Christians Don't Know This Jesus 

Hey Derrick

Why do you have a white man in the thumbnail ? That's not me even his hair isn't accurate

No thanks, it appears that much of what is said are mere speculations on his part and his thoughts/feelings. Two person examining the exact same set of facts, may come to two very different conclusions. How can this be? All of us, as fallen humans, are at war with the God who created us. All of us have an enmity toward God that must first be removed if we are ever going to see the evidence clearly. Evidence is a matter of objective truth, proof is in the mind of the evaluator, and many of you resist the truth in spite of many evidence that goes against your narrative. We can offer evidence all day long: facts about eyewitness testimony, archeological verification, scientific harmony and even probabilities, but none of this will serve as proof unless you first change your heart. I love them that love me; and those that seek me early shall find me. (Proverbs 8:17) And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. (Romans 8:28) To seek God with all our heart is fundamental to God’s revealing himself to us (Jer. 29:13). As the philosopher & famous pascal Blaise Pascal put it: Willing to appear openly to those who seek Him with all their heart, and to be hidden from those who flee from Him with all their heart, He so regulates the knowledge of Himself that He has given signs of Himself, visible to those who seek Him, and not to those who seek Him not. There is enough light for those who only desire to see, and enough obscurity for those who have a contrary disposition. But if from thence thou shalt seek the Lord thy God, thou shalt find him, if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul. (Deuteronomy 4:29) For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and *my thoughts than your thoughts*. (Isaiah 55:8-9) If you look at your faith you will look in vain. If you look to him, knowing you have insufficient faith, and you do not consider your faith or the lack thereof, he will receive you as you are, having less faith than a grain of finely ground pepper. He will then call you his own. Then your faith is not in your faith; it is in his faithfulness. Then you have entered the world of biblical faith-all praise to him and no brag on our part. The disciples wanted more faith, and Jesus’ answer indicated they were barking up the wrong tree. We relate to God with so little faith that he has to make up the difference with the blood he shed on the cross. It is not the quantity of faith that moves God, it is the heart focus. A tiny amount of faith fixed on the all-sufficient grace of God will not move a mountain, but it will guarantee us a place on Mt. Calvary where our sins are washed away by the blood of Jesus. It is not how much faith we have, it is how much our faithless hearts are dependent upon him. The grace of God covers every sin except unbelief. “He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God” (John 3:18). The Bible teaches security of the believer. It does not teach security of the unbeliever. Properly understood, Bible doctrine espouses that sinners are saved by believing, and those who continue to believe are the same ones who will be saved in the end. The Bible message is that great sinners are saved by a little faith-ever trusting in his finished work while repudiating personal works as of any value to produce or maintain salvation (Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 4:5; 11:6).

Looking at archeo-genetic facts like other such facts points out that Jews are a Greek like Mediterranean SeaPeople that intruded in to Eastern Mediterranean coastal line and adopted various alphabets, stories, identities...from local people.As such there is NO evidence of them being a pastoral, warrior, tribal alliance called ISRAELITES at all further questioning the whole Greek-Jewish copy cat culture and they intentions.

The Messiah did not start Christianity. The greco-roman philosophers concocted it from their own imaginations after listening to the Followers they persecuted.

@Martians on Maui - I think so.

😂 true

Fan fiction. Religious doctrine. Give it enough time and all of those fanfics about My Little Pony will spur it's own religion called Gnorsticism. 😉

It would these days, but it would be called history in ancient Rome. Most of historical biographies of antiquity were written hundreds of years after the person died such as that of Caesar, Alexander the Great, Plutarch, etc. The gospel of Mark was written about 40 years after Jesus' death which is remarkably close to the actual events it portrayed and when eyewitnesses were still alive.

@@DavidS_Tanbased on what I have learned and read, the actual author of Mark isn’t known and did not personally witness the life or death of Jesus. Nor is there any record of any other actual witnesses. All accounts of the gospels were stories passed down, and none were actual witnesses. But, I may be wrong.

😂facts your right

😅😅 so true

I’m pretty sure they didn’t have best friends that time.

@@mooshei8165 They sure had. :) Human nature has not changed that much.

@@urmasalas right...human nature has not changed that much. And the game of telephone (let alone other experiments on cognition and eye witness testimony unreliability) easily demonstrate that what you hear from a friend, of a friend, of a friend, of a friend...is not reliable. ESPECIALLY when 'recorded, by someone over 60 years after the fact, and with an agenda/purpose/goal of the writing. So women's behavior aside (which, is not a scientific statement to begin with)...zero reliability or ability to even call it evidence with a lower case 'e'.

Human behavior may not have changed - a debatable statement - but social morés, customs and the law sure have.

@@TheIndianTree Not, That interested! Just stumbled across... Won't change my beliefs. People can do that 🤫🥰

@@TheIndianTree I am a weirdo, so I use emojis. Enjoy your day!

