NT Wright: resurrection of Jesus, reliability of the New Testament, and virtue ethics 

VeritasForumFinland, nevertheless, it sounds good overall. I really enjoyed the dialogue. Thanks for uploading:-)!

This upload is much appreciated and truthfully I had not noticed any sound issues.

Still audible. Thanks for this clip

The truth does not need to be presented in the most hi tech, high-quality way, in order for it to be appreciated

@@wellnessgirl2806, The idea of quality of content over quality of presentation

Godfrey Babu, always stimulating to the heart, soul and eternal spirit

Dd S, troll much?

Can you reconcile the accounts ? Angel on the rock or one inside or two inside or in john's gospels no mention at beginning of encountering any angels but leaving to get Peter and John who encounter no angels Resurrection accounts in the gospels Matthew 28: 1-6 (80 AD) After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. 2 There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. 3 His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. 4 The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men. 5 The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. 6 He is not here; he has risen, just as he said Mark 16 (AD 66-70) 1 When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus’ body. 2 Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb 3 and they asked each other, “Who will roll the stone away from the entrance to the tomb. 4 But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. 5 As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. 6 “Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. 7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.’” 8 Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.[a] Luke 24:1-11 (AD 85-90) 1 On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. 2 They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, 3 but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. 4 While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. 5 In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, “Why do you look for the living among the dead? 6 He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 7 ‘The Son of Man must be delivered over to the hands of sinners, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.’ ” 8 Then they remembered his words. 9 When they came back from the tomb, they told all these things to the Eleven and to all the others. 10 It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told this to the apostles. 11 But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense. John 20:1-(AD 90-110) 20 Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance. 2 So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, “They have running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. 5 He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. 6 Then Simon Peter came along behind him and went straight into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, 7 as well as the cloth that had been wrapped around Jesus’ head. The cloth was still lying in its place, separate from the linen. 8 Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw and believed. 9 (They still did not understand from Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.) 10 Then the disciples went back to where they were staying.

@@noelhausler8006, much has been written about the “contradictions” of the Gospels yet if they were exactly the same then it would have been collusion, wouldn’t it? Three witnesses to a crime. Similar but different accounts. Your dating is way off from what I know about this but the most concrete evidence for the truth of the resurrection is the fact that Christ bodily resurrection was not part of any Hebrew theology at that time and the creedal statements were in wide circulation within 5 years after the event. Many would put them between 1-3 years.

@@michaelbrickley2443 They are the same. 95% of Mark is in Matthew. 65% of Mark is in Luke. 35% of Mark is in John. They all stole from Mark and are NOT eye witness accounts. Fact.

@@jonnsmith180, haha….keep believing the BS you’re putting out. I’ve seen miracles in my life and He made Himself manifest to me in 1990. You can believe what you want.

It’s Ed Sanders that Wright refers to here. I’m not sure which work, but he wrote a book on the historical Jesus

The accounts of Josephus and Tacitus.

I am not asking for more text claims. I am asking for physical evidence. Do you know the difference?@@Bassmaster_UK_Band

Scripture is His Word. His Church are believers (in a spiritual, not physical sense) in his Word. Follow His Word (ie the Scriptures). Not other the self proclaimed "facts".

Not everything was recorded in the Gospels. But there is a verse referring to it " Rachel weeping for her children" Matt. 2:18.

"I'll stick with the KJV". Don't assume you have perfect translation which fell out of the heavenly realm. Translation errors like "end of the world" instead of "end of the aeon" (Greek word for age) appear in the KJV. The translators use the word Easter when the correct translation is Passover. The translators even have St.Paul contradicting himself in the same book. It's best to use a variety of different translations.

He also claims to 'speak in tongues' when he prays, but speaking in tongues (essentially a WRITTEN, SPOKEN LANGUAGE, and not mere 'heaven chatter' or babbling nonsensical words) was specifically a sign to the Jews! The modern day charismatic movement has infiltrated this into their many heretical and damnable doctrines and have had millions of people over the years babbling into the air without having any clue what they're saying, thinking that they're doing it for God knows what reason. This, too, gets into the Kundalini stuff and the eastern religions that essentially conjure and contact demonic entities, but that's another can of worms. Anyway, interesting comment!

@