not very historical. Luke was a follower of Paul--not the apostle. Paul was converted after the church of Jerusalem was formed under Peter and John--then he had to serve long enough to get follower and for those followers to start writing books of their own. So Luke COULD NOT have been written for many years--maybe decades after Jesus' death.
Tecnicaly even if God itself presents and makes miracles or any tbing, it should"nt be proff oh the existence of God. Nobody is capable of disign the ideal ecperiment that could probe the ecistence of God , in part because there isn"t a definition ecact of Him.
And where is the opposite of this - the misfortunes? The senseless killings, accidents, covid19 killing children, children being abducted, raped and killed, stray bullets killing innocents These theists happy to give credit to God for good things but never mentioning the bad things Ah, the slave must never question the master These are Master/Slave religions - Christianity & Islam Master will GIVE us pleasures of the flesh for eternity! We must only praise him and never find fault with him, otherwise we won't get that good life Like the supporters of brutal dictators like Putin, Saddam - praising the dictator, supporting him unconditionally and living the good life Like prostitutes/gigolos/leeches/free loaders - praising their Sugar Daddies, telling them they "love" them all in the hope of a life of comfort and ease Amazing that even the best of minds have been reduced down to supporters of sick disgusting dictators like Putin, prostitutes, leeches, Slaves but have no clue!
After watching 'Arguing God from Miracles' I can't resist to ask some questions. Why did not Professor ask basic questions concerning miracles. For the wisemen in the film miracle is sth unexplained. Just unnatural, impossible. The first question should be- Are all the unexplained happenings on Earth miracles? If not- How can you distinguish the God made miracles from just unexplained events? Miracles have sth positive in them? If someone had been late for the plane which had a crash, can he say 'It was a miracle'? And if someone's car while driving to an airport stopped and he could be late, but accidentally he was seen by a frind driving to the airport and he gave him a lift (miracla?), he flew away and died. Was it a miracle. Could his family call the lift/death a miracle? And first of all. The event is unexplained. All the instances claim- It is a miracle! For instance healing. Unexplained now. And what if it could be explained in 3000 year's time? Still not? And if in 10000 year's time? Then the miracle can be cancelled? The Saint bereft his sanctity?
Suggesting a better title like "What was christianity starting from ?". Noting that this chronology may be the weak point. Moreover as the virtual Q text has never been but an excuse for scholar litterature, forget it. Sorry.
Assuming that the Gospel of Mark was wrote about 70 AD and the Gospel of Matthew was wrote after the Gospel of Mark, and by analysis it would seem that the Gospel of Matthew is a take off of the Gospel of Mark in many ways, why would the Gospel of Matthew, supposedly wrote by the Apostle Matthew who would have had first hand knowledge and understanding of Jesus Christ, ever copy a Gospel from a second generation christian who possibly never even met Jesus Christ? It just doesn't make logical sense unless it is taken into account that the Gospel of Matthew was most probably not wrote by the actual apostle Matthew. In fact, through studies, it seems that many new testament books were apparently wrote by one (or more) individuals who then attributed those writings to a more famous person of that day and age, which is itself a lie. Now, "God" wouldn't lie, nor even have a reason to lie, "God" is "God". But humans sure do lie and even believe they have justifiable reasons to lie. Those in power and authority want the status quo to remain with them in power and authority and at times will do anything at all to retain that power and authority. (Good thing I already have advanced cancer and am dying already). But, after we die, what do any of us actually remember anyway?
Assuming Jesus Christ truly did rise fully in body, spirit, soul, bones and all, then why are Jesus Christ's apostles not risen from the dead yet fully in body, spirit, soul, bones and all, as evidenced by the bones of the apostles that many churches still venerate and protect even today? And keep in mind, this is the same church and religion that claimed that we lived in a geo-centric solar system and not in a helio-centric solar system, and even punished those who believed differently than what they taught. Later actual evidence indicates that we exist in a helio-centric solar system. How could people who claim to speak for "God" not know such a fundamental thing about this solar system?