@@TheIndianTree Nothing wrong with mythicism. It's well established that there is no physical evidence of Jesus. Even many scholars state that there was no one man named Jesus the bible was based on and instead he was a composite character. Which is the same thing as saying he was fictional which is the same thing as mythicism

@@TheIndianTree *Do you think all the secular scholars are simply lying. Some of them even go as far as saying the fact he existed and was crucified is one of the most certain facts of history* Majority of scholars who say Jesus definitely existed are Christians who work for religious organizations and probably signed a statement of faith as a requirement of their employment. You're not going to get an objective viewpoint from them especially if they're already believers. So leaving out all these scholars who are Christians who are associated/employed by religious organizations, you're left with a lot less scholars than you think who believe Jesus was definitely real. And of course, without EVIDENCE, any scholar who is CERTAIN Jesus was real, is lying. No scholar worth his sheepskin will say for sure Jesus did. They have no evidence, only conjecture that he did. Look up their arguments. See what they offer as "proof". All you're going to get is their theories. The most the honest ones will say is Jesus _probably_ existed, but they mean a man, not the Jesus of the bible. But of course, saying a Jew in 1st century ce Judea name of Yeshua existed, is like saying James Bond existed in the UK, when you're really wanting to imply the super spy James Bond. It becomes a moot point.

@@TheIndianTree What archeological evidence?? There’s no first century evidence of him. The New Testament was put together in the third century. There’s no first century evidence of him. No Roman records, no hieroglyphics, no statues, no archeological evidence anywhere. This man that supposedly did all these miracles etc and no one recorded it?? All the first century philosophers living in the first century and never mention Jesus in their writings?? There’s tons of evidence for Constantine and Cesar and lots of first century historical figures. Yet absolutely not one piece of evidence for Jesus?? Little odd don’t u think?

Thank you! I love both of these gents.

On your Marks.... get set....

Yes! I know they are pals - how do they look at Mark differently?

I would like to know whether Ehrman basically affirms his 1999 book "Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millenium" -- or not.

@@jamesboswellii2034 I've heard him say many times that Jeshua was an apocalyptic preacher

Agreed . I love Jesus and I just want the truth about him . Like he likely was a good man , but is he god ? Who knows .

@@joshchurch785 If you want to know the truth, he was an apocalyptic preacher, one of many. When he was crucified, his followers, in trying to make sense of this, came up with the redemption story. Which is not what Jesus was preaching. So , no god, no messiah, and No redemption, just a story

Don't forget love your enemies and don't swear oaths which eliminate any chance of Christians being in the government or military or police

*_”THE MOST IMPORTANT COMMANDMENT,” Jesus answered, “is THIS: ‘Hear O Israel! The Lord OUR GOD, the Lord is ONE!’”_* _(Mark 12:29)_ *_Jesus said, “Why do you call ME good? No one is good but GOD ALONE!”_* _(Mark 10:18)_ *_Jesus said, “Father...now THIS is Eternal Life: that they know YOU, THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus the Messiah whom YOU HAVE SENT!”_* _(John 17:3)_ *_”Followers of the Bible-do not go too far in your theology, and do not say anything about God but the truth! The Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, is only God’s messenger, as well as His word which He cast into Mary, and a spirit from Him! So believe in God and His messengers, and do not speak of a trinity! Stop it-it is for your own good! God is one sole divinity, who is far above having a son! He owns everything in the heavens and everything on earth! And God is able to manage it all on His own!”_* _(The Qur’an, Sūrah 4:171)_

@@celestialknight2339 Oh boy, the Qur'an. That's a good one 😂 Perfect Qur'anic preservation is a lie, there are many versions of the Qur'an

If you'd lived 2000 years ago and written it all down, perhaps your book would now be in the New Testament.

No, he's specifically trying to diminish the women. Early Christianity had two conflicting traditions on who became the first witness to the resurrected Jesus. Some thought it was Mary Magdalene, others Peter. Paul knew only the Petrine tradition ("...first to Cephas..."). Mark knew both traditions, but Mark also had a beef with Peter (or followers of the real Peter). He can't erase the traditions because he knew that's how Christianity started, so he had to begrudgingly write down both while being a bit of an ass about it. As a result, the women became the first witness BUT TOLD NO ONE, diminishing them, and the story ended before Peter could become the first witness. However, he did subtly concede with the command to go to Galilee that he accepted the Petrine witness tradition. Basically Mark is saying, okay, I don't think the women were the first witnesses, but I'm not going to exalt Peter with my pen, so there!

Or, it's all just made up.

@@andrewsuryali8540 that’s your opinion. Interesting hypothesis, but not very convincing.

A simpler explanation is that Jesus later appeared (or appeared to appear) to the disciples in person, which IMO would be a much better proof of his resurrection.

@@lazykbys ahha very true

Agreed 👍🏼

So true.

What stikes me, is that it took near 2k years. When I think of all the conspiricy theories out there that are mostly propagated by christains, moon landing, flat earth, are examples, yet the real conspiricy is the bible 😂👍

Very much

So did Jesus actually exist, or what's going on here?

