Always such a powerful blessing to watch and listen to Gary Habermas. I am so grateful for these presentations with Gary Habermas that presents such powerful videos with biblical facts about our Lord Jesus Christ. Thank you sir. !!
@mkl2237 Are u serious too? Gary is famous for lying He says he debated 2 well known atheists why do u think he doesn't mention there names?He always generalises so u can't fact check him .Do u not this?
Good Man Professor Habermas, just revealing what we already knew but gives us extended truth and is a good way for Agnostics to watch and learn how we deepen our FAITH much appreciated Professor my 27 yr old Son actually introduced me to you and others ( Steven Myers ) among others
I am highly skeptical of your claim. I bet you are not even educated in this arena… and I bet you are just a UA-cam commenter (which means nothing)… that you have no proof… and odds are high that you’re just a Dawa Wannabe who will cite a text that proves nothing But I’ll entertain ya…. I believe in free speech even for people who don’t know what they’re talking about. So: ________????
These advertisements by UA-cam are killing me, it’s worse than TV!!!! As soon as I start getting into the lecture another 3 minute advert comes up. This needs to stop!!!!😡😡😡😡
In the bigger picture, I find the strongest evidence for the Biblical narrative/world view is simply … all of it: evidence taken from any and all domains-no holds barred-is absolutely overwhelmingly supportive of the Biblical world, the real world, the world (physical and spiritual) in which EVERYBODY lives, whether they believe it or not, whether they like it or not.
@@kevinkelly2162 Revelation makes clear the serpent was the devil. Either the devil himself, or he inhabited the serpent. The donkey that spoke to Balaam? Well, apparently, you'd like a God who isn't sovereign over His creation and can't do miracles. Of course, that being wouldn't be a god. God created and encoded the DNA that is in all life. And it is encoded with digital information. So what's the big deal if He wanted a donkey to speak to a stubborn prophet who became wicked?
I find the strongest evidence for the biblical narrative is: the old testament was copied from Babylonian stories like the epic of gilgamesh and new testament from Greek mythology.
The first documented evidence of the Shroud dates back to 1357, when it surfaced at a church at Lirey, near the eastern French town of Troyes. In 1390, Pope Clement VII declared that it was not the true shroud but could be used as a representation of it, provided the faithful be told that it was not genuine.
I am a Christian and I don’t see how it could be authentic or relevant to my faith. People of the middle ages were known to have “created” many relics. I consider the shroud to be as irrelevant as I do with “weeping” statues of Mary etc. it may seem skeptical to some believers but just remember how skeptical Thomas was, he was chosen for a reason. However I am also not heavy-handed with my skepticism and try to allow for the instances of the supernatural. Peace ❤️🙏✝️🙏❤️
The Nicene Creed is most definitely from the Council of Nicea. There were many creeds and gospels in early Christianity usually varying regionally or bishop to bishop. The Council of Nicea was called for the very specific purpose of resolving these disputes and henceforth brought out the new creed, a synthesis of earlier ones.
The sad tragedy is that so many of the scholars referred to by Gary stopped short of saving faith in the deity, death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ... They must have somehow disconnected their heads from their hearts...
UA-cam asked if this video "has been recommended too much" .... like what? The video isn't even old. Please be more transparent about your obvious bias.
The first documented evidence of the Shroud dates back to 1357, when it surfaced at a church at Lirey, near the eastern French town of Troyes. In 1390, Pope Clement VII declared that it was not the true shroud but could be used as a representation of it, provided the faithful be told that it was not genuine.
Man...I hate to be critical but Gary rabbit trails so much that the nuggets of information are almost lost. Are there any distilled presentations without all the incoherence?
@@James-ll3jb Sad that this is so difficult for you. Arguing about the claims made by fictional characters (as in the Bible and Star Wars) is pointless, given that those characters ARE fictional. Go back to playing with ur own sht in the corner while U mull that over. Cvntface.
Paul did not immediately go to see the "apostles" after his so-called vision of Jesus. Paul did not write all the letters. The reference to Jesus in Josephus was a later interpolation. Paul was a real piece of work.
But his writings match those of the other apostles. He is recorded to have persecuted the same christians he later preached to..and openly admits his earlier shortcomings. If they were making this stuff up Paul would be a perfect Christian from day 1....not on day 2000 after killing and imprisoning a bunch of christians.
The bible shows that James (Jesus' brother) converted to believer status around Pentecost in 33 A.D. (maybe a month before that). Although considered an apostle, we don't have any record that he performed any miracles. Paul complained to the Corinthians about fake apostles who didn't perform any "signs of an apostle". I think James was accepted as an apostle because he was another one of Mary's boys and not because his apostleship was legitimate. What did Paul write in Hebrews? "How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him." According to the Apostle John, James didn't believe in Jesus during Jesus earthly ministry. (See John 7:5) So, James wasn't chosen because he was among the disciples of Christ before His crucifixion (as was Matthias (see Acts 1:21-23)) and he didn't perform any miracles after he believed. Religion is politics. James rode the coattails of his high profile Brother to one of the top positions in the first century church. And Paul identifies him as a rabid Judaizer. (See Gal. 2:12) "Beware the leaven of the Pharisees", Jesus warned. Imagine the political pressure on the Jerusalem church, which was LOADED with Levitical priests and Judaizer Pharisees. (See the Book of Acts)
@@ji8044 - Well sure. His comrades finally "offed" him but not after his betrayal of the Apostle Paul. Read Acts 20 thru the end of the book. Luke kind of sugar coats the events but conspicuous by its absence is James' defense of Paul as they were dragging him away to prison. James was very influential in that church but nobody said, "Peep", from the church leadership when they were making these accusations against Paul. Why? Paul cooled his heels in prison for YEARS before they shipped him off to Rome to stand trial. You mean to tell me that James couldn't have used his influence to say, "Wait a minute, what those random Asian Jews [Acts 21:27] were saying about Paul is not true!" But no defense of their "brother" (Acts 21:20) was made - that we know about. No, it looks to me like a setup. James talked Paul into a 7-day vow (when his Brother Jesus said, "Swear not at all"), which gave them time to line up these random Asian Jews to hurl accusations against Paul. The Jerusalem church was a defacto sect of Judaism. James and the Pharisaic leadership of the Jerusalem church were buddy-buddy. You mean to tell me that they didn't have enough pull to stop Paul from being dragged away? I was born _AT_ night but I wasn't born _LAST_ night. That whole situation STINKS. They hated Paul and they had an opportunity to get rid of him, so they did. James was to Paul as Judas was to Jesus. Years later, James was himself murdered by these same people, as Josephus (et. al.) records.
@@GizmoFromPizmo That is all fiction on your part. There's nothing wrong with creating your own scenario, but it has no historical basis in the books which are left to us.
@@ji8044 - Well, the scenario is right there in front of us in the Acts of the Apostles. That's a book, which was left to us. My views are not the same pablum you're likely to hear from your typical preacher at church. They've been trained to believe that there was complete harmony among the apostles in the first century. No honest reading of the Book of Galatians will lead you to that conclusion. The Jerusalem church was sending out missionaries to undo everything Paul was doing.
Can anyone tell me what word Gary Habermas used at about 6:47 about what the atheist did not want to discuss? I played it several times, and even went to the transcript, which didn't do a very good job of transcribing the word. Thanks!
I love Gary Habermas but I'm really confused by one thing he stated. He said the "the close of New Testament cannon in 100 AD". I'm wondering what he meant by that because the earliest list of the canon comes from the Muratorian fragment which dates from 170 - 200 AD according to Wikipedia (I know not the best source). So is he saying simply that we know that Revelation was written before 100 A.D. i.e. most scholars put it beeing written in the 90's A.D. or is he saying something more like we have evidence of an earlier canon list from prior to the Muratorian fragment? If someone can help me out on this please I would be very appreciative.
Where does your Authority come from Gary, because clearly it does not come from Jesus, for it to do so would make Jesus contradict Himself. Jesus gave to the Apostles the Authority to preach & teach the truth. Does Authority, therefore, matter to be able to preach & teach the truth, and to ensure that it continues, that the preaching and teaching is done correctly should not that Authority be passed on, by those who had/have the Authority to preach and teach the truth, or can anyone preach & teach, whatever they like without that Authority??? Would anyone allow someone to teach their children if that person has no authority to teach children??? Why is this so difficult to understand. This can and does exist today with only one Church and that is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, Authority therefore can not be given to others for the simple reason that there will be conflict, as to who has Authority and who does not. This understanding is obvious in scripture. Jesus who has Supreme Authority, gave to Peter Authority to bind and lose Matthew 16 vrs 15 - 19. This is why Protestants, Anglicans, and Non-denominationals have no Authority. They are counterfeit Christians, a contradiction to Christianity, total frauds.
