Dr. Williams destroyed B. Erdmans’ theory on the gospels. God bless him, and may the Almighty keep using Dr. Williams for advancing the truth and defending our faith.
I enjoyed listening to Dr. Peter Williams discuss the truth of scripture. He's very well thought out and has researched the subject matter he discusses well.
On the question about what evidence is there that Matthew was written in Aramaic, search Jeff Benner - Ancient Hebrew Research Center. The evidence as presented by him points to the implication that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. Cross reference is made to Shem Tov's Matthew and the logical implications of Hebrew puns and translation mistakes from Hebrew to Greek.
Optimus: That is a fascinating read. Thank you for the information. I know several people who are learning Hebrew, even visiting Israel during this tumultuous time. I wish I had more time to do things like that, as well.
I love the holy scriptures. The eyewitness accounts written in scripture of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus are all true. I also am an eyewitness of the awesome beyond awesome Lord Almighty Jesus! You poor doubters must repent or you will go straight into hell one day. God is very kind and merciful, so repent and believe in the Son of God who is Jesus. I am an eyewitness of Jesus. God does not play games and neither do I.
Actually there are no accounts of the resurrection in the NT - from eyewitnesses or otherwise. Nobody claims to have witnessed the resurrection so presumably what you are referring to are the alleged post resurrection appearances of Jesus. And if, you look at the Biblical accounts it is clear that for the most part the authors were not and could not have been eyewitnesses to those appearances. The earliest account comes from Paul (1 Corinthians 15) "And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time" Now obviously Paul cannot have been an eyewitness to the first 5 of the 6 appearances that he lists. And as regards the 1 that he claims to have witnessed - unfortunately Paul doesn't say where or when this happened or record any of the words that either he or Jesus said. So it's hardly even an account is it. While Paul claims that the risen Jesus appeared to James; in James own letter he himself makes no such claim. As regards the gospels - none of the authors (whoever they actually were) claims to have been an eyewitness to any appearances of the risen Jesus. In fact in Mark, the earliest of the gospels, there are no appearances of the risen Jesus. Because Mark doesn't mention any post resurrection appearances the authors of the following gospels can't use him as a base for their accounts - they have to make them up. This is what they do and this is why the post resurrection appearances in Matthew, Luke/Acts and John are completely different from one another. If the gospel authors were eyewitnesses their accounts of the risen Jesus would be broadly similar. It's the differences that tell you that tell you that they were not.
@@TheSmithDorianin Galatians, Paul describes a 15-day meeting he had with Peter & James, generally pinned at about 5 years after Jesus’ death, where he would have verified the claim from Peter and James themselves, that Paul later records in 1 Cor. 15. So Paul’s undisputed letters are a very solid witness to what Peter and James claimed about their own experience. Paul had a second meeting years later in Galatians 2 to verify his message with the apostles, at least including Peter, James, & John, and “they added nothing” to his message. Furthermore, passages like Philippians 2:5-11 and 1 Cor. 15:3-7 are generally held to be very early believers’ creedal statements that pre-date Paul’s first meeting with Peter & James, and likely before Paul’s conversion itself, 2 years after the cross. (Even atheists scholars trace this claim back to within a year of the crucifixion.) As such, it’s well evidenced to claim that Christians claimed a) very high Chritology and b) resurrection appearances almost immediately after Jesus’ death.
Also we must not forget that the Roman Empire absolutely OBLITERATED much of Judea and Galilee by 70ad so how could anyone "invent" the Gospels after that date and get ALL the major and minor details right???
. The city of jerusalum was destroyed but not its surrounding areas. Its possible Local "reporters" and historians would most likely already have copies of what had happened in the last 100 years, that had moved out of the city and thus survived
Juan: You can dismiss the Deity of Christ, but the historical evidence for His life, death, and the fact that so many believed shortly after His death that He rose again and even hung out bodily with some of these witnesses cannot be refuted even by atheist scholars. One reason for this is due to ancient sources outside of the Bible reporting similar things found in the Bible, without those writers believing in His Deity (at least one such writer, Pliny, was decidedly hostile toward the growing Christian movement and was proudly responsible for killing a fair amount of people in the name of polytheism--and local commerce). Good luck finding such evidence of Ganesh, Mithras or Osiris. You, of course, may continue your faith in nothing, coming from nothing, returning to nothing if you wish, as I believe in freedom of thought, but there appears to be even less evidence of that than sightings of Kali.
Atheism a goal? A goal? Which atheistic goal do you want? Stalin’s? Mao’s? Hitler’s? I pray your “goal” remains far, far from those of us who love our fellow human beings and God therefore. We’ll all likely pray for you anyway!
Dr. Williams destroyed B. Erdmans’ theory on the gospels. God bless him, and may the Almighty keep using Dr. Williams for advancing the truth and defending our faith.
I enjoyed listening to Dr. Peter Williams discuss the truth of scripture. He's very well thought out and has researched the subject matter he discusses well.
I wish the audio was better. :(
On the question about what evidence is there that Matthew was written in Aramaic, search Jeff Benner - Ancient Hebrew Research Center. The evidence as presented by him points to the implication that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. Cross reference is made to Shem Tov's Matthew and the logical implications of Hebrew puns and translation mistakes from Hebrew to Greek.