Genesis chapters 1- 11 is recorded in Chinese pictographs which are silent witnesses of events, these are rather like fingerprints of historical facts that took place, being historical in character not forgeries. Evolutionists believe everything is a forgery if it calls evolution into question, we must not go against this world religion of Darwinian Origins for it is a sacred cow. We must ignore, suppress and disregard any evidence that calls evolution into question. The pictographic clues to our ancient past have remained in hidden view for thousands of years. There is evidence of antiquity which is undeniable, but evolutionists will always remain arrogant and defiant to the reality of this evidence. The question is: Where did the Chinese picture concepts come from? Concepts that are memorialized in ancient Chinese pictographs and why do these figures match the Genesis account. Many Chinese people who were former communists have recognized the historical account in Genesis in their pictographic ancient language and have turned to Christ for salvation, knowing that their for bearers had knowledge of their migration from the Tower of Babel. These are just three pictographs as examples and there are others for those who want to do their own research. Noah’s Flood is mentioned in pictographic evidence particularly where the symbol for eight is concerned, because eight persons entered the Ark. It doesn’t matter what evidence points towards Creation, fall, Flood and redemption through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, evolutionists as goats will still head-butt the evidence, such as andesite stones carved with dinosaurs on them found in Nazca tombs in the desert with patina on them which takes thousands of years to form, speaking of antiquity. Dr Dennis Swift through this evidence he discovered doing excavations, turned him 360 degrees from an evolutionist to a creationist. Dinosaur figurines which are quite numerous in Mexico were studied by Dr Don Patton and were found to be genuine. See you-tube. The evidence is clear that the indigenous Indians lived alongside dinosaurs a few thousand years ago. They did not die out 65 million years ago, this is purely a religious concept. The Turin Shroud depicting Jesus crucified was produced, when the fire of God’s presence raised him from the dead, leaving a negative impression on the shroud which scientists have tried to reproduce, in order to prove it a forgery. When the Lord’s body was exposed to God’s light, just like film being exposed in a camera to light, it produced a negative. In all these things God has not left us without his divine witness of events.

Yet early Christian works show.. It is said that each one of the twelve and of the seventy wrote a Gospel; but in order that there might be no contention and that the p. 115 number of 'Acts' might not be multiplied, the apostles adopted a plan and chose two of the seventy, Luke and Mark, and two of the twelve, Matthew and John.

@@michaelbernard7402 Credible sources are needed to verify a claim. What are yours?

@red watch mine is this.. CHAPTER XLVIII2. OF THE TEACHING OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF THE PLACES OF EACH ONE OF THEM, AND OF THEIR DEATHS3. NEXT we write the excellent discourse composed by Mâr Eusebius of Caesarea upon the places and families of the holy apostles

@red watch also from that I have note each tribe Simon, the chief of the apostles, was from Bethsaida, of the tribe of Naphtali. He first preached in Antioch, and built there the first of all churches, which was in the house of Cassianus, whose son he restored to life. He remained there one year, and there the disciples were called Christians. From thence he went to Rome, where he remained for twenty-seven years; and in the three hundred and seventy-sixth year of the Greeks, the wicked Nero crucified him head downwards James, the brother of John, preached in his city Bethsaida, and built a church there. Herod Agrippas slew him with the sword one year after the Ascension of our Lord. He was laid in Âkâr, a city of Marmârîkâ2. Philip also was from Bethsaida, of the tribe of Asher. He preached in Phrygia, Pamphylia and Pisidia; he built a church in Pisidia, and died and was buried there. He lived twenty-seven years as an apostle3. Thomas was from Jerusalem, of the tribe of Judah. He taught the Parthians, Medes and Indians4; and because he baptised the daughter of the king of the Indians, he stabbed him with a spear and he died5. Andrew his brother preached in Scythia and Nicomedia and Achaia. He built a church in Byzantium, and there he died and was buried. John the son of Zebedee (Zabhdai) was also from Bethsaida, of the tribe of Zebulun. Simon Zelôtes was from Galilee, of the tribe of Ephraim. He preached in Shemêshât (Samosâta), Pârîn (Perrhê), Zeugma, Hâlâb (Aleppo), Mabbôg (Manbig), and Kenneshrîn (Kinnesrîn). He built a church in Kyrrhos, and died and was buried there9. James, the son of Alphaeus (Halphai), was from the Jordan, of the tribe of Manasseh. He preached in Tadmor (Palmyra), Kirkêsion p. 107 (Kirkîsiyâ), and Callinîcos (ar-Rakkah), and came to Batnân of Serûg (Sarûg), where he built a church, and died and was buried there1. Judas Iscariot, the betrayer, was from the town of Sekharyût of the tribe of Gad, though some say that he was of the tribe of Dan.

@@redwatch. John the Baptist was of the tribe of Levi. Herod the tetrarch slew him, and his body was laid in Sebastia.

Laughing for what cause?

@@ReligionOfSacrifice happiness

@@coltoncatalli8148, what do reasonable people think? These two men are fools for it is obvious. The women came back upset that Jesus was gone and thinking someone took their Lord and so the men (disciples ran to the tomb) when the women finally told the men it was because they also were confirming the empty tomb and the women then told them the story they heard from the messenger (angel) and that they would see Jesus. What is the point of the end of Mark? The Christians exist because Jesus rose again and was seen and men died for the gospel because they picked up the cross daily and laid the only foundation that can be laid and were persecuted because they are not above their master. So were Luke and Matthew trying to correct the fool Mark or were they writing the truth that Mark not only told the truth to a point which would never die for Jesus is the Lord of the whole universe and so His movement is full of power? The lie is Islam will wipe away Judaism and Christianity away with the wiping away of Israel, but then read Revelation 11:7-15 and believe in the power of Christ Jesus to testify of Himself with millions of dead bodies. You see the Muslims fall never to rise again per Amos 8:14 for enemies be made footstools per Psalms 110:1 and the Muslims in ash forms shall be an abhorrence unto all flesh per Isaiah 66:24, but know that Jesus' arm is not short in that some of the Muslims leave Islam between the second and third woe in Revelation 11:7-15 by screaming out "YAHWEH IS MY ELOHIM" per Zechariah 13:8-9. You can either choose Jesus with your last breath or scream out for the rocks to fall upon you for who shall be able to stand. No one is able to stand before Jesus without His blood covering them when they approach the throne of Jesus who has all the power of Shekinah Glory, so be indwelt with the Spirit of Christ Jesus unless you are Enoch who can walk with Jesus whenever you want, like Adam in the Garden of Eden. The ending is don't be like the women who don't tell the gospel of good news. See Christianity? We are brave and still speak of Christ to all the ends of the Earth, but the testimony does come to an end. Know Revelation 11:7-15.