Clement's "important information" includes his support for the Levitical priesthood and the story about the Phoenix Bird. I'm not a fan. Clement was overstepping his authority as an elder. An elder of one congregation has ZERO authority over another congregation. We don't know why the Corinthian church expelled all their elders. We know that proto-catholicism had been brewing for decades. What if the elders of the church at Corinth were conspiring with Clement and the Roman church to unite under a single eldership? Was the Roman church gobbling up independent congregations as far back as the late first century? Who can know? Those records wouldn't survive the Roman takeover anyway. We know that Rome was doing her serpenty best to destroy the church of God and we see how successful she was. For all we know, Clement may have been part of that takeover.
“Time out, what about NDE’s, you know what he said, I don’t want to discuss NDE’s”, Gary’s recollection of these conversations are hilariously false. I can only hope the Gospel writers recollection are better than Gary’s. What Gary’s false memories demonstrate is how easily the most scholarly and well meaning people can misremember things from 20 years ago yet alone 50-90.
But there are multiple gospels with no contradiction, not even with other historical writings and not even with nonchrist-following historians. Theres no evidence that these sources are inaccurate.
@horridhenry9920 What specific evidence(or argument) do you find compelling? I've read about so many supposed archaeological discoveries that prove the Bible false. Only to find later there was something wrong with the initial dating or another aspect they did not consider. People claimed the pool of Bethesda never existed but we found it in the 1950’s. "It was improbable there were Pharisees and a Synagogue in 70 AD" (because all of them would have fled to Galilee). We excavated a synagogue in the 19th century. People said the town Nazareth didn’t exist and in 2009, we found the remains of a house in Nazareth. People doubted the reliable transmission of the Bible-then we find the Dead Sea Scrolls showing the OT has not been changed in over 2000 years etc...
Forgive mistakes ...I am french After all... To me, one thé biggest arguments in favour of thé résurrection, is that all the apostles ( except John) died for preaching thé résurrection. You could not have fooled them. Théy had Seen him die. Théy were absolutely convinced that Jésus Rose from the dead. Théy would not have died to support défend a lie.
Paul did not consult with the apostles on the Resurrection. He quite literally says the exact opposite in his letters. "Am I now seeking the approval of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ. For I certify to you, brothers, that the gospel I preached was not devised by man. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ: Galatians 1:10-11
Galatians 2 2 Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain. 6 As for those who were held in high esteem-whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism-they added nothing to my message. 7 On the contrary, they recognized that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised,[a] just as Peter had been to the circumcised.[b] 8 For God, who was at work in Peter as an apostle to the circumcised, was also at work in me as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9 James, Cephas[c] and John, those esteemed as pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me.
@@voiceofreason162 You have not refuted what I wrote but supported it actually. Paul always and everywhere maintained his gospel was unique and came directly from Jesus. Second Galatians backs that up "As for those who were held in high esteem-whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism-they added nothing to my message." How much more plain refutation of what Habermas said can you get than that passage, they added nothing to my message?
@ji8044 Your problem is worse. Paul went to Arabia beyond Moab is modern day Saudi Arabia. And came back with a Gospel identical to that held by James, his half-brother, Peter, his leader, and they matched to the point no alterations were required. That was known by Paul at Stephen's stoning AD 34. Paul knew what they believed THEN because Acts reports Paul held the cloaks while they stoned him. The point? He didn't alter it. The deity, death and resurrection were firm planks agreed by ALL.
@@voiceofreason162 Every sentence there is false. Paul considered James his enemy. Even in the NT James makes Paul sacrifice to prove he is still a Jew. Up to his death in 62 AD, James was still 100% Jewish, which is why he struggled against the Temple leadership, as Jesus himself did. No idea what NT you are reading because most of what you write is made up. Paul never went anywhere near Saudi Arabia, which at the time was outside the Roman Empire. Biblical Arabia is NOT modern Saudi Arabia. Moab is in modern Jordan. Please stop replying to me, because what you write is embarrassing.
@ji8044 Acts 21:17-21 says your misrepresentation of James's relationship with Paul is wrong. Paul was NEVER forced to make a sacrifice to prove himself. Mt Sinai is in Arabia, south of Moab, per the ARCHAEOLOGICAL evidence you're basically ignoring, and your ability to twist Scripture is noted. Paul did consult and these are Scriptures you omit while stressing nonexistent Scriptures without references. Basically, you've wasted my time. That stops now. Remain deluded; you're choice. Bye.
The only people who say Jesus appeared to the apostles in the flesh after the Resurrection are Paul who wasn't there and probably didn't even know who Jesus was at the time, and Luke who may not have even been born yet. The only eyewitness testimony to the risen Jesus is Paul. On the other hand we have epistles from Peter, James, and the other brothers of Jesus in which they never mention seeing what would have been the greatest event in the history of humanity.
Later He appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen. (Mark 16:14) Mark was written first off eyewitness accounts from Peter. So they rose up that very hour and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven and those who were with them gathered together, saying, “The Lord is risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon!” And they told about the things that had happened on the road, and how He was known to them in the breaking of bread. Now as they said these things, Jesus Himself stood in the midst of them, and said to them, “Peace to you.” But they were terrified and frightened, and supposed they had seen a spirit. (Luke 24:33-37) Then, the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them, “Peace be with you.” When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. (John 20:19-20) Luke is a defence document compiled from multiple eyewitness sources, and from Mark. Following His Resurrection from the dead, Jesus made a number of appearances to his followers-no less than ten of these are recorded in Scripture. Beginning on Resurrection Sunday, He “showed himself alive . . . by many infallible proofs” (Acts 1:3, KJV) and instructed His apostles and many other followers periodically for forty days. He then ascended from Mount Olivet, near Jerusalem, while the apostles watched (Acts 1:9-12). To sort out the verses in question, we need to examine several appearances in terms of when and where they occurred and who witnessed them. And the woman Paul called "his mother in Christ" who stayed with him in Ephesus and Rome was the widow of two sons, Rufus and Alexander, and her husband was called Simon, a Saducee priest related to Caiphas as uncle, the man who carried Jesus's cross. Making Paul fully conversant with the facts of his death and resurrection even without a Damascus road encounter.
@@voiceofreason162 Those remarks are not historically credible, sorry. We have the actual epistles of Peter, or purported to be from Peter in which he never mentions seeing Jesus in the flesh. Mark is definitely not from Peter. Luke was a Gentile writing probably 40-50 years after the Resurrection. He was a follower of Paul and would not have known any of the disciples personally. His made up nativity narrative is proof that much of his work is pure fiction.
Below are Scriptural proofs that I've compiled over the years: The NT Gospels - Evidence of Author's & Dates Written: Matthew - A tax collector who became Jesus' apostle and wrote about the life of Jesus as the Messiah of the Jewish community c. 54 to 60 AD. Mark - A Jew, and a companion of Peter and Paul, who wrote for both Jews and Gentiles about Christ's death and resurrection c. 46 to 54 AD. Luke - A Gentile doctor, a companion of Peter and Paul who wrote for the Gentiles about Christ the Savior of mankind. c. 54 to 60 AD. Luke - also wrote the Acts of the Apostles c. 60 AD. John - The 'beloved' apostle of Jesus, wrote in his later years about the Word who took on Flesh (John 1:1,14) c. 80-90 AD. John - also wrote 3 Letters and The Book of Revelation c. 80-95 AD. James- Jesus' half-brother, wrote 1 letter c.35 AD. Paul - wrote 13 letters c.49 - 65 AD. Jude - wrote 1 letter c. 65 AD. Peter - wrote 2 letters c. 67 AD. The author of Hebrews is unknown c. 65 AD. Jesus Christ's' ministry began between the dates of 27-30AD with 30-33AD for His Crucifixion, well attested facts even by secular historians. Christianity began after the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus Christ when thousands of Jews became followers of the 'Way', (Jesus). The New Testament scholar, F.F. Bruce, gives strong historical evidence that the New Testament was completed by A.D. 100.
