The moderator is kind of garbage. Richard let’s mark talk till he’s done and then they constantly interrupt Richard to “let mark talk.” How about let Richard finish. I also think it’s hilarious that they said Richard has the stronger bias because this would help an atheist destroy Christianity. What an intellectually dishonest thing to say. If Richard is wrong, it’s a discovery. If Mark is wrong, his worldview is shattered. Yeah, Richard has the bigger bias. This debate really should be had between athiest scholars because the theological bias is too big.
20 minutes in Are you kidding me The moderator only interrupted carrier once and that was because he interrupted mark And mark isn't really a christian He rejects traditional authorship if the gospels and major doctrines like the Trinity and alot more I always thought he was an atheist But apparently he is a liberal mainline christian And what the heck are you talking about are you saying that christian perspectives should be automatically dismissed just because you think they are biased
Justin is oily-notice how Goodacre gets in that reference to James, “brother of the Lord”, after which Justin quickly redirects the conversation so Richard never gets a chance to respond to that old canard.
No one can say with certainty that the Jesus of the Bible existed what I find ludicrous is that theists seem to say it with such certainty which is ridiculous and laughable
@@Lobsterwithinternet my point being all of this could be a simulation. So no way of knowing if you’re real or maybe we are a figment of someone else’s imagination…
Mark is a liar, quoting fake passages that aren't there. Typical apologist arm waving and misdirection. Richard and others have shown that Jews did expect a crucified savior in that time based on Daniel 9 and Isaiah 53.
@@ApolloThyrteen Nothing in the gospels happened. It's all fiction to cope with the daniel prophecy failing for a third time and the temple being destroyed with no messiah coming.
@@tomasrocha6139 He doesn't need to. He is relying on mainstream hebrew scholars to make his arguments. he cites all of his sources. nothing is even controversial in what he is saying.
Jesus effing christ, between Goodare, or Goodacre, whatever is correct, and the host, how much more could you both interrupt Carrier as he calmly and politely explains the error of your assumptions that are so in conflict with not just your beliefs, but what I must assume is also a core part of your identity.
Jesus must have existed - I once saw him on TV. If Dr Carrier was was gifted Blurays regarding all the dramatised Jesus movies and series out there - surely it is obvious Jesus existed.
Dr Carrier obviously believes Student Loans exist - as he had everyone else exercise charity to pay it off for him. How's that for contradicting the Protestant Work Ethic?
@@MidlifeCrisis82 First off Jesus isn’t pro roman, He’s just non violent. That being said, many of the “pro roman” attitudes are just saying to keep peace, they are echoed in the many beliefs of sadducees, pharisees and individuals like Josephus. Anti jewish is probable, because He was an apocalyptic jew; the qumran sect was notorious for saying that everyone else but them would be destroyed.. it’s not a stretch for a apocalyptic preacher to have that same zeal.
@@MidlifeCrisis82 First off Jesus isn’t pro roman, He’s just non violent. That being said, many of the “pro roman” attitudes are just saying to keep peace, they are echoed in the many beliefs of sadducees, pharisees and individuals like Josephus. Anti jewish is probable, because He was an apocalyptic jew; the qumran sect was notorious for saying that everyone else but them would be destroyed.. it’s not a stretch for a apocalyptic preacher to have that same zeal.