A delightful burst of energy!

its disturbing

Excellent comment. I have an hypothesis to add to it. Suppose that at the time Mark wrote there was not yet any firm tradition that Jesus had risen from the dead, but that the followers of his cult were still struggling with the cognitive dissonance that comes from their messianic teacher, whom they had expected to bring about God's millennium, having been executed. So Mark came up with the idea (or maybe took the idea from some vague popular memes that were beginning to form), "Hey, he's not really dead. He rose up into the sky, and leads us still." Hence, he created the story of the women being told this news by the young man at the tomb. That left Mark with the problem of explaining why no one, or very few, had heard about this before. Solution: say that the women ran away and told no one, because they were afraid. In this hypothesis, the women are simply a literary device for adding the idea of the resurrection to the biographical narrative, and the bit about their telling no one was a way of explaining why many people hadn't heard this idea before. Or, if there were already stories about resurrected Jesus talking to his disciples, but that Mark thought these stories were widely disrespected, this was his way of distancing himself from them while preserving the idea of resurrection itself. Of course the issue of how anyone was supposed to have learned about it at all was left hanging. But a smart propagandist realizes that this would not matter. Most people have the critical thinking skills of a guppy. This hypothesis and your comments about the source of the resurrection idea being widespread cultural traditions that have post-mortem ascension as an expected feature of acquired divinity, jive with Richard Carrier's opinion that the initial ideas of Jesus' resurrection had more the character of a spooky spiritual ascension (Carrier thinks it all took place in the spiritual, or sky realm) but lacked at first any component of a tradition of the corporeal Jesus walking around and talking to his followers. Mark's version leaves it more or less on that level, but adds in the women being informed just to make it a definite item in the narrative. We then have to look at the Book of Matthew as the first recorded instance of anybody claiming that a bodily resurrected Jesus got up, walked around, and preached to his followers. So then we have a fairly clear picture of the evolution of the resurrection tradition. First you have Paul, a decade or so after the crucifixion, claiming a supernatural visitation from Jesus, which could not be seen by his companions of the moment. Paul speaks of Jesus' resurrection, but only in terms that cannot be distinguished from a spiritual event that has taken place in the heavens. Then you have the Mark story that brings the moment of resurrection back to the time and place immediately after Jesus' death, but still being a spooky ephemeral event that was not directly witnessed by anyone. Then you have Matthew and the rest expanding the story and making the post-resurrection period a narrative about the flesh and blood Jesus shooting the shit with his followers and having them put their hands into his wounds and all the rest of it. And this expanded tale of an earthly post-resurrection walkabout never appears until everybody who could have known the original Jesus is dead and gone.

@@donnievance1942 Your timeline, of Paul first mentioning the resurrection but in more or less 'spiritual terms', then Mark making it a physical apotheosis but the women told no one about it, then Matthew, Luke, and John coming along anywhere from 10-40 years later and having Jesus making guest appearances on The Late Show, fits the 'known' dates of these writings. The story grows and gets new elements and embellishments added to it. Of course, in the Roman world, there were demigods of whom it was assumed they ascended back to heaven because their bodies went missing (Romulus, Asclepius, etc) and that's about where Mark leaves off, so if Mark was aware of these earlier myth-themes, he would likely have written his exaggerated story about the life of a rebel Jewish teacher and miracle ('magic') worker named Jesus with those themes in mind. In the past, I've likened the gospels and other works of that era as the comic books of that day and age.

I to know Jesus existed but only to save his people the Jews from being taken out of ISRAEL by the ROMAN Occupation at that time ! The JEWS were rebelling against the ROMAN Occupation and tried to warn the JEWS that if they continue to rebel against the ROMAN Occupation, that they ( the JEWS) would be TAKEN OUT of ISRAEL ! This happened during the time of JESUS ! The JEWS rebelled against the ROMAN Occupation on three occasions the last rebellion happened at the hilltop fortress at MASADA, in which the JEWS held out against the ROMAN army and were finally defeated ! Every Jew involved with that rebellion committed suicide rather than being put into slavery by the ROMAN Legions !

There are two reasons Mark’s end abruptly: 1. It didn’t end there. The rest hasn’t been found / has been lost. 2. Mark meant it to end there. The reasons for #2 can be many. You present a very good one. There are other reasons: Mark was protecting Christians - as they started to be prosecuted. Mark (writing for Peter) wanted to leave it open ended. Or, many other reasons. We’ll never know.