The apostles and their companions wrote the New Testament from their first-hand experiences with Jesus the Christ, (Messiah). New Testament integrity is supported by historians, biblical and textual scholars, along with thousands of early codices, manuscripts and the Dead Sea Scrolls, proving the validity and preservation of the Gospels written between c. 35-90 A.D (Eusebius, Church History 111. 39 .15; Irenaeus Against Heresies, 111.1) Internal Evidence: The internal evidence supports these early dates for several reasons. The first three Gospels prophesied the fall of the Jerusalem Temple which occurred in A.D. 70. However, the fulfillment is not mentioned in them. It is strange that these three Gospels predict this major event but don't record it happening. Why didn't they mention such an important prophetic milestone? The most plausible explanation is that it hadn't yet occurred at the time Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts and the majority of the New Testament was written. In the book of Acts, the Temple plays a central role in the nation of Israel. Luke writes as if the Temple is an important part of Jewish life. He also ends Acts on a strange note: Paul living under house arrest. It is strange that Luke does not record the death of his two chief characters, Peter and Paul. The most plausible reason for this is that Luke finished writing Acts before Peter and Paul's martyrdom in A.D. 64. A significant point to highlight is that the Gospel of Luke precedes Acts, further supporting the traditional dating of c. A.D. 54 to 60. Most scholars agree Mark precedes Luke, making Mark's Gospel even earlier. Finally, the majority of New Testament scholars believe that Paul's epistles were written from A.D. 48-60. Paul's outline of the life of Jesus matches that of the Gospels. 1st Corinthians is one of the least disputed books regarding its dating and Pauline authorship. In 1st Corinthians chapter 15, Paul summarizes the gospel and reinforces the premise that this is the same gospel preached by the apostles. Paul quotes from Luke's Gospel in 1 Timothy 5:18, showing us that Luke's Gospel was indeed completed in Paul's lifetime. This would move the time of the completion of Luke's Gospel along with Mark and Matthew. This Internal Evidence presents a strong case for the early dating of the Gospels. External Evidence - Gospel Dates: Were the Gospels written by eyewitnesses of the events, or were they not recorded until centuries later? As with the internal evidence, the external evidence also supports a first century date. Fortunately, New Testament scholars have an enormous amount of ancient manuscript evidence, 24,300+. The documentary evidence for the New Testament far surpasses any other work of its time, with 5,860+ Koine Greek, (Aramaic), manuscripts, many are dated within a few years of their authors' lives. Key documents: Chester Beatty Papyri contains most of the N.T. writings, and is dated around A.D. 250. The Bodmer Papyri contains most of John, and dates to A.D. 200. Rylands Papyri that was found in Egypt and contains large fragments of John, and dates to A.D. 130. From these fragments we can conclude that John was completed well before A.D. 130 because, not only did the gospel have to be written, it had to be hand copied and make its way down from Greece to Egypt. The majority of scholars agree that John is the last gospel written, so we can affirm its first century date along with the other three with greater assurance. Dead Sea Scrolls, the Text of Isaiah, especially Isa:53, and a portion of every OT book except Ester, c. 250 BC. Old Testament Greek Septuagint c. 200 BC. Early New Testament Papyrus Manuscripts: P52 (John Rylands Fragment) - John 18:31-33; 37-38 c. 96 AD P90 (Oxyrhynchus) - John 18:36; 19:7 c. 96 AD P104 (Oxyrhynchus) - Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45 c. 60-65 AD P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus) - Romans 5:17-6; 5-14; 8:15-25; 27-35; 10:1-11, 22, 24-33, 35; 16:1-23; 25-27, and Hebrews; 1 & 2; Corinthians; Ephesians; Galatians; Philippians; Colossians; 1 Thessalonians 1:1, 9-10; 2:1-3; 5:5-9, 23-28 c. 50’s-70’s AD P98 (IFAO) - Revelation 1:13; 2:1 c. 90 AD P66 (Bodmer Papyrus) - John 1:1-6,11; 6:35; 14:26; fragment of 14:29; 21:9 c. 100 - 150 AD P67 Matthew 3:9, 15; 5:20-22; 25-28 c. 60-65 AD Jose Callahan discovered in Qumran Cave 7 a fragment of the Gospel of Mark and dated it to have been written in A.D. 50. Also fragments of Acts and other epistles and dated them to have been written slightly after A.D. 54 Another line of evidence is the writings of the church fathers: CLEMENT of Rome sent a letter to the Corinthian church in A.D. 95. in which he quoted from the Gospels and other portions of the N.T. IGNATIUS, Bishop of Antioch, wrote a letter before his martyrdom in Rome in A.D. 115, quoting all the Gospels and other N.T. letters. POLYCARP wrote to the Philippians in A.D. 120 and quoted from the Gospels and N.T. letters. JUSTIN MARTYR, A.D. 150 quotes John 3. Church fathers of the early second century were familiar with the apostle's writings and quoted them as inspired Scripture. Early dating is important for two reasons. The closer a historical record is to the date of the event, the more likely the record is accurate. Early dating allows for eyewitnesses to still be alive when the Gospels were circulating to attest to their accuracy. The apostles often appeal to the witness of the hostile crowd, pointing to their knowledge of the facts, (Acts 2:22, 26:26). Also, the time is too short for legends to develop. Historians agree it takes at least two generations, or eighty+ years, for legendary accounts to establish themselves. From the evidence, we can conclude the Gospels were indeed written by the authors they are attributed to. The First Fully Bound Bible Books/Codices: Codex Vaticanus: Origin 1st century M/S - first Codex, 280 - 330 AD Codex Siniaticus: Origin 1st century M/S - first Codex, 300 - 350 AD Codex Alexandrius: Origin 1st century M/S - first Codex, 350 - 400 AD Codex Vulgate: Origin 1st century M/S - first Codex, 380 - 400 AD Jesus and the Jews were multilingual: Pilate had a placard prepared in 3 languages and fastened to the cross, we get the full missive from 3 of the Gospels having portions of the whole. It read: 'JESUS Of NAZARETH, THE KING Of THE JEWS'. Many of the Jews read this sign, the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city gate, and the sign was written in Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin/Greek, (John 19:19-20). The Gospels were written in Koine Greek being the World's language in the 1st century. The Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek (Septuagint) c.200 BC for the many Greek speaking Jews. It is well known that first-century Jerusalem was inhabited by Greek speaking Jews who were at least bilingual. Jesus Himself was at least trilingual apart from His miraculous gifts. The original Gospels, autographs, were written in Koine Greek and sent throughout the then known world.. Jewish culture was heavily influenced by Hellenistic culture, and Koine Greek was used not only for international communication but also as the first language of many Jews. This development was furthered by the fact that the largest Jewish community in the world at that time lived in Ptolemaic Alexandria. GOD Protects His Sacred Words: "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed". "As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed". (Galatians 1:8-9). Jesus said, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matt 24:35). God protects His Word & Gospels and warns of antichrists. (1 Jhn 2:22). Christ's Good News of Salvation, His Deity, Death and Resurrection haven't changed for over 2000 years. The Gospels are evidenced by internal and external historical, archeological & literary facts. The Gospels are reliable and transparent with any variations in translations referenced in the footnotes. The Gospels have 1000 times more manuscripts than the most documented ancient literature, (Greco-Roman historian Suetonius). The Bible is the most comprehensive and reliable source of 1st century Jerusalem history and being used by archaeologists to support research today. Hallelujah ! Num 6:24-26
@ji8044 I've spent 42 years investigating that credibility. Ignoring it and rewriting one of your own based on a reimagination doesn't cut it. I checked your channel. Closed. And no-one listens to you, which doesn't surprise me. Enough said.
@@PreacherwithoutaPulpit You wasted your time, because all you did was cut and paste the NT. For instance none of the gospels were written by anyone who knew Jesus. Mark was definitely not a Jew and neither was Luke of course. "Jose Callahan discovered in Qumran Cave 7 a fragment of the Gospel of Mark and dated it to have been written in A.D. 50. Also fragments of Acts and other epistles and dated them to have been written slightly after A.D. 54 " This is entirely false and accepted by absolutely no one. It's completely fraudulent.
There's no evidence that these accounts are false. No contradictions with other historical sources not even with nonchrist-following historians. Not with archaeology or anything else.
If we use your same logic and apply it to all of history...we can't believe anything. We have far more evidence of the reliability of the Bible compared to every other ancient text. Are you arguing for the lack of proof of Alexander the Great or Plato? There is no evidence that disproves the historicity and reliability of the Bible. Everything we've dug up in archaeology aligns with it, even after 2000+ years.
