthompson9922what type of evidence will satisfy skeptic,that Jesus resurrected from the dead
@@OMMANIPADMEHUM8 decent evidence, the same as for ANYTHING else.
What type of evidence would satisfy you that Mohammed rode to heaven on a winged horse?
I guarantee Wood will look through the comments and make some gibe about how if Steven and Derek aren't mythicists, why are there so many in their comments section? It will be his only argument against what is a very fair and damning critique.
Honestly David's one those people who I wouldn't even want to refute on religion because the only thing holding him back from killing someone is sky daddy. I'd just let him keep his irrational belief just so no one dies.
Wait so believing in a false thing can be beneficial? who would've thunk
Are you referring to D'awah as "he" because you think David is referring to Ali Dawah?
The 'creed' in no way necessitates going back to within 2-3 years of the death of Jesus - it is simply the tradition sometime prior to Paul writing it down as a creed formula - and since his first letters were around 50 CE it could have been developed anytime up just prior to that point. Nor did Paul receive that tradition, at least not by any man, as he is explicit that he got it from Christ!
Paul states, before writing the creed, that he “delivered to [Corinthian Church] what [he] also received…” ( 1 Cor. 15.3).
Paul also wrote that “after three years [he] went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and remained with him fifteen days. But [he] saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother” (Gal. 1.18-19).
According to Paul, he converted, and after three years, he stays with Peter and James for 15 days. He most likely received the creed there. The creed was most likely, therefore, originally formulated 2-3 years after Jesus’ death (at the latest).
@@isaacrukin9783 Read more carefully:
Paul does not say he received the creed - but he received the gospel - the CONTENT of the creed. Note he does not say he got it from any disciple.
Look what Gal.1:1 says: "From Paul, an apostle (not from men, nor by human agency, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised him from the dead)..."
and Gal.1:11-12 says: "Now I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. For I did not receive it or learn it from any human source; instead I received it by a revelation of Jesus Christ!
So Paul explicitly says he received the gospel that he preached from Jesus through a revelation not by any man. The word received is the same root - παραλαμβάνω.
“Proof- texting” is a good word to describe what David does to prove his points
The cognitive dissonance of David and AP is amazing. They tear apart the apologetics of Muslims that equally apply to David's religion.
Well DW loves him some special pleading and AP just loves to bash Muslims, seems like a match made in Heaven, no?
Thanks Steve for the clipped video; much more palatable for my YT consumption!
I'm also glad he did the 5.5 hours. I very much enjoyed that, and a lot more than this one. Now I'm sticking around in the comments because the video ended but I'm not done with it 🤣
Since RR burned the bridge with DW, I’ll just leave this here:
Nitpicks:
@ 1:00 RR conflates the terms in common usage on YT of videos (prerecorded, edited) and live streams (live, unedited).
@1:50 RR accuses David of calling them Jesus mythicists supplying a clip that conveniently edits out where he says he doesn’t think RR is and he doesn’t know if the guest is or not. Ironically, appealing to David to stop misrepresenting him while misrepresenting David.
@2:10 RR claims DW claims most atheists are mythicists. Receipts needed. Perhaps he’s said that about the New Atheists, but still, bring receipts.
@2:20 RR claims they (DW & AP) are not fans of all things LGBT. DW is not a fan of Mike Winger either, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t love them in the way Jesus told us to and wants what’s best for them. RR mistakes pandering for love and love for hate, but what can you expect from a godless heathen with no objective morals.
@2:30 RR panders to gay marriage advocates. Why does same sex partnerships have to be called the same thing as complementary sex partnerships? The important thing should have been for them to have the same rights, privileges, and obligations like the way churches, synagogues, and mosques have different names but the same treatment under the law. Wonder if RR would celebrate bookstores calling themselves libraries or if he had anything to say about Trump University.
@12:20 RR brings out the ole tropes bit. Ok, there’s a literary trope going back to time immemorial of a hero discovering new land bringing riches back to the society, therefore, Columbus never discovered America, didn’t happen. Right? Nonsense, you can’t judge an event based on whether it’s a literary trope.
Main argument:
RR claims DW’s conclusion doesn’t follow from the evidence illustrated by comparisons to Alexander the Great and Joseph Smith.
Comparison of Jesus to Alexander the Great being an actual person with fantastical elements woven into the historical narrative.
1) AtG narrative formed a couple hundred years after his death and the fantastical elements were incorporated a hundred or more years after that.
2) The resurrection narrative was formed within a few decades of Jesus’ crucifixion and is central to the very earliest narratives.
3) More fantastical versions of the Gospels developed after the 1st century and were never accepted as canonical.
4) Isaiah 53 unambiguously describes the Gospel narrative at least 140 years before Jesus’ time.
5) The letters of Paul, Acts, and the Gospels publish witness testimony potentially within the lifespan of the witnesses.
Comparison of Jesus’ followers to Joseph Smith followers believing in his fantastical claims.
1) JS’s early companions were charlatans themselves.
2) JC’s early companions were the “salt of the earth”.
3) JS claimed to receive revelations and visitations out of sight.