@@BabyBoomerChannel No one was interested in some weird cult. A lot of them existed in the Roman Empire. The cult was so tiny no one noticed it.

Agreed! P.S. Derek, I like your new hair style. 😮

@@patricianoel7782 idek who you are

Yup. To me now, its no different than kids being upset about a pets death, and the parents saying.. its ok, he is in heaven now.

@@TheScotsalan Infinity, eternity and death (own in particular) are very hard to understand and accept . It seems to be almost biologically impossible for our brains. it is much easier to accept existence of divine being behind all than reality, universe, black holes etc.

As a Christian I will respond: the suffering servant also is a theme troughout in the old testament. It started with Joseph as the one suffering, being thrown into a pit and left to die, eventually he was sold. In the end he forgives his brothers and saves his family. I actually believe this myth became fact as this pattern seems to be a returning one throughout history, even to this day. Rene Girard has written on it as his theory of mimesis which is very interesting.

@@405servererror As a former Christian: Gospels were written by people who knew Old Testament, so it would be even surprising not seeing the analogies. Everybody is different but we also share many common things. Most of us will more likely believe in something and less likely with something else. More believable stories would more likely be fixed through generations then less believable, but the fact that beyond lighting is electricity and not a divine being (Ball, Zeus, Perun and so on) is a fact despite divine being being a original explanation across many cultures in the past.

Hi Ashley, yeah, I was wondering the same thing. I came across this, from Dr. Ehrman. Pretty cool. Have a wonderful day!! Sheldon ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-f_L4_LmqImY.html

He did on his own RU-vid channel yesterday

Well now, let’s be honest, the New Testament, I’d argue, that the Gospels themselves, outside of the Epistles are certainly the most influential writings of all time.

@@φαρμακεία-πρωταρχικόςBart Ehrman would agree!

@@nodrog567I certainly hope so.😅😂

@@φαρμακεία-πρωταρχικός Depends on the definition of "influential". As stories and literacy, one could argue that the Greek epics are more influential, since they heavily influenced the Gospels themselves. Perhaps when measured in something like human suffering and the justification for it, then sure, they could be considered the most "influential".

@@Bluesruse You could definitely make that argument. I need to start listening to audiobook of The Odyssey

They didn't tell anybody. They told Mark. He's not anybody he's Mark

Checkmate atheist

Well, he didn't. He made a story to try and fulfill the prophecies from the Old testament. He didn't care About what really happened, but emphasizing on the character of Jesus.

He is winking to the audience

@@JasonHenderson you think Mark was written by Mark? You have to be kidding.

He tends to contradict myself in his own books, but he is a good debater, I 'll give him that.

@@masterbaiter7537 Scientific studies in religious hospitals show that prayer for others doesn't work. Never works. Self-prayer works because of the Placebo effect. I believe strongly in most of the moral beliefs that I think you do though I never in my life thought these were divinely inspired. Academic estimates around 90,000,000-1.2 billion people have died as a result of Islam and its continuous war of religious expansion since its inception. Problem: they take it too literally. Christians over time are less fanatical. A strong morality should be taught but most religions and holy books demonstrate a lot of immoral or questionable dogma. It's so obvious. Some people think there is no morality without god but this is total nonsense as proven by scientific studies on the equal morality of non-believers. Good behavior comes from being taught by parents, mentors, or even imaginary 'gods'. It can be imbued from childhood and reinforced over the years, setting up an internal moral clock that usually plays a role in good behavior. The best and most moral people do good when not being rewarded or watched because it feels good and we are rewarded for our feeling good. I think the basis for moral behavior is largely one's level of empathy. The seeming display of empathy by religious people may be motivated by scoring points with their imaginary god for the reward of a good imaginary afterlife or avoidance of imaginary hell.

In context of the narrative it was probably to the hostile Jewish Pharisees, though perhaps with rippling meaning towards anyone whose reaction to the gospel is violent and continuously hostile. (As an aside, we see in Matthew Jesus call a Gentile woman a dog, but then still give what is holy to her. Her reaction is Thanksgiving and faith, no indication of trampling and violence...unlike the hostile Pharisees and eventually the Roman authorities)

Malaysia. But he doesn’t want anyone else to have them. 😂

Hogwarts.

@Wolfgang - He makes them look really good.

@@mnamhie figures

Demystifying Jesus makes him much more 'obtainable' and that is dangerous to the pharasies of the world gatekeepers of god.

I see feet...

You are misinformed

@@leviandhiro3596That’s only a potential flaw if you believe that the romans were pressured to crucify Jesus. I think Bart’s position is that the blame placed on the Jews was a later addition.

I don't think the title of this one is so bad, but I take your general point - I fear that Dereck can put off the very people who most need to hear this stuff, by over-cooked choice of title.

I agree, but i don't care at all about regular guy named Jesus, the magical guy clearly didn't exsist.

It means the same thing, doesn't it? That's not what click bait means. The title doesn't have to be a quote, it just has reflect the actual content.

Defraud - to rob, get what is not yours. it is in the Commandments, do not covet. please study the word and not just believe what this fool is saying.

@@1amCrucifiedWithChrist Covet: Yearn to possess Defraud: iIlegally obtain money from (someone) by deception You do understand the difference between 'thought crimes' and actual crimes?