+Charles Brightman Assuming that Jesus was even an actual historical figure. People are notorious for allowing themselves to fully believe mythology and jumping to conclusions and explanations without even basic knowledge of a phenomena. Hey you can't disprove god, so inturn god has to exist, can't be disproved. While absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, you have to consider what is likely. It is most likely that God is a human construct based on our previous examples of making up gods. Why would the abrahamic god be any different?
+brillobean The principal you just stated is basically Occam's razor, the most probable scenario is most probably the correct scenario. But, just because something is possible, and maybe even highly probable, does not automatically mean that it is in fact actually true, just that it is highly probably true. Further research and analysis would have to be done to say for sure which way it actually is. Occam's razor gives direction to better utilize resources to try to seek out the real truth. I had condensed all of space and time down into a single diagram and then analyzed it. Utilizing Occam's razor, (based even upon what you said above that we have to consider what is likely), it is most probable that a conscious somethingness is in fact behind the creation of this universe and most probably is everywhere and in everything for it to even exist. Let's call it pure energy that appears to be everywhere and in everything, (E=mc^2 and E=hf). While we don't currently know what consciousness actually is yet, it does currently appear that it is energy interacting with energy. So, it would be a small leap to see how all the energy in this universe is "God's" consciousness. But here again, just because something is highly probable in no way automatically means it's really true. It's just highly probably true. Further research and analysis would have to be done to know one way or another for sure. Now, as far as Jesus Christ goes. Years ago I had thought about this too. My conclusion is that an entity whom we call Jesus Christ today, did in fact exist as evidenced by the Apostles themselves of which we have writings from as well as their very bones in some cases as protected and venerated by various churches. There appears to be just too much evidence of the Apostles'; existence. And of course, if they exist, whom were they an Apostle of? Jesus Christ is the most likely answer. So, Jesus Christ most probably did exist and most probably was a great teacher and maybe even prophet. The things he was saying though went against the establishment who had enough power to most probably actually crucify Jesus. (As was done back then). So, even if Jesus Christ did not actually rise from the dead, "Christianity" could still exist and I could even consider myself a "Christian" by following the teachings of Jesus and his Apostles. And if Jesus Christ truly did rise from the dead fully in body and spirit bones and all, maybe all the better. But then again, maybe not. If we truly did have an actual eternal conscious existence we would either be eternally consciously alone, or more probably still just an individual in a society of individuals, kind of like we are now. Conscious individuals who have choices to Help, Neutral, Hurt, and to whom to Help, Neutral, Hurt. Unless the very nature of those choices changed in the afterlife, I am not so sure I would want to put up with entities who chose to hurt others for eternity. Maybe I don't have a choice, maybe I do. My eternal conscious death might just be "God's" final blessing upon me just so I don't have to have an actual eternal conscious existence and have to put up with a-holes for literally eternity.
+brillobean Why would the gods of the Romans or Greeks or Mayans, etc, etc, be any different? Why are there even different perspectives of God even today? In part I believe it's due to the fallibility of the human brain. As far as a common set of values, we are apparently physical beings in a physical universe. There are things that are beneficial to us, things that are neutral to us, and things that are not beneficial to us. Things that are beneficial to us in this state of existence we say is "good", things that are not beneficial to us in this state of existence we say is "bad" or even "evil". This I currently believe is the source of all of humans values, ethics and moralities. And is also then why some of these items show up in numerous religious writings. It has to do with our current state of existence in this environment we exist in and whether something is beneficial or not.
+brillobean And then factor in those in power and authority want to maintain the status quo with them in power and authority, along with their job security and benefits.