4) JC spoke with authority and performed miracles in the open.
5) JS’s followers had much to gain keeping the movement going.
6) JC’s followers had much to lose keeping the movement going.
7) JC’s followers got a very different Messiah than the one they were expecting.
Basically, DW makes a probabilistic conclusion based on the set of reasonably established facts that the followers of Jesus earnestly reported events rather than perpetrating the most unlikely conceivable hoax given their likely state of mind and culture in order to receive one of the worst payoffs in history.
Thank you for this comment.
Hope RR and his fans will read more than just the views they prefer.
I'm pretty sure DW and Mike Winger are friends. DW one time was picking on Mike Winger claiming only a nerd light up his background with blue light when AP was using blue light in his background.
@@smidlee7747 I agree, just keeping up the bit.
🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗🦗
Aside from that, I forgot a nitpick. Much hay is made in the video and comments from DW not responding to the long video as if the binary is between short and long videos. This video is evidence that’s not the binary having addressed the main argument in a short video. The first video from RR in response to DW’s video on the resurrection didn’t address the main argument but pretended it did. It would be like in my comment above I had just listed the nitpicks without addressing the main argument and then acted like I had debunked the main argument. This is why the bridge has been burned.
"The letters of Paul, Acts, and the Gospels publish witness testimony potentially within the lifespan of the witnesses.
"
So they claim in theri texts. Actual evidence: zero
This David guy is the one who tried to murder his father with a hammer, right?
Just making sure I get the cast of characters right.
Before he became a Christian
Watching this channel makes it so apparent why Alex O’Connor has such a faster growing channel. He seems to be growing while RR still continues the same boring tirades and uninspiring and uninteresting philosophical musings
Yeah, Alex is out talking to interesting people, having productive conversations. Meanwhile this guy makes the same snarky videos again and again.
Stephens channel also is growing
@@guilhermecastro9893 Alex’s channel has grown almost the entire total subscriber count of Stephen in the last year alone
@@ItsThatGuy1989 different growth rates so what? Stop hating who cares stephen tales more time to make a quality video
@@guilhermecastro9893 bro come on his videos are not the same level as Alex’s haha
David Wood believes what he wants to believe. That's why he clings to it: He wants to believe it. Science asks no one to believe anything. It states that certain things happen and are observable. And that these observations can be repeated. If something contradicts an observation, then new ideas are produced. It's a great approach. This is how I am able to type this on an internet channel and others may read it. If David and Christians and religious zealots don't like science, I suggest that they not use any of the products of science. Forget the internet. Forget telephones. Forget microphones. All of these specific objects exist because of scientific discovery and application. Religion has produced nothing that I need rely on to denounce it. David Wood and all of the Christians and religious zealots rely on the fruit of science to denounce science. It's preposterous. Their thinking is worse than worthless: It's horrendously destructive.
Wow.. another very bad take. It's clear you're not very knowledgeable about this topic.
8:55 dude no... Muhammad performed no miracles in the Quran you could have looked this up in a second online. In fact it is mentioned multiple times in the Quran that he is asked why he doesn't perform signs and miracles like the previous prophets. (the splitting of the moon is not even mentioned to have been performed by Muhammad in the Quran...). There are 0 miracles performed by Muhammad in the Quran. Accounts of his miracles started to propagate long after his death when the hadiths were being told and written (150 years after his death)
And no, Alexander the Great has no miracles of his own too.. All the 'miracles' in his biographies are ABOUT him, not performed by him. Yes biographers tried to say that he had a divine birth, or that divine omens and prophecies were told about him, but he never performed any kind of healing miracle or anything of that sort to individuals in his lifetime. The miraculous aspect in the life of Alexander is all about omens and prophecies about him, saying that he is a god, along with having a divine birth.. In short, nothing to take seriously.
It is the exact same for Julius Caesar and even more so the case for him. So I am shocked that you picked these three persons as examples of people that had miracles told about them during their lifetime. You could not have gone more wrong on this one: literally all three of these are known and remembered to have performed no miracles.
The difference with Jesus is that the gospel of Mark alone details 18 individual miracle stories performed by Jesus (and I mean not sayings, but the actual story of each of these miracles). In top of that, Mark also has 2 or so sayings about Jesus having performed a lot of miracles. And that is only Mark. You see the same in Matthew, Luke and John. Even Paul is noteworthy here since he believed that he performed miracles himself (see Romans, and 2 Corinthians). So one can quickly deduce that if Paul believes that he performed miracles himself, plus we know that he personally knew Peter, James, and John, plus we knew that he believed Jesus resurrected, then I think we can confidently say that Paul knew about Jesus' miracles too. So here we have Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, and (most probably) Paul that know about the miracles performed by Jesus. How you compared this to Muhammad, Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great, is beyond me.
You protest too much here. He didn't claim that Muhammad's miracles are reported in the Quran, he said reports of them started circling during his lifetime already. That's not the same, and if you demand accuracy from others, you should show this diligence yourself!