@@canwelook its the translators fault not the writer. the greek word is simple as covet.

@@1amCrucifiedWithChrist No. You are 100% wrong. Please back up your claimed correct translation of Mark 10:19 ... which bible translation you using? Every bible's translation of this word in this passage that I can find has Jesus commandment as do not 'defraud' or do not 'cheat'. Not one of them says do not 'covet' as you claim. In addition, Mark's Jesus disagrees with not just the Exodus 20 commandment of Moses' god, but with the 2 different Jesus characters discussion with the same rich young man in Matthew's (Matthew 19:18), and Luke's (Luke 18:20) gospels

It's not Mark's gospel, it's the gospel (of Jesus Christ) according to Mark.

@Tryme Yes! Mark died for our sins and rose from the dead... But he didn't want his mother in law to know so he called himself "Yhéssuss"...

Thanks!!

Found it used on Amazon for about a dollar! Yea!🎉

@@lunarmodule6419 Okay phoney.

Il have a look

I always enjoy Dr. James White as well. Wallace and White dig deeper. God bless their insight. 👍✝️

The problem with that is that there are no provably genuine sayings of Jesus, and therefore the point is moot. Paul's version shaped the religion, so it's crucial to study that to understand how it came about

@@humbleopulence was Paul a disciple of Jesus?

@@14-Peaks no, but you don't have any original material to point to save for a host of Gnostic materials that carry none of the trademarks of a supposed original Gospel. Likely because there wasn't such a thing. There was a story and people took it to all kinds of directions. The direction that won, was Paul's. It doesn't matter that he wasn't a disciple of Jesus because all we have left is material from the winners and the followers of the losers (Nag Hammadi, etc), and yet, nothing from the losers themselves. So it doesn't matter what Jesus really said. We will likely never know.

@@humbleopulence you said "There was a story and people took it to all kinds of directions. The direction that won, was Paul's." You also said "So it doesn't matter what Jesus really said. We will likely never know." *do you believe in what Paul says or NOT?* Also about the NT authors?

@@14-Peaks I'm Jewish and don't have a dog in the fight. I just wanna know why my people were turned into public enemy number one over what appears to be bullcrap. When I look at Paul, alls I see is the self hating jew stereotype come to unfortunate life. I wish someone had hugged him when he was a kid. He feels so resentful, it's sad.

Paul's letters (50s), then Mark (70s) then Matthew (80s) then John (90s). Q is hypothetical and frankly unnecessary.

@@phyllis9998 what's the chronology of the signs gospel? When was it compiled?

@@srebalanandasivam9563 synoptic gospels, not signs gospels. Good to see that you're taking an interest in it all. I'm just putting you right on that. Me, when I became interested in art mispronounced Renoir and called him Renor until someone corrected me 🤣

@@srebalanandasivam9563 we have no extant work that is known as the signs gospel

@@srebalanandasivam9563 It is still debated but the majority opinion is as I stated above.

It's very eye-opening when you learn about the parallelisms Christianity shares with many much older mythologies. And some apologists say the parallelisms don't contradict the Christian Gospel. I don't know how they justify it at that point.

Yeah. Sure. Yawn. But no number of people willingly and freely went to their deaths for Zeus. It just does not compare.

​@@lorenzor124 And how do you know? What do the super honest pedophile Catholics have to say about Zeus?

@@lorenzor124 yeah because who would believe that the most violent civilizations, that happened to be very religious, didn't die for their gods.

​@@lorenzor124 you are cherry picking avoiding whole series of similarities you literally try to refute good arguments with own random non argument

“Pilot” 😂

You can't make sense out of a fictional story..

@@richardlawson6787there’s fictional elements, but a guy called Jesus was killed, who taught something that probably pissed off romans- that’s pretty clear

wars between projections of more convenient "truth" you could add more differences from that scripture that's what ppl are interested in

except there is no Q in mark nor John

bart is a NT scholar. youll have to look to others for OT interpretations

Yep. You're smarter than Ehrman. But you probably don't blame fake Christianity for turning you away from real Christianity like Ehrman does

This is an oversimplification and not necessarily true. Because: (1) Everyone has a different perspective on the same story or the same events. (2) People involved in interrogations have noted that a guilty person has a rehearsed lie they keep telling over and over, while innocent people tend to change their stories while under intense pressure to try to appease their interrogators and end the exhausting interrogation process.

@@gerasoras It is really telling that you are attaching the same weakness as humans under interrogation to a god that is alleged by believers to be Omnipresent, Omnipotent, Omnibenevolent and Omni Intelligent. Seriously, a Supreme Being that is supposedly far superior to Humans can't get his story straight? WTF???!!! So what I can conclude from this is that your comment is alluding to the fact that god is Man- Made with all the weakness of Human Attributes and Characteristics.

His laugther is infectious.

@@williamsawyer9894 It is nauseating.

Always make me smile!

Bart Erman was very smart to have left Christianity. Christianity is a 4th century Greek theatre production

@@JesusisaMuslim Not really, as we know there was a bunch of cults early on who in various ways centered on aspects of the "Christ" narrative! Heck, even Islam have aspects of this cult-like fan-fiction of parts of the Jewish and the Christian narratives which Mohammed in his trade as a merchant undoubtedly came into contact with before he started having his seizures!