I don't know who this guy is, but he's just plain wrong. The creed Paul quotes in 1 Corinthians 15 is verified to be in existence from the first few years after Christ's death. This position is held by atheist and theist (including non-Christian) scholars. The creed says: "that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures and that he was buried and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time... Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles" To quote Gerd Lüdemann (non-believing Biblical scholar) “…the elements in the tradition are to be dated to the first two years after the crucifixion of Jesus…not later than three years… the formation of the appearance traditions mentioned in I Cor.15.3-8 falls into the time between 30 and 33 CE.” From Wikipedia (which is skeptical/ critical of anything related to the divinity of Christ... plus sources are cited: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_Corinthians_15#Origins_of_the_creed): "The account of the resurrection appearances of Jesus in verses 3-7 appears to be an early pre-Pauline creedal statement. Verses 3-5 (plus possible additional verses) may be one of the earliest creeds about Jesus' death and resurrection. Most biblical scholars note the antiquity of the creed, probably originating from the Jerusalem apostolic community. The antiquity of the creed has been placed to no more than five years after Jesus' death by most biblical scholars. The linguistic analysis suggests that the version received by Paul seems to have included verses 3b-6a and 7. The creed has been deemed to be historically reliable and is claimed to preserve a unique and verifiable testimony of the time." The guy in this video also claims James to be the literal brother of Jesus, when actually he was more like a cousin, making this video riddled with misinformation. Closer to Truth I love your videos, but please add a disclaimer or do some of your own research before posting blatantly false information.
It’s impossible to date this alleged creed in 1 Cor . 15. The only way a historian could date it with any kind of accuracy would be to have empirical evidence regarding the date of the composition via some independent confirmation. Many scholars speculate that the creed is early, but they have no proof of this. And even if it was early, that wouldn’t prove its accuracy. Within a few days of the 2020 US election millions of Americans were chanting ‘stop the steal’ based on Trump’s false claims that Joe Biden stole the election from him. That claim was made early and repeated widely but it was totally false. Same with claims about Jesus’ alleged resurrection. There’s no proof it happened. The only proof we have is that some people believed it happened. Only gullible people believe claims without evidence.
![[#어쩌다어른] (3시간) 우주에서 살아남는 방법 🌎 문과도 쉽고 재밌는 김상욱 교수 물리학 수업!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/X8Cpp6dJi8w/mqdefault.jpg)
6:00 - was Paul martyred under Nero, though? What's the evidence?
As historians we find no mention of the Pentecost in the gospels, therefor the gospels were written within 50 days of the death of Jesus.
not very historical. Luke was a follower of Paul--not the apostle. Paul was converted after the church of Jerusalem was formed under Peter and John--then he had to serve long enough to get follower and for those followers to start writing books of their own. So Luke COULD NOT have been written for many years--maybe decades after Jesus' death.
This man should interact with Gary Habermas.
Yes!
Well i Totally Agree 🤔
Tecnicaly even if God itself presents and makes miracles or any tbing, it should"nt be proff oh the existence of God.
Nobody is capable of disign the ideal ecperiment that could probe the ecistence of God , in part because there isn"t a definition ecact of Him.
And where is the opposite of this - the misfortunes? The senseless killings, accidents, covid19 killing children, children being abducted, raped and killed, stray bullets killing innocents
These theists happy to give credit to God for good things but never mentioning the bad things
Ah, the slave must never question the master
These are Master/Slave religions - Christianity & Islam
Master will GIVE us pleasures of the flesh for eternity! We must only praise him and never find fault with him, otherwise we won't get that good life
Like the supporters of brutal dictators like Putin, Saddam - praising the dictator, supporting him unconditionally and living the good life
Like prostitutes/gigolos/leeches/free loaders - praising their Sugar Daddies, telling them they "love" them all in the hope of a life of comfort and ease
Amazing that even the best of minds have been reduced down to supporters of sick disgusting dictators like Putin, prostitutes, leeches, Slaves but have no clue!
you are just delusional literally no miracle like the ones in the bible has ever been demonstrated
After watching 'Arguing God from Miracles' I can't resist to ask some questions. Why did not Professor ask basic questions concerning miracles. For the wisemen in the film miracle is sth unexplained. Just unnatural, impossible. The first question should be- Are all the unexplained happenings on Earth miracles? If not- How can you distinguish the God made miracles from just unexplained events? Miracles have sth positive in them? If someone had been late for the plane which had a crash, can he say 'It was a miracle'? And if someone's car while driving to an airport stopped and he could be late, but accidentally he was seen by a frind driving to the airport and he gave him a lift (miracla?), he flew away and died. Was it a miracle. Could his family call the lift/death a miracle? And first of all. The event is unexplained. All the instances claim- It is a miracle! For instance healing. Unexplained now. And what if it could be explained in 3000 year's time? Still not? And if in 10000 year's time? Then the miracle can be cancelled? The Saint bereft his sanctity?