The Bible states that Jesus was followed by scribes and was famous throughout the Levant. He was said to have literally thousands of followers and was notorious to the authorities. The Romans kept copious records about everything, hundreds of thousands of mundane notes and tax receipts survive from the time. And yet not one contemporaneous word about the most extraordinary Jesus, the biggest star of the land, from either the Jews OR the Romans. Obviously it's a hoax that was invented much later. 'And he went throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom among the people. HIS FAME spread throughout all Syria, and they brought him those oppressed by demons,and he healed them. And great crowds followed him from Jerusalem and Judea, and from beyond the Jordan.' Matt 4 23 - 25. Yet not a WORD written about him ... until he was retroactively invented in the late first century.
You need to read the modern day book “Cold Case Christianity” by. J.w. Wallace. He is a former cold case detective who studied whether or not the gospels were “manufactured” or true. I subscribe to the latter despite your given reasons for doubt. Your position isn’t new, but Jesus is clearly a historical person as noted by Josephus and Tacitus.
@@dawood121derful Wallace is an absolute fraud. The Josephus passages are known forgeries by Eusebius. Even Christian scholars admit this. I cannot believe apologists STILL think the Josephus fraud has any credibility. Your religion is a pernicious lie concocted by Roman authorities. The gospels of Thomas and Mary Magdalene are apocryphal forgeries. Pliny the Younger, a Roman governor writing circa 110 CE, called Christianity a 'superstition taken to extravagant lengths'. Similarly, the Roman historian Tacitus called it 'a deadly superstition' in 116AD, and the historian Suetonius called Christians 'a class of persons given to a new and mischievous superstition'. And yet apologists point to these authors as the best 'proof' of Jesus... it's both funny AND sad, really.
@@wraves693 That's not what a straw man is, but yes, it's very easy to debunk your childish fantasies: God isn't real because magic isn't real. Also, Judeo-Christianity is insane and paradoxical, and can in no way be true or correct. Done. Oh, but if you DO have evidence for your lurid beliefs that nobody has ever seen, please do present it here.
This shtick has become soooooooooo tiresome. The most that can be shown by the evidence is that soon after Jesus' death his followers claimed that he had risen from the dead. This obviously is a light year away from demonstrating that a resurrection actually occurred. I suspect that the good dr. believes that if he writes and talks long enough about how early the claim of resurrection was, our minds will gloss over the difference between a claim and a fact.
What would it take you to believe that Jesus truly did rise from the dead, and if you knew it was true, would you become a follower of Christ? Praying for you!
I've been an ordained minister for some fifty years and love God and Jesus with all my heart and soul and mind. But it's that last thing, my mind, which feels compelled by the Holy Spirit to call out false arguments which should never be used to preach the Gospel. They damage it, not promote it.
Why would those followers make up a claim that they later died defending? Psychologists state that 500 people cant have the same hallucination of a risen Jesus. So then they all got hoodwinked by a pretender into thinking it was the same man they had followed daily for the past few years of their life. You dont make sense mate. Why would unbelievers convert? Such as Jesus' own step brother James (who called him crazy earlier) or Paul who used to kill and imprison christians with a passion!
@@MegaChickpeas Simple. The followers didn't exist either. The entire story was invented by third parties many, many decades later. 500 eyewitnesses?? What were their names? Were they interviewed and does anyone have the records?? Your 'argument' is the equivalent of 'Why would Darth Vader claim to be Luke's father if it wasn't true?'
Bart Ehrman would NOT agree with your examples that you provide from his scholarship; there is a slight-of-hand here. You should debate this. My money is on Dr. Ehrman!
Man, I SO love the idea of you losing your money on this bet! But it saddens me that you’re clearly also gambling your destiny on Dr. Errorman. Keep exploring…
@@CelticSpiritsCoven Fart Errorman is an academic sellout. I know I’m not being respectful but he’s had many examples of deliberate deception: the “variants” is one example… over 99% have NO relevance to theology whatsoever but he makes it sound like they mean “unreliable”… and HE KNOWS BETTER.
If everyone will be judged and give an account including babies that's 100 billion people.And everyone thinks they'll be center stage to see Jesus as they give an account.including things no one else knowe about.Then they live where? Work where? Communucate with other unregistered people ? No money to buy anything And live to infinity without dying?! Yikes!!
@@rogersacco4624 Age of accountability. You aren't very studied on this subject. God gives life to billions of people, but he is a moral monster for judging people who commit genocide for centuries? You should stop posting and start studying. We receive no advancement from people like you who haven't even read the book.
@@johnadams3673 From "Forged" by Bart Ehrman: “One of the striking and to many people, surprising facts about the first century is that we don't have any Roman records, of any kind, that attest to the existence of Jesus. We have no birth certificate, no references to his works or deeds, no accounts of his trial, no description of his death - no reference to him whatsoever in any way, shape, or form. Jesus's name is not even mentioned in any Roman source of the first century.”
@@dawood121derful *What is the opinion on J. Warner Wallace's "Cold-Case Christianity"?* 'I found it to be ridiculous and dishonest. I say dishonest because he claimed to have arrived at the conclusion Jesus rose from the dead using the same techniques and methodology that he used as a cold case investigator. He proceeds to uncritically accept things as facts based on evidence that would never be considered in an actual criminal investigation. Either he was completely incompetent as an investigator (and I have no reason to think he was) or he is being dishonest. For example, he treats the Gospels as the equivalent of eye witness evidence in a criminal case. Imagine a criminal prosecutor producing an anonymous letter, written decades after the event, that copies from previous writings about the event, and saying "we have here good eye witness testimony." If you want to accept that, ok that's your opinion. But then don't pretend you are using the same rigorous standards that would be required of an investigator to prove something in a court of law.' JLord
Why do you say that when there is evidence of him in the early first century and the entire Christian movement/church was underway by the mid and late first century?
Well. Go back 33yrs from 33AD. April 3rd. There was a partial eclipse at 3pm right when Jesus died. They also think April 3rd because of the Tiberias Ceasar issue. I should add NASA says this regarding the eclipse, not me..
Thank you God in Jesus’ name for Gary Habermas ❤
Thank You Dr. Habermas for all that you contribute to our knowledge of the Resurrection. God Bless.
Always such a powerful blessing to watch and listen to Gary Habermas. I am so grateful for these presentations with Gary Habermas that presents such powerful videos with biblical facts about our Lord Jesus Christ. Thank you sir. !!
Habermas has an encyclopaedic knowledge on Jesus’s resurrection. His work is phenomenal 🙏🏻
🙏🏽God bless you, strengthen you, and protect you, @Gary Habermas, and your family💖in the Name of Jesus✨
World leading work from the number one scholar on Jesus and the Resurrection! Thanks Gary!
Are you serious?
@@jasonleslie4349 What do you know about this subject?
@@jasonleslie4349yes
@@jasonleslie4349 He is correct, and appropriate. He was also simple and clear. What part of this is confusing to you? What’s your point?
@mkl2237 Are u serious too? Gary is famous for lying He says he debated 2 well known atheists why do u think he doesn't mention there names?He always generalises so u can't fact check him .Do u not this?
Good Man Professor Habermas, just revealing what we already knew but gives us extended truth and is a good way for Agnostics to watch and learn how we deepen our FAITH much appreciated Professor my 27 yr old Son actually introduced me to you and others ( Steven Myers ) among others
Its a very encouraging lecture. Thankful for your work.
We are all in your debt, sir-thanks for all your work!
Was that for Jesus?
Gary Habermas
Thanks for all the work you have done Gary. God bless you. I’m speaking it into existence. We will meet in heaven. God bless
Thank you for your scholarship 💜
Badass Habermas is a LEGEND and a BLESSING to the world! 💪🏼 😎 📚
🏆 ✝️ ✡️ ❤️ 💙 🤍 🩵 🏒 🥅
@@siludanji4560 Gi for it: ______?????
I am highly skeptical of your claim. I bet you are not even educated in this arena… and I bet you are just a UA-cam commenter (which means nothing)… that you have no proof… and odds are high that you’re just a Dawa Wannabe who will cite a text that proves nothing
But I’ll entertain ya…. I believe in free speech even for people who don’t know what they’re talking about.
So: ________????
ALL by 36ad! That’s powerful! 🌌🍃🕊️
These advertisements by UA-cam are killing me, it’s worse than TV!!!! As soon as I start getting into the lecture another 3 minute advert comes up. This needs to stop!!!!😡😡😡😡
Why don't you get a family membership at YT... Presto! You and your family will no longer get ads!
Just pay the jizya 😂
God bless you dear Dr. Habermas. Glory to the LORD!
He’s not a doctor. He’s a fraud.
God bless you. 🙏🏻❤️✝️
In the bigger picture, I find the strongest evidence for the Biblical narrative/world view is simply … all of it: evidence taken from any and all domains-no holds barred-is absolutely overwhelmingly supportive of the Biblical world, the real world, the world (physical and spiritual) in which EVERYBODY lives, whether they believe it or not, whether they like it or not.