Calma pueblo

Just updated that for you my friend.

@@MythVisionPodcast muchas gracias!

The amount of differences between the gospels is staggering. It’s not just one verse. What were his supposed last words? Who went to see the tomb? If you allow a religion based off this evidence to dictate your life, you should rethink this. It’s crazy to think we know anything Jesus said or did. 13 books of the NT are Pauls letters. 6 of those are known forgeries. This book is fraudulent full stop and the gospels were all anonymous written decades after this supposed event.

One notices the word “trust”. What prompts someone to trust another? Or trust a story? What prompts distrust? Magicians develop techniques to manipulate and exploit the trust we place in what we see. These tricks can still amaze and delight…like peek a boo for grown ups. Peek a boo is probably the oldest magic trick ever! And it still delights. Christians are finding people don’t trust the ancient books, the spell is broken for many of us. And Many good people just quietly go along with the true believers and for understandable reasons… Love, family, and friends are trusted and needed far more than ancient myths of heaven and hell…which is understandable. Thomas trusts his own senses…he needed evidence… that evidence remains enough to trust the story still today…at least for true believers. The ancient authors of the Gospels remain trusted by true believers…why? …apparently they trust what they see in the ancient texts… This functions as confirmation bias and special pleading…or faith…depending on one’s view of reality.

Wins the attention of the audience. 'He surely must know what he is talking about.'

i used to believe that, until i realized most books are full of BS. so i threw out most and only refer to my bibles in the original greek. life makes more sense now

@@ngmui430 Original Greek?

That is not a caveat. Bart's historical belief is based on a well established practice. Your supposition is that Jesus was an exception to the Romans even though there is no indication he would have been.

Citation needed for that claim. It strains credulity from an administrative perspective, as it could result in military units more loyal to the vassal state than Rome itself, with inherent conflicts of interest potentially leading to siding with a rebellion.

Well, the Local authorities also had their own troops .the Temple had a palace guard of 600. The temple was more the treasury, courts and place of government, housing, commerce as well as various temples. Herodian dynasty also had its own army. The wars they caused were part of the reason for Roman intervention to protection trade. There had been major wars between Greek kingdoms over previous century too If there was a complex social situation for a novel missiah to emerge: this was the place.

The question of whether Jesus was buried in a tomb is a completely different question than whether there actually was an empty tomb. If Jesus was buried in a tomb, that doesn't mean there was an empty tomb. We don't know where Jesus' body ended up - all we can do is speculate. Him being buried in a tomb could have been completely made up in order to tell a "missing body" story which was common in Greco-Roman culture.

@@decades5643 we don't have to speculate at all. There is evidence or we don't know. I'm we could speculate that Jesus body flew away and laugh at the whole scene - which is another story that was told. Again, with no evidence

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Truths?😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

@@cloudman8911 Textually, pure.

What "older" gospel?

Are you referring to the Q fragments that they think is proto-Mark? I think they settled on them being just a really old draft of Mark.

@@ProgrammedForDamage Apparently they don't know what they are actually referring to.

They occur in every culture known. Today, we call them hallucinations....

@@deeder001 Than how do you know you are not hallucinating right now?

@@mistermurtad2831 There are ways to test and interrogate perceptual and sensory experiences. It helps if one has a basic grasp of the natural laws (i.e. physics), is not prone to believing in supernatural nonsense and things such as animals, bushes, and rock formations are capable of speaking. This is partly why schizophrenics are unable to effectively implement these tests. But would it matter if I were? The hallucination isn't ordering me to kill people, telling me that I'm just so very special to have knowledge 'revealed' to me that others are not special enough to have revealed to them or are not permitted to consider, telling me to smash someone in the face because they are laughing at me behind my back, or that others should be condemned if they don't do what my hallucination tells me they should be doing.

@@deeder001 You miss the point entirely. The video implied that Mark did not have knowledge of Jesus's death. It is clear he knew of Jesus projecting this before his death. You presume that all can be known has to fit into the natural world. There a many unexplained phenomena that can't be explain by a narrow view of the law of physics.

It's easy to predict something when you're documenting what has already happened. Paul is the antichrist because he changed the new law back to the old

Or until they touch fire and burn their skin

How many of the 3 guys walked back out of the lions den alive?

😂 Good one. The question almost no theologian ever asks is why. Why did the church accept four gospels that contradict each other? Why did they not follow the cleaned up canon of Marcion? Why are there even contradictions within one and the same parable? Once you come to an understanding of that problem, you're much closer to understanding the gospel writers and their audience. In all my years at university to get my MA, I only found one author that really addressed this issue. And to this day it was one of the most profound books on religion that I ever read.

​@@MrSeedi76Currently one hypothesis is "Greco-Roman Biographical" genre.

He's trying to explain why nobody heard about it contemporaneously to it happening? It should have been the most important thing in human history, yet it was "kept secret," supposedly.

There’s no faster way to become an atheist than by reading the Bible.

You don't believe in what?