@@stefanheinzmann7319 The only 7th century record of Muhammad would be the Quran and Muhammad is only mention 4 times. So how did RR know reports of Muhammad started during his lifetime? Historians have no clue who Muhammad was. The Quran didn't just leave out Muhammad doing miracles it plainly claim Muhammad didn't perform any miracles and he was only a warner. The Jews in the Quran questioned Muhammad was a true prophet because he didn't do any miracle. Thus RR is still wrong about Muhammad. RR wants to claim Muhammad is just like Jesus Christ which is a lie.
The hadith written centuries later contradicts the Quran which claims Muhammad didn't preform any miracle. David Wood and AP have pointed this out to Muslims.
This is how legends are form ; with time the person gets bigger. BUT that doesn't work with Jesus because people were proclaiming he did miracles and the Son of God all the way back to the 1st century in Judah. No time for him to become a legend.
@@stefanheinzmann7319 Well the Quran is the earliest Islamic source.. So if miracles are not mentioned in the Quran, it just follows logically that Muhammad was not known to have performed miracles during his lifetime. There is no known source that talks about Muhammad written before the Quran. The hadiths were written loong after the Quran, and they are the ones mentioning Muhammad's miracles.
I did not mean to sound rude in my comment though. I only wanted to show that what he said was wrong.
Oh brother this guy STINKS! Talk about missing the point!
@@charbelbejjani5541 That's a bit like saying that Paul's letters are the earliest Christian source, and since no miracles are reported there, it follows that Jesus wasn't known to have performed miracles during his lifetime.
My point here is: You are trying to make it look like the situation regarding miracles is quite different between Jesus and Mohammed, where upon closer inspection it isn't quite as different.
Good synopsis! I watched the full debunk and loved it.
I like Apostate Prophet and Nuriyah Khan a lot, but I can't stand David Wood. He never contributes anything meaningful, and I can't understand why AP has him as a co-host. AP is a thoughtful, well-read ex-Muslim, while Wood is a childish Christian fundamentalist himself.
bcuz ap is an anti-muslim shill
He’s definitely well read but thoughtful? Nah, the dude is just as trash as David Wood
If I were too hazard a guess, it's because AP is more anti-Islam than anything else.
That's it. Full stop.
Nothing deeper rolling around in that head of his.
He hates Islam because it affectes(d) him directly.
And as long as he can push that message I don't think he cares who he pairs up with.
After all he doesn't seem to be anti-theist, anti-fundy, or even against the mindset that leads one to extremism.
I mean he is willing to ignore the fact that he is simply a token apostate of Islam for a fundy minded Christian.
So personally I would toss thoughtful out the window, it's all spite driven. ;)
At least that's my best guess.
Your thoughtful idol supports killing of 38,000 people.
For those looking for concrete evidence of jesus birth , death and resurrection must look to ancient chinese astrology which during the hans dynasty documented the star (which they explained as a man from heaven came down to earth)
When there was an solar eclipse they documented as man from heaven died and took all sins of human.
My question is how did this chinese who didn't know jesus but their explaination exactly matches the timing of jesus birth and death and the christian beliefs.
I'm an atheist and I find mythicists to be really obnoxious and annoying.
Sounds more like obnoxious and annoying people happen to be mythicists.
If there really was an empty tomb, why is it not known where? I'd expect that tomb to be of similar status as the ka'aba for Islam.
Rationality Rules, Stephen, I loved you guys refuting david woods. It was long, so I took it in bits. But I like these, too. I am a fan of Apostate Prophet. Good guy. David doesn't seem to realize he is more like the ditz ,ali dawah, than he is, his good friend AP! I'm glad they have friendship, I guess. 👍🏼💙💙💙🥰✌🏽
Your entire argument relies on poisoning the well
no he is pointing out that the well is full of poison.
@believeroflight9888 nice quip, but my point still stands
It's weird how people keep making the same mistakes when the solution is put right in front of them.
If you think he's poisoning the well, why don't you go watch his 5hr video that goes more in depth?
If you paid attention, you'd see that this is essentially a continuation of a series of videos talking about David 's argument for Jesus' resurrection and how David handled it.
@whatwecalllife7034 because I'm not going to listen to this guy for long periods of time I struggle listening to him in shorter videos let alone listening to his pretentious arrogance for hours
@@Super3face no , in fact your argument never held any water from very beginning. Bible can be interpreted as you want because the authors are not present and can not confirm anything . While david is the one twisting the other author's work , which they confirmed in the last video. So , david is the one poisoning the well. Steve is just pointing out that david is poisoning other peoples work. Are you even watching the video , or are you just randomly commenting.
The saddest role here is that of the "aposthate prophet" here, who is as far as I know an atheist, surely Wood's friend, one that can surely support his buddy but at the same time have the respect for their friendship to say, "well bro, you might be wrong here..."
I would probably have used Kim Jong Un as an example of somebody who exists, and has a ton of miraculous events attributed to him in multiple sources (all from within his country), but you obviously can believe he exists but not believe he is divine-despite that being the official position in North Korea.
Ah, David. Good to see that Christian humility on display. You're an example for all believers, living up to 1 Peter 3:15.
It’s honestly hard to believe David takes himself seriously.
thanks for the executive summary
TL:DW