Yup. when someone says there is no evidence for God I think at that point we need to have a discussion about what constitutes evidence.
So we should all believe in talking snakes and donkeys?
@@kevinkelly2162 Revelation makes clear the serpent was the devil. Either the devil himself, or he inhabited the serpent.
The donkey that spoke to Balaam? Well, apparently, you'd like a God who isn't sovereign over His creation and can't do miracles. Of course, that being wouldn't be a god.
God created and encoded the DNA that is in all life. And it is encoded with digital information. So what's the big deal if He wanted a donkey to speak to a stubborn prophet who became wicked?
@@scottb4579😂 its exactly human gullibility like this that refutes theism.
I find the strongest evidence for the biblical narrative is: the old testament was copied from Babylonian stories like the epic of gilgamesh and new testament from Greek mythology.
Comments are open? Dang! I think this is the first time I've seen comments open on a Gary Habermas video!
Jesus saves
The first documented evidence of the Shroud dates back to 1357, when it surfaced at a church at Lirey, near the eastern French town of Troyes. In 1390, Pope Clement VII declared that it was not the true shroud but could be used as a representation of it, provided the faithful be told that it was not genuine.
I am a Christian and I don’t see how it could be authentic or relevant to my faith. People of the middle ages were known to have “created” many relics. I consider the shroud to be as irrelevant as I do with “weeping” statues of Mary etc. it may seem skeptical to some believers but just remember how skeptical Thomas was, he was chosen for a reason. However I am also not heavy-handed with my skepticism and try to allow for the instances of the supernatural.
Peace ❤️🙏✝️🙏❤️
Years later and you are still teaching me. Thanks Doc.
The Nicene Creed is most definitely from the Council of Nicea. There were many creeds and gospels in early Christianity usually varying regionally or bishop to bishop. The Council of Nicea was called for the very specific purpose of resolving these disputes and henceforth brought out the new creed, a synthesis of earlier ones.
At 34:33 is he talking about Heiser as in Michael S Heiser?
Yep, probably.
Gary are you of the Orthodox tradition? Thank you for your work! God bless.
He's Baptist.
The sad tragedy is that so many of the scholars referred to by Gary stopped short of saving faith in the deity, death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ... They must have somehow disconnected their heads from their hearts...
Gary, Why do we believe at Cephas is Peter? Is this provable in scripture?
UA-cam asked if this video "has been recommended too much" .... like what? The video isn't even old. Please be more transparent about your obvious bias.
Hey Gary.
I Am a student with Liberty University.
I Am asking you to create a course on The Shroud of Turin.
Please
The first documented evidence of the Shroud dates back to 1357, when it surfaced at a church at Lirey, near the eastern French town of Troyes. In 1390, Pope Clement VII declared that it was not the true shroud but could be used as a representation of it, provided the faithful be told that it was not genuine.
The shroud is fake, goes against the ways and works of God to leave an image of himself.
@@emielvanderwel5200 Sorry, but you're way wrong.
It’s a forgery .
@@MartTLS The Lord does not leave images of himself, of course it’s a forgery or demonically made
Man...I hate to be critical but Gary rabbit trails so much that the nuggets of information are almost lost. Are there any distilled presentations without all the incoherence?
Buy some of his books.
Your 'arguments' are equivalent to 'Why would Darth Vader claim to be Luke's father if it wasn't true?'
Bad analogy....
@@James-ll3jb No, it's a perfect analogy. U cvnt.
@@DocReasonable lmao! Oh do explain how and why! It sounds like bad Bob Hope lol.
@@James-ll3jb Sad that this is so difficult for you. Arguing about the claims made by fictional characters (as in the Bible and Star Wars) is pointless, given that those characters ARE fictional. Go back to playing with ur own sht in the corner while U mull that over. Cvntface.
...bad Bob Hope! Oh, thats a good one. Such a bad comice@James-ll3jb
What supernatural world is he talking about when the atheist said he didn't want to talk about it? INDE'S?
NDEs, near death experiences…
@@dawood121derful Thanks.
If the person didn’t die how is it a near death experience?
Paul did not immediately go to see the "apostles" after his so-called vision of Jesus. Paul did not write all the letters. The reference to Jesus in Josephus was a later interpolation. Paul was a real piece of work.
Paul was a charismatic salesman, as all religious founders are.
But his writings match those of the other apostles. He is recorded to have persecuted the same christians he later preached to..and openly admits his earlier shortcomings. If they were making this stuff up Paul would be a perfect Christian from day 1....not on day 2000 after killing and imprisoning a bunch of christians.
@@MegaChickpeas agreed
The bible shows that James (Jesus' brother) converted to believer status around Pentecost in 33 A.D. (maybe a month before that). Although considered an apostle, we don't have any record that he performed any miracles.
Paul complained to the Corinthians about fake apostles who didn't perform any "signs of an apostle". I think James was accepted as an apostle because he was another one of Mary's boys and not because his apostleship was legitimate.
What did Paul write in Hebrews?
"How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him."
According to the Apostle John, James didn't believe in Jesus during Jesus earthly ministry. (See John 7:5) So, James wasn't chosen because he was among the disciples of Christ before His crucifixion (as was Matthias (see Acts 1:21-23)) and he didn't perform any miracles after he believed.
Religion is politics. James rode the coattails of his high profile Brother to one of the top positions in the first century church. And Paul identifies him as a rabid Judaizer. (See Gal. 2:12) "Beware the leaven of the Pharisees", Jesus warned. Imagine the political pressure on the Jerusalem church, which was LOADED with Levitical priests and Judaizer Pharisees. (See the Book of Acts)
Nope, that is completely false. James died in Jerusalem as the Jewish leader of The Way in 62 AD.
@@ji8044 - Well sure. His comrades finally "offed" him but not after his betrayal of the Apostle Paul. Read Acts 20 thru the end of the book.
Luke kind of sugar coats the events but conspicuous by its absence is James' defense of Paul as they were dragging him away to prison.
James was very influential in that church but nobody said, "Peep", from the church leadership when they were making these accusations against Paul. Why?
Paul cooled his heels in prison for YEARS before they shipped him off to Rome to stand trial. You mean to tell me that James couldn't have used his influence to say, "Wait a minute, what those random Asian Jews [Acts 21:27] were saying about Paul is not true!"
But no defense of their "brother" (Acts 21:20) was made - that we know about.
No, it looks to me like a setup. James talked Paul into a 7-day vow (when his Brother Jesus said, "Swear not at all"), which gave them time to line up these random Asian Jews to hurl accusations against Paul.
The Jerusalem church was a defacto sect of Judaism. James and the Pharisaic leadership of the Jerusalem church were buddy-buddy. You mean to tell me that they didn't have enough pull to stop Paul from being dragged away?
I was born _AT_ night but I wasn't born _LAST_ night. That whole situation STINKS. They hated Paul and they had an opportunity to get rid of him, so they did. James was to Paul as Judas was to Jesus.
Years later, James was himself murdered by these same people, as Josephus (et. al.) records.
@@GizmoFromPizmo That is all fiction on your part. There's nothing wrong with creating your own scenario, but it has no historical basis in the books which are left to us.
@@ji8044 - Well, the scenario is right there in front of us in the Acts of the Apostles. That's a book, which was left to us.
My views are not the same pablum you're likely to hear from your typical preacher at church. They've been trained to believe that there was complete harmony among the apostles in the first century.
No honest reading of the Book of Galatians will lead you to that conclusion. The Jerusalem church was sending out missionaries to undo everything Paul was doing.
@@GizmoFromPizmo Ah, I see where you're going now. I missed it before.
Can anyone tell me what word Gary Habermas used at about 6:47 about what the atheist did not want to discuss? I played it several times, and even went to the transcript, which didn't do a very good job of transcribing the word. Thanks!
NDEs. Abbreviation for Near Death Experiences.
I love Gary Habermas but I'm really confused by one thing he stated. He said the "the close of New Testament cannon in 100 AD". I'm wondering what he meant by that because the earliest list of the canon comes from the Muratorian fragment which dates from 170 - 200 AD according to Wikipedia (I know not the best source). So is he saying simply that we know that Revelation was written before 100 A.D. i.e. most scholars put it beeing written in the 90's A.D. or is he saying something more like we have evidence of an earlier canon list from prior to the Muratorian fragment? If someone can help me out on this please I would be very appreciative.
Where does your Authority come from Gary, because clearly it does not come from Jesus, for it to do so would make Jesus contradict Himself.