A cartoon of Bart is needed or talking doll😅

i love how christians ignore all the evidence and simply state “in my opinion” or “i (want to) believe….”. lmfao

@@ngmui430 The evidence for Mark being the first prototype Gospel are what ? It's deffinetely not "All the evidence". And as for the ending of Mark, I was surprised watching a debate between two christians who held both opiions about the ending of Mark, and seeing alll the evidence they discussed, now hearing people like Bart Ehrman choose not to count it as reliable material is surprising. The 1 John 5:7 and the Woman taken in adultery isnt that shocking, (and I've made videos on my former channel on those two, I am going to update the 1John5:7 one sometime because of new evidence I came cross.) But the longer ending of Mark just looks like a text critic is looking for a stirr up. And that's silly imo. Heres a presentation about the Ending of Mark and Matthew being a developement of Mark. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aXGpi7kC0Mw.html

I think there probably was a memorization text, but I have some suspicion that the Gospels used Memory Loci a popular technique of the era, to encode the text. In other words the important thing was the sayings and the geographical narrative was important symbolically but also as a memorization technique. The method of loci was an Ancient Greek strategy for memory enhancement, which uses visualizations of familiar spatial environments in order to enhance the recall of information.

😂

It is so unlikely that the Roman authorities would treat a dissident who questioned the very authority of Rome with any favour. I struggle to believe other than the gospel writers, Mark in particular were wrong.

@@robertloader9826 Not disagreeing with you. I just have a hard time believing the Romans would crucify someone as a dissident rebel who said things like "Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s" (Mark 12:17, Matthew 22:20-22). They must've crucified Jesus for a different reason. My guess is Pilate was afraid of a Jewish rebellion starting on his watch, and how that would look to his superiors. So I think he crucified Jesus for purely political optics reasons (appeasing conservative Jews; such as Caiaphas, the wealthy Sadducees who liked their money, the traditionalistic Pharisees. etc; who did not want Jesus questioning the status quo or making any changes to their religion). If this was not a routine treason crucifixion, then why compare it to one? Pilate didn't crucify Jesus because he saw him as a threat to Rome, but to keep relations relatively peaceful with the locals. If we can believe people at that time behaved much like people do today, then it is perfectly reasonable to agree with the Gospels that the Romans didn't do a by-the-book crucifixion on Jesus. It really could've happened just the way they said it did. Bart Ehrman is an extremely smart man, but even very smart men can be wrong about some things.

@@dmw0077 Not really a convincing argument, nothing you said there gives any indication as to why the body of Jesus would be treated in any way different to the body of any other dissident. To remove the body to a tomb would create a shrine, the last thing Pilate would have desired!

@@robertloader9826 Why would Pilate care if a tomb became a shrine? Again, there is zero evidence that Jesus was advocating rebellion against Roman rule. Caiaphas probably did cared, but he wasn't the one in charge of crucifixions. Once Jesus was dead, Pilate's interest in the whole affair was over. If anyone had pleaded for the body, why wouldn't he have given it to him (or her)? The Romans were occupiers. Augustus wanted peace in the region, which is why he let Herod Antipas appear to have some local power in the area, when the real power was 100% Roman. The Romans cared little (if at all) about the Jewish religion. Pilate could've easily let someone take Jesus' body to a tomb just to thumb his nose at Caiaphas and his religious concerns. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything...only to point out that Dr Ehrman's take on the subject is highly questionable.

@@dmw0077 It is just as likely that Pilate may have feared unrest and ordered the body buried quickly and quietly in secrecy to avoid any surprises, so that nothing more be heard of Jesus! Pilate’s interest in the whole affair may not have been entirely bound by his duty, but of his inner thoughts we shall never know. I still however regard Mr. Ehrman’s position that the body would have been left as per standard procedure more likely than it being removed to parties unknown. Not sure why your purely speculative opinion is less questionable than his informed one.

Agreed. Some things are so easy that a child could understand. But, and I could be wrong, I also thank God for scholarship. I have learned things from scholarship no church has ever taught me. And in the Bible we see the power of when scribes turn to God. Like Paul, Stephen, and the wise scribe in Mark 12. I am a Gentile and many of us are Gentiles, and we don't have the benefit or education to understand the Jewish context of some of the stories. Nor do we even understand or get educated in the Greco-Roman context of it. These scholars God has raised up for us do all the historical work for us and then write neat simple little books we can read in one week what took them 20 years to learn. I appreciate them and thank God for that. Because I and many others would never ever take the time to learn so much for the Bible's sake.

Isn't he an atheist?

@@timgregory2296 He calls himself both agnostic and atheist. Even though he is an atheist, or because of it(?), he is one of the better, more objective, historical Jesus scholars (although two of his most popular books, "Misquoting Jesus" and "Jesus, Interrupted" have, imho, caused him to be viewed as more iconoclastic than I think he actually is). Two of the foremost "Christian" (so self designated) historical Jesus scholars, John P. Meier and Dale C. Allison, also manage to achieve commendable amounts of objectivity.

I detest staunch atheism but I understand it to the analytical mind that has not seen. However, when one suspends their own disbelief to suppose, one can begin to open up to what the true meaning is. It isn't sifting sands of history to find who's accurate and who's not, it's a looming forward to a truth and a time told of long ago that is rooted in much more than hope.

@@timgregory2296 not seen? Suspends disbelief? Have you tried looking at these fables with an open mind? These are parables that helped superstitious desert dwellers forget that they didn't have a ton of freshwater.

the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish.” ISAIAH 29:14