Optimus: That is a fascinating read. Thank you for the information. I know several people who are learning Hebrew, even visiting Israel during this tumultuous time. I wish I had more time to do things like that, as well.
evidence points to an implication? So, not the evidence suggests, but it points to a suggestion?
I love the holy scriptures. The eyewitness accounts written in scripture of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus are all true. I also am an eyewitness of the awesome beyond awesome Lord Almighty Jesus! You poor doubters must repent or you will go straight into hell one day. God is very kind and merciful, so repent and believe in the Son of God who is Jesus. I am an eyewitness of Jesus. God does not play games and neither do I.
Actually there are no accounts of the resurrection in the NT - from eyewitnesses or otherwise.
Nobody claims to have witnessed the resurrection so presumably what you are referring to are the alleged post resurrection appearances of Jesus. And if, you look at the Biblical accounts it is clear that for the most part the authors were not and could not have been eyewitnesses to those appearances.
The earliest account comes from Paul (1 Corinthians 15)
"And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once;
After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time"
Now obviously Paul cannot have been an eyewitness to the first 5 of the 6 appearances that he lists. And as regards the 1 that he claims to have witnessed - unfortunately Paul doesn't say where or when this happened or record any of the words that either he or Jesus said. So it's hardly even an account is it.
While Paul claims that the risen Jesus appeared to James; in James own letter he himself makes no such claim.
As regards the gospels - none of the authors (whoever they actually were) claims to have been an eyewitness to any appearances of the risen Jesus. In fact in Mark, the earliest of the gospels, there are no appearances of the risen Jesus.
Because Mark doesn't mention any post resurrection appearances the authors of the following gospels can't use him as a base for their accounts - they have to make them up. This is what they do and this is why the post resurrection appearances in Matthew, Luke/Acts and John are completely different from one another. If the gospel authors were eyewitnesses their accounts of the risen Jesus would be broadly similar. It's the differences that tell you that tell you that they were not.
What do you mean "eyewitness"? Have you seen him in a vision?? I would like to hear your experience
u are not eyewitness. u are just liar
@@TheSmithDorianin Galatians, Paul describes a 15-day meeting he had with Peter & James, generally pinned at about 5 years after Jesus’ death, where he would have verified the claim from Peter and James themselves, that Paul later records in 1 Cor. 15. So Paul’s undisputed letters are a very solid witness to what Peter and James claimed about their own experience.
Paul had a second meeting years later in Galatians 2 to verify his message with the apostles, at least including Peter, James, & John, and “they added nothing” to his message.
Furthermore, passages like Philippians 2:5-11 and 1 Cor. 15:3-7 are generally held to be very early believers’ creedal statements that pre-date Paul’s first meeting with Peter & James, and likely before Paul’s conversion itself, 2 years after the cross. (Even atheists scholars trace this claim back to within a year of the crucifixion.)
As such, it’s well evidenced to claim that Christians claimed a) very high Chritology and b) resurrection appearances almost immediately after Jesus’ death.
John 6:47
Hi. Hope you are well. I agree with you, but we also should defend the faith when needed. God bless you.
1 Peter 3:15
Also we must not forget that the Roman Empire absolutely OBLITERATED much of Judea and Galilee by 70ad so how could anyone "invent" the Gospels after that date and get ALL the major and minor details right???
How would you know if the got the details right? What known pre 70 sources do we have to check the gospels against?
@@sp1ke0kill3r josephus
@@thegreatandpowerfultrixie7 Josephus doesn't present any evidence, either.
. The city of jerusalum was destroyed but not its surrounding areas. Its possible Local "reporters" and historians would most likely already have copies of what had happened in the last 100 years, that had moved out of the city and thus survived
Sorry but audio is horrible. Can't understand him
I heard him clearly enough, although I’m sure it could of been perfectly clear.
Yes,monotheism is considered a progress from polytheism,,,Then,atheism will be the greatest goal for humanity.
Juan: You can dismiss the Deity of Christ, but the historical evidence for His life, death, and the fact that so many believed shortly after His death that He rose again and even hung out bodily with some of these witnesses cannot be refuted even by atheist scholars. One reason for this is due to ancient sources outside of the Bible reporting similar things found in the Bible, without those writers believing in His Deity (at least one such writer, Pliny, was decidedly hostile toward the growing Christian movement and was proudly responsible for killing a fair amount of people in the name of polytheism--and local commerce). Good luck finding such evidence of Ganesh, Mithras or Osiris. You, of course, may continue your faith in nothing, coming from nothing, returning to nothing if you wish, as I believe in freedom of thought, but there appears to be even less evidence of that than sightings of Kali.
Atheism a goal? A goal? Which atheistic goal do you want? Stalin’s? Mao’s? Hitler’s? I pray your “goal” remains far, far from those of us who love our fellow human beings and God therefore. We’ll all likely pray for you anyway!
In other words... there were no witnesses because it's all a fairytale. It even has a talking donkey in it. ;-)