Jesus gave to the Apostles the Authority to preach & teach the truth. Does Authority, therefore, matter to be able to preach & teach the truth, and to ensure that it continues, that the preaching and teaching is done correctly should not that Authority be passed on, by those who had/have the Authority to preach and teach the truth, or can anyone preach & teach, whatever they like without that Authority??? Would anyone allow someone to teach their children if that person has no authority to teach children??? Why is this so difficult to understand. This can and does exist today with only one Church and that is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, Authority therefore can not be given to others for the simple reason that there will be conflict, as to who has Authority and who does not. This understanding is obvious in scripture. Jesus who has Supreme Authority, gave to Peter Authority to bind and lose Matthew 16 vrs 15 - 19. This is why Protestants, Anglicans, and Non-denominationals have no Authority. They are counterfeit Christians, a contradiction to Christianity, total frauds.
You will be amazed when The true mashiach comes. The J-man is never returning.
Clement's "important information" includes his support for the Levitical priesthood and the story about the Phoenix Bird. I'm not a fan.
Clement was overstepping his authority as an elder. An elder of one congregation has ZERO authority over another congregation. We don't know why the Corinthian church expelled all their elders. We know that proto-catholicism had been brewing for decades. What if the elders of the church at Corinth were conspiring with Clement and the Roman church to unite under a single eldership?
Was the Roman church gobbling up independent congregations as far back as the late first century? Who can know? Those records wouldn't survive the Roman takeover anyway.
We know that Rome was doing her serpenty best to destroy the church of God and we see how successful she was.
For all we know, Clement may have been part of that takeover.
Nope, the Romans didn't know any difference between Jews and Christians existed before the fall of the Second Temple
“Time out, what about NDE’s, you know what he said, I don’t want to discuss NDE’s”, Gary’s recollection of these conversations are hilariously false. I can only hope the Gospel writers recollection are better than Gary’s. What Gary’s false memories demonstrate is how easily the most scholarly and well meaning people can misremember things from 20 years ago yet alone 50-90.
But there are multiple gospels with no contradiction, not even with other historical writings and not even with nonchrist-following historians. Theres no evidence that these sources are inaccurate.
@@icecoolguita You really need to read the scholarly research on bible contradictions, I think you will find they disagree with you.
@horridhenry9920 What specific evidence(or argument) do you find compelling? I've read about so many supposed archaeological discoveries that prove the Bible false. Only to find later there was something wrong with the initial dating or another aspect they did not consider.
People claimed the pool of Bethesda never existed but we found it in the 1950’s. "It was improbable there were Pharisees and a Synagogue in 70 AD" (because all of them would have fled to Galilee). We excavated a synagogue in the 19th century. People said the town Nazareth didn’t exist and in 2009, we found the remains of a house in Nazareth. People doubted the reliable transmission of the Bible-then we find the Dead Sea Scrolls showing the OT has not been changed in over 2000 years etc...
The only human being born without a birthdate.
Hallelujah!!! I’m favored and blessed with $60,000 every week! Now I can afford anything and also support the work of God and the church.
Oh really? Tell me more!
This is what Melissa Jonas Richard does, she has changed my life.
After raising up to 60k trading with her, I bought a new house and car here in the US and also paid for my son’s (Oscar) surgery. Glory to God.shalom.
I know Melissa Jonas Richard, and I have also had success...
Absolutely! I have heard stories of people who started with little or no knowledge but managed to emerge victorious thanks to Melissa Jonas Richard.
Every 2 min an ad … geez
Time for an ad blocker bro!
Forgive mistakes ...I am french After all...
To me, one thé biggest arguments in favour of thé résurrection, is that all the apostles ( except John) died for preaching thé résurrection. You could not have fooled them. Théy had Seen him die. Théy were absolutely convinced that Jésus Rose from the dead. Théy would not have died to support défend a lie.
Muslims die to defend their lies all the time. Your argument fails.
Paul did not consult with the apostles on the Resurrection. He quite literally says the exact opposite in his letters.
"Am I now seeking the approval of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ. For I certify to you, brothers, that the gospel I preached was not devised by man. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ: Galatians 1:10-11
Galatians 2
2 Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain.
6 As for those who were held in high esteem-whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism-they added nothing to my message. 7 On the contrary, they recognized that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised,[a] just as Peter had been to the circumcised.[b] 8 For God, who was at work in Peter as an apostle to the circumcised, was also at work in me as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9 James, Cephas[c] and John, those esteemed as pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me.
@@voiceofreason162 You have not refuted what I wrote but supported it actually. Paul always and everywhere maintained his gospel was unique and came directly from Jesus. Second Galatians backs that up
"As for those who were held in high esteem-whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism-they added nothing to my message."
How much more plain refutation of what Habermas said can you get than that passage, they added nothing to my message?
@ji8044 Your problem is worse. Paul went to Arabia beyond Moab is modern day Saudi Arabia. And came back with a Gospel identical to that held by James, his half-brother, Peter, his leader, and they matched to the point no alterations were required.
That was known by Paul at Stephen's stoning AD 34. Paul knew what they believed THEN because Acts reports Paul held the cloaks while they stoned him.
The point? He didn't alter it. The deity, death and resurrection were firm planks agreed by ALL.
@@voiceofreason162 Every sentence there is false. Paul considered James his enemy. Even in the NT James makes Paul sacrifice to prove he is still a Jew. Up to his death in 62 AD, James was still 100% Jewish, which is why he struggled against the Temple leadership, as Jesus himself did. No idea what NT you are reading because most of what you write is made up. Paul never went anywhere near Saudi Arabia, which at the time was outside the Roman Empire. Biblical Arabia is NOT modern Saudi Arabia. Moab is in modern Jordan. Please stop replying to me, because what you write is embarrassing.
@ji8044 Acts 21:17-21 says your misrepresentation of James's relationship with Paul is wrong. Paul was NEVER forced to make a sacrifice to prove himself. Mt Sinai is in Arabia, south of Moab, per the ARCHAEOLOGICAL evidence you're basically ignoring, and your ability to twist Scripture is noted. Paul did consult and these are Scriptures you omit while stressing nonexistent Scriptures without references. Basically, you've wasted my time. That stops now. Remain deluded; you're choice. Bye.
The only people who say Jesus appeared to the apostles in the flesh after the Resurrection are Paul who wasn't there and probably didn't even know who Jesus was at the time, and Luke who may not have even been born yet. The only eyewitness testimony to the risen Jesus is Paul. On the other hand we have epistles from Peter, James, and the other brothers of Jesus in which they never mention seeing what would have been the greatest event in the history of humanity.
Later He appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen. (Mark 16:14)
Mark was written first off eyewitness accounts from Peter.
So they rose up that very hour and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven and those who were with them gathered together, saying, “The Lord is risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon!” And they told about the things that had happened on the road, and how He was known to them in the breaking of bread. Now as they said these things, Jesus Himself stood in the midst of them, and said to them, “Peace to you.” But they were terrified and frightened, and supposed they had seen a spirit. (Luke 24:33-37)
Then, the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them, “Peace be with you.” When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. (John 20:19-20)
Luke is a defence document compiled from multiple eyewitness sources, and from Mark.
Following His Resurrection from the dead, Jesus made a number of appearances to his followers-no less than ten of these are recorded in Scripture. Beginning on Resurrection Sunday, He “showed himself alive . . . by many infallible proofs” (Acts 1:3, KJV) and instructed His apostles and many other followers periodically for forty days. He then ascended from Mount Olivet, near Jerusalem, while the apostles watched (Acts 1:9-12). To sort out the verses in question, we need to examine several appearances in terms of when and where they occurred and who witnessed them.
And the woman Paul called "his mother in Christ" who stayed with him in Ephesus and Rome was the widow of two sons, Rufus and Alexander, and her husband was called Simon, a Saducee priest related to Caiphas as uncle, the man who carried Jesus's cross.
Making Paul fully conversant with the facts of his death and resurrection even without a Damascus road encounter.
@@voiceofreason162 Those remarks are not historically credible, sorry. We have the actual epistles of Peter, or purported to be from Peter in which he never mentions seeing Jesus in the flesh. Mark is definitely not from Peter. Luke was a Gentile writing probably 40-50 years after the Resurrection. He was a follower of Paul and would not have known any of the disciples personally. His made up nativity narrative is proof that much of his work is pure fiction.
Below are Scriptural proofs that I've compiled over the years:
The NT Gospels - Evidence of Author's & Dates Written:
Matthew - A tax collector who became Jesus' apostle and wrote about the life of Jesus as the Messiah of the Jewish community c. 54 to 60 AD.