The speculation is strong with this one.
Very good.
historians work with the history and sources then you use the faith to help complete it
Suggesting a better title like "What was christianity starting from ?". Noting that this chronology may be the weak point.
Moreover as the virtual Q text has never been but an excuse for scholar litterature, forget it.
Sorry.
Assuming that the Gospel of Mark was wrote about 70 AD and the Gospel of Matthew was wrote after the Gospel of Mark, and by analysis it would seem that the Gospel of Matthew is a take off of the Gospel of Mark in many ways, why would the Gospel of Matthew, supposedly wrote by the Apostle Matthew who would have had first hand knowledge and understanding of Jesus Christ, ever copy a Gospel from a second generation christian who possibly never even met Jesus Christ? It just doesn't make logical sense unless it is taken into account that the Gospel of Matthew was most probably not wrote by the actual apostle Matthew. In fact, through studies, it seems that many new testament books were apparently wrote by one (or more) individuals who then attributed those writings to a more famous person of that day and age, which is itself a lie. Now, "God" wouldn't lie, nor even have a reason to lie, "God" is "God". But humans sure do lie and even believe they have justifiable reasons to lie.
Those in power and authority want the status quo to remain with them in power and authority and at times will do anything at all to retain that power and authority.
(Good thing I already have advanced cancer and am dying already). But, after we die, what do any of us actually remember anyway?
How are you doing now health wise?
It’s fun to play pretend.
Assuming Jesus Christ truly did rise fully in body, spirit, soul, bones and all, then why are Jesus Christ's apostles not risen from the dead yet fully in body, spirit, soul, bones and all, as evidenced by the bones of the apostles that many churches still venerate and protect even today?
And keep in mind, this is the same church and religion that claimed that we lived in a geo-centric solar system and not in a helio-centric solar system, and even punished those who believed differently than what they taught. Later actual evidence indicates that we exist in a helio-centric solar system. How could people who claim to speak for "God" not know such a fundamental thing about this solar system?
+Charles Brightman Assuming that Jesus was even an actual historical figure. People are notorious for allowing themselves to fully believe mythology and jumping to conclusions and explanations without even basic knowledge of a phenomena. Hey you can't disprove god, so inturn god has to exist, can't be disproved. While absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, you have to consider what is likely. It is most likely that God is a human construct based on our previous examples of making up gods. Why would the abrahamic god be any different?
+brillobean The principal you just stated is basically Occam's razor, the most probable scenario is most probably the correct scenario.
But, just because something is possible, and maybe even highly probable, does not automatically mean that it is in fact actually true, just that it is highly probably true. Further research and analysis would have to be done to say for sure which way it actually is. Occam's razor gives direction to better utilize resources to try to seek out the real truth.
I had condensed all of space and time down into a single diagram and then analyzed it. Utilizing Occam's razor, (based even upon what you said above that we have to consider what is likely), it is most probable that a conscious somethingness is in fact behind the creation of this universe and most probably is everywhere and in everything for it to even exist. Let's call it pure energy that appears to be everywhere and in everything, (E=mc^2 and E=hf). While we don't currently know what consciousness actually is yet, it does currently appear that it is energy interacting with energy. So, it would be a small leap to see how all the energy in this universe is "God's" consciousness. But here again, just because something is highly probable in no way automatically means it's really true. It's just highly probably true. Further research and analysis would have to be done to know one way or another for sure.
Now, as far as Jesus Christ goes. Years ago I had thought about this too. My conclusion is that an entity whom we call Jesus Christ today, did in fact exist as evidenced by the Apostles themselves of which we have writings from as well as their very bones in some cases as protected and venerated by various churches. There appears to be just too much evidence of the Apostles'; existence. And of course, if they exist, whom were they an Apostle of? Jesus Christ is the most likely answer. So, Jesus Christ most probably did exist and most probably was a great teacher and maybe even prophet. The things he was saying though went against the establishment who had enough power to most probably actually crucify Jesus. (As was done back then).