Mark - A Jew, and a companion of Peter and Paul, who wrote for both Jews and Gentiles about Christ's death and resurrection c. 46 to 54 AD.
Luke - A Gentile doctor, a companion of Peter and Paul who wrote for the Gentiles about Christ the Savior of mankind. c. 54 to 60 AD.
Luke - also wrote the Acts of the Apostles c. 60 AD.
John - The 'beloved' apostle of Jesus, wrote in his later years about the Word who took on Flesh (John 1:1,14) c. 80-90 AD.
John - also wrote 3 Letters and The Book of Revelation c. 80-95 AD.
James- Jesus' half-brother, wrote 1 letter c.35 AD.
Paul - wrote 13 letters c.49 - 65 AD.
Jude - wrote 1 letter c. 65 AD.
Peter - wrote 2 letters c. 67 AD.
The author of Hebrews is unknown c. 65 AD.
Jesus Christ's' ministry began between the dates of 27-30AD with 30-33AD for His Crucifixion, well attested facts even by secular historians.
Christianity began after the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus Christ when thousands of Jews became followers of the 'Way', (Jesus).
The New Testament scholar, F.F. Bruce, gives strong historical evidence that the New Testament was completed by A.D. 100.
The apostles and their companions wrote the New Testament from their first-hand experiences with Jesus the Christ, (Messiah).
New Testament integrity is supported by historians, biblical and textual scholars, along with thousands of early codices, manuscripts and the Dead Sea Scrolls, proving the validity and preservation of the Gospels written between c. 35-90 A.D
(Eusebius, Church History 111. 39 .15; Irenaeus Against Heresies, 111.1)
Internal Evidence:
The internal evidence supports these early dates for several reasons. The first three Gospels prophesied the fall of the Jerusalem Temple which occurred in A.D. 70. However, the fulfillment is not mentioned in them. It is strange that these three Gospels predict this major event but don't record it happening. Why didn't they mention such an important prophetic milestone? The most plausible explanation is that it hadn't yet occurred at the time Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts and the majority of the New Testament was written.
In the book of Acts, the Temple plays a central role in the nation of Israel. Luke writes as if the Temple is an important part of Jewish life. He also ends Acts on a strange note: Paul living under house arrest. It is strange that Luke does not record the death of his two chief characters, Peter and Paul. The most plausible reason for this is that Luke finished writing Acts before Peter and Paul's martyrdom in A.D. 64. A significant point to highlight is that the Gospel of Luke precedes Acts, further supporting the traditional dating of c. A.D. 54 to 60.
Most scholars agree Mark precedes Luke, making Mark's Gospel even earlier.
Finally, the majority of New Testament scholars believe that Paul's epistles were written from A.D. 48-60. Paul's outline of the life of Jesus matches that of the Gospels.
1st Corinthians is one of the least disputed books regarding its dating and Pauline authorship.
In 1st Corinthians chapter 15, Paul summarizes the gospel and reinforces the premise that this is the same gospel preached by the apostles.
Paul quotes from Luke's Gospel in 1 Timothy 5:18, showing us that Luke's Gospel was indeed completed in Paul's lifetime. This would move the time of the completion of Luke's Gospel along with Mark and Matthew.
This Internal Evidence presents a strong case for the early dating of the Gospels.
External Evidence - Gospel Dates:
Were the Gospels written by eyewitnesses of the events, or were they not recorded until centuries later?
As with the internal evidence, the external evidence also supports a first century date.
Fortunately, New Testament scholars have an enormous amount of ancient manuscript evidence, 24,300+. The documentary evidence for the New Testament far surpasses any other work of its time, with 5,860+ Koine Greek, (Aramaic), manuscripts, many are dated within a few years of their authors' lives.
Key documents:
Chester Beatty Papyri contains most of the N.T. writings, and is dated around A.D. 250.
The Bodmer Papyri contains most of John, and dates to A.D. 200.
Rylands Papyri that was found in Egypt and contains large fragments of John, and dates to A.D. 130.
From these fragments we can conclude that John was completed well before A.D. 130 because, not only did the gospel have to be written, it had to be hand copied and make its way down from Greece to Egypt. The majority of scholars agree that John is the last gospel written, so we can affirm its first century date along with the other three with greater assurance.
Dead Sea Scrolls, the Text of Isaiah, especially Isa:53, and a portion of every OT book except Ester, c. 250 BC.
Old Testament Greek Septuagint c. 200 BC.
Early New Testament Papyrus Manuscripts:
P52 (John Rylands Fragment) - John 18:31-33; 37-38 c. 96 AD
P90 (Oxyrhynchus) - John 18:36; 19:7 c. 96 AD
P104 (Oxyrhynchus) - Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45 c. 60-65 AD
P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus) - Romans 5:17-6; 5-14; 8:15-25; 27-35; 10:1-11, 22, 24-33, 35; 16:1-23; 25-27, and Hebrews; 1 & 2; Corinthians; Ephesians; Galatians; Philippians; Colossians; 1 Thessalonians 1:1, 9-10; 2:1-3; 5:5-9, 23-28 c. 50’s-70’s AD
P98 (IFAO) - Revelation 1:13; 2:1 c. 90 AD
P66 (Bodmer Papyrus) - John 1:1-6,11; 6:35; 14:26; fragment of 14:29; 21:9 c. 100 - 150 AD
P67 Matthew 3:9, 15; 5:20-22; 25-28 c. 60-65 AD
Jose Callahan discovered in Qumran Cave 7 a fragment of the Gospel of Mark and dated it to have been written in A.D. 50. Also fragments of Acts and other epistles and dated them to have been written slightly after A.D. 54
Another line of evidence is the writings of the church fathers:
CLEMENT of Rome sent a letter to the Corinthian church in A.D. 95. in which he quoted from the Gospels and other portions of the N.T.
IGNATIUS, Bishop of Antioch, wrote a letter before his martyrdom in Rome in A.D. 115, quoting all the Gospels and other N.T. letters.
POLYCARP wrote to the Philippians in A.D. 120 and quoted from the Gospels and N.T. letters.
JUSTIN MARTYR, A.D. 150 quotes John 3.
Church fathers of the early second century were familiar with the apostle's writings and quoted them as inspired Scripture.
Early dating is important for two reasons. The closer a historical record is to the date of the event, the more likely the record is accurate. Early dating allows for eyewitnesses to still be alive when the Gospels were circulating to attest to their accuracy.
The apostles often appeal to the witness of the hostile crowd, pointing to their knowledge of the facts, (Acts 2:22, 26:26).
Also, the time is too short for legends to develop.
Historians agree it takes at least two generations, or eighty+ years, for legendary accounts to establish themselves.
From the evidence, we can conclude the Gospels were indeed written by the authors they are attributed to.
The First Fully Bound Bible Books/Codices:
Codex Vaticanus: Origin 1st century M/S - first Codex, 280 - 330 AD
Codex Siniaticus: Origin 1st century M/S - first Codex, 300 - 350 AD
Codex Alexandrius: Origin 1st century M/S - first Codex, 350 - 400 AD
Codex Vulgate: Origin 1st century M/S - first Codex, 380 - 400 AD
Jesus and the Jews were multilingual:
Pilate had a placard prepared in 3 languages and fastened to the cross, we get the full missive from 3 of the Gospels having portions of the whole.
It read: 'JESUS Of NAZARETH, THE KING Of THE JEWS'.
Many of the Jews read this sign, the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city gate, and the sign was written in Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin/Greek, (John 19:19-20).
The Gospels were written in Koine Greek being the World's language in the 1st century.
The Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek (Septuagint) c.200 BC for the many Greek speaking Jews.
It is well known that first-century Jerusalem was inhabited by Greek speaking Jews who were at least bilingual.
Jesus Himself was at least trilingual apart from His miraculous gifts.
The original Gospels, autographs, were written in Koine Greek and sent throughout the then known world..
Jewish culture was heavily influenced by Hellenistic culture, and Koine Greek was used not only for international communication but also as the first language of many Jews. This development was furthered by the fact that the largest Jewish community in the world at that time lived in Ptolemaic Alexandria.
GOD Protects His Sacred Words:
"But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed".
"As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed". (Galatians 1:8-9).
Jesus said, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matt 24:35).
God protects His Word & Gospels and warns of antichrists. (1 Jhn 2:22).
Christ's Good News of Salvation, His Deity, Death and Resurrection haven't changed for over 2000 years.
The Gospels are evidenced by internal and external historical, archeological & literary facts.
The Gospels are reliable and transparent with any variations in translations referenced in the footnotes.
The Gospels have 1000 times more manuscripts than the most documented ancient literature, (Greco-Roman historian Suetonius).
The Bible is the most comprehensive and reliable source of 1st century Jerusalem history and being used by archaeologists to support research today.
Hallelujah !
Num 6:24-26
@ji8044 I've spent 42 years investigating that credibility. Ignoring it and rewriting one of your own based on a reimagination doesn't cut it. I checked your channel. Closed. And no-one listens to you, which doesn't surprise me. Enough said.
@@PreacherwithoutaPulpit You wasted your time, because all you did was cut and paste the NT. For instance none of the gospels were written by anyone who knew Jesus. Mark was definitely not a Jew and neither was Luke of course.
"Jose Callahan discovered in Qumran Cave 7 a fragment of the Gospel of Mark and dated it to have been written in A.D. 50. Also fragments of Acts and other epistles and dated them to have been written slightly after A.D. 54 "
This is entirely false and accepted by absolutely no one. It's completely fraudulent.
No one has yet been able to demonstrate that the resurrection ever happened or is even possible!!!
Stop being such a lying grifter!!
There's no evidence that these accounts are false. No contradictions with other historical sources not even with nonchrist-following historians. Not with archaeology or anything else.
Try actually looking at "The Shroud of Turin." Before making ridiculous, unfounded claims!
Pot, kettle, black…
@@dawood121derful I have not lied
If we use your same logic and apply it to all of history...we can't believe anything. We have far more evidence of the reliability of the Bible compared to every other ancient text. Are you arguing for the lack of proof of Alexander the Great or Plato?
There is no evidence that disproves the historicity and reliability of the Bible. Everything we've dug up in archaeology aligns with it, even after 2000+ years.
The Bible states that Jesus was followed by scribes and was famous throughout the Levant. He was said to have literally thousands of followers and was notorious to the authorities. The Romans kept copious records about everything, hundreds of thousands of mundane notes and tax receipts survive from the time. And yet not one contemporaneous word about the most extraordinary Jesus, the biggest star of the land, from either the Jews OR the Romans. Obviously it's a hoax that was invented much later. 'And he went throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom among the people. HIS FAME spread throughout all Syria, and they brought him those oppressed by demons,and he healed them. And great crowds followed him from Jerusalem and Judea, and from beyond the Jordan.' Matt 4 23 - 25. Yet not a WORD written about him ... until he was retroactively invented in the late first century.
You need to read the modern day book “Cold Case Christianity” by. J.w. Wallace. He is a former cold case detective who studied whether or not the gospels were “manufactured” or true. I subscribe to the latter despite your given reasons for doubt. Your position isn’t new, but Jesus is clearly a historical person as noted by Josephus and Tacitus.
@@dawood121derful Wallace is an absolute fraud. The Josephus passages are known forgeries by Eusebius. Even Christian scholars admit this. I cannot believe apologists STILL think the Josephus fraud has any credibility. Your religion is a pernicious lie concocted by Roman authorities. The gospels of Thomas and Mary Magdalene are apocryphal forgeries. Pliny the Younger, a Roman governor writing circa 110 CE, called Christianity a 'superstition taken to extravagant lengths'. Similarly, the Roman historian Tacitus called it 'a deadly superstition' in 116AD, and the historian Suetonius called Christians 'a class of persons given to a new and mischievous superstition'. And yet apologists point to these authors as the best 'proof' of Jesus... it's both funny AND sad, really.
Biblical apologetics = baseless philosophical arguments in lieu of any hard evidence.
Can you prove your point beyond this Strawman?
@@wraves693 That's not what a straw man is, but yes, it's very easy to debunk your childish fantasies: God isn't real because magic isn't real. Also, Judeo-Christianity is insane and paradoxical, and can in no way be true or correct. Done. Oh, but if you DO have evidence for your lurid beliefs that nobody has ever seen, please do present it here.
This shtick has become soooooooooo tiresome. The most that can be shown by the evidence is that soon after Jesus' death his followers claimed that he had risen from the dead. This obviously is a light year away from demonstrating that a resurrection actually occurred. I suspect that the good dr. believes that if he writes and talks long enough about how early the claim of resurrection was, our minds will gloss over the difference between a claim and a fact.
What would it take you to believe that Jesus truly did rise from the dead, and if you knew it was true, would you become a follower of Christ? Praying for you!
I've been an ordained minister for some fifty years and love God and Jesus with all my heart and soul and mind. But it's that last thing, my mind, which feels compelled by the Holy Spirit to call out false arguments which should never be used to preach the Gospel. They damage it, not promote it.
@@newtonfinn164. 🍋 🍋
Why would those followers make up a claim that they later died defending? Psychologists state that 500 people cant have the same hallucination of a risen Jesus. So then they all got hoodwinked by a pretender into thinking it was the same man they had followed daily for the past few years of their life. You dont make sense mate. Why would unbelievers convert? Such as Jesus' own step brother James (who called him crazy earlier) or Paul who used to kill and imprison christians with a passion!
@@MegaChickpeas Simple. The followers didn't exist either. The entire story was invented by third parties many, many decades later. 500 eyewitnesses?? What were their names? Were they interviewed and does anyone have the records?? Your 'argument' is the equivalent of 'Why would Darth Vader claim to be Luke's father if it wasn't true?'
Bart Ehrman would NOT agree with your examples that you provide from his scholarship; there is a slight-of-hand here. You should debate this. My money is on Dr. Ehrman!
Man, I SO love the idea of you losing your money on this bet! But it saddens me that you’re clearly also gambling your destiny on Dr. Errorman. Keep exploring…
Bart Ehrman is bottom of the barrel.
@@CelticSpiritsCoven Fart Errorman is an academic sellout. I know I’m not being respectful but he’s had many examples of deliberate deception: the “variants” is one example… over 99% have NO relevance to theology whatsoever but he makes it sound like they mean “unreliable”… and HE KNOWS BETTER.
If everyone will be judged and give an account including babies that's 100 billion people.And everyone thinks they'll be center stage to see Jesus as they give an account.including things no one else knowe about.Then they live where? Work where? Communucate with other unregistered people ? No money to buy anything And live to infinity without dying?! Yikes!!
@@rogersacco4624 Age of accountability. You aren't very studied on this subject. God gives life to billions of people, but he is a moral monster for judging people who commit genocide for centuries? You should stop posting and start studying. We receive no advancement from people like you who haven't even read the book.
Jesus never existed.
No legit scholars believe that, even ones who are skeptical of the resurrection and are not Christians. You are a century or two behind the times.
@@johnadams3673 From "Forged" by Bart Ehrman:
“One of the striking and to many people, surprising facts about the first century is that we don't have any Roman records, of any kind, that attest to the existence of Jesus. We have no birth certificate, no references to his works or deeds, no accounts of his trial, no description of his death - no reference to him whatsoever in any way, shape, or form. Jesus's name is not even mentioned in any Roman source of the first century.”
You don’t exist.
@@dawood121derful *What is the opinion on J. Warner Wallace's "Cold-Case Christianity"?*
'I found it to be ridiculous and dishonest. I say dishonest because he claimed to have arrived at the conclusion Jesus rose from the dead using the same techniques and methodology that he used as a cold case investigator. He proceeds to uncritically accept things as facts based on evidence that would never be considered in an actual criminal investigation. Either he was completely incompetent as an investigator (and I have no reason to think he was) or he is being dishonest. For example, he treats the Gospels as the equivalent of eye witness evidence in a criminal case. Imagine a criminal prosecutor producing an anonymous letter, written decades after the event, that copies from previous writings about the event, and saying "we have here good eye witness testimony." If you want to accept that, ok that's your opinion. But then don't pretend you are using the same rigorous standards that would be required of an investigator to prove something in a court of law.'
JLord
We don't even know which CENTURY Jesus was born in. That's some pretty lousy record keeping.
Why do you say that when there is evidence of him in the early first century and the entire Christian movement/church was underway by the mid and late first century?
@@johnadams3673 Many scholars say he was born before 4 BC, dunce, because that's when Herod died.
@@johnadams3673 That's false, before the fall of the Second Temple, there was no difference between Judaism and Christianity.
@@DocReasonable The events portrayed in the infancy narrative conflict with each other on a timeline, so he is correct that we don't know what year.
Well. Go back 33yrs from 33AD. April 3rd. There was a partial eclipse at 3pm right when Jesus died. They also think April 3rd because of the Tiberias Ceasar issue. I should add NASA says this regarding the eclipse, not me..