So, even if Jesus Christ did not actually rise from the dead, "Christianity" could still exist and I could even consider myself a "Christian" by following the teachings of Jesus and his Apostles. And if Jesus Christ truly did rise from the dead fully in body and spirit bones and all, maybe all the better. But then again, maybe not.
If we truly did have an actual eternal conscious existence we would either be eternally consciously alone, or more probably still just an individual in a society of individuals, kind of like we are now. Conscious individuals who have choices to Help, Neutral, Hurt, and to whom to Help, Neutral, Hurt. Unless the very nature of those choices changed in the afterlife, I am not so sure I would want to put up with entities who chose to hurt others for eternity. Maybe I don't have a choice, maybe I do.
My eternal conscious death might just be "God's" final blessing upon me just so I don't have to have an actual eternal conscious existence and have to put up with a-holes for literally eternity.
+brillobean Why would the gods of the Romans or Greeks or Mayans, etc, etc, be any different? Why are there even different perspectives of God even today? In part I believe it's due to the fallibility of the human brain.
As far as a common set of values, we are apparently physical beings in a physical universe. There are things that are beneficial to us, things that are neutral to us, and things that are not beneficial to us. Things that are beneficial to us in this state of existence we say is "good", things that are not beneficial to us in this state of existence we say is "bad" or even "evil". This I currently believe is the source of all of humans values, ethics and moralities. And is also then why some of these items show up in numerous religious writings. It has to do with our current state of existence in this environment we exist in and whether something is beneficial or not.
+brillobean Maybe, I don't really know.
+brillobean And then factor in those in power and authority want to maintain the status quo with them in power and authority, along with their job security and benefits.
Alot of knowledge....but sadly no wisdom at all.... hostile to religion entirely....quite an awful character....just my opinion 🤔
I don't know who this guy is, but he's just plain wrong. The creed Paul quotes in 1 Corinthians 15 is verified to be in existence from the first few years after Christ's death. This position is held by atheist and theist (including non-Christian) scholars. The creed says: "that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures and that he was buried and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time... Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles" To quote Gerd Lüdemann (non-believing Biblical scholar) “…the elements in the tradition are to be dated to the first two years after the crucifixion of Jesus…not later than three years… the formation of the appearance traditions mentioned in I Cor.15.3-8 falls into the time between 30 and 33 CE.”
From Wikipedia (which is skeptical/ critical of anything related to the divinity of Christ... plus sources are cited: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_Corinthians_15#Origins_of_the_creed): "The account of the resurrection appearances of Jesus in verses 3-7 appears to be an early pre-Pauline creedal statement. Verses 3-5 (plus possible additional verses) may be one of the earliest creeds about Jesus' death and resurrection. Most biblical scholars note the antiquity of the creed, probably originating from the Jerusalem apostolic community. The antiquity of the creed has been placed to no more than five years after Jesus' death by most biblical scholars. The linguistic analysis suggests that the version received by Paul seems to have included verses 3b-6a and 7. The creed has been deemed to be historically reliable and is claimed to preserve a unique and verifiable testimony of the time."
The guy in this video also claims James to be the literal brother of Jesus, when actually he was more like a cousin, making this video riddled with misinformation. Closer to Truth I love your videos, but please add a disclaimer or do some of your own research before posting blatantly false information.
It’s impossible to date this alleged creed in 1 Cor . 15. The only way a historian could date it with any kind of accuracy would be to have empirical evidence regarding the date of the composition via some independent confirmation. Many scholars speculate that the creed is early, but they have no proof of this.
And even if it was early, that wouldn’t prove its accuracy. Within a few days of the 2020 US election millions of Americans were chanting ‘stop the steal’ based on Trump’s false claims that Joe Biden stole the election from him. That claim was made early and repeated widely but it was totally false. Same with claims about Jesus’ alleged resurrection. There’s no proof it happened. The only proof we have is that some people believed it happened. Only gullible people believe claims without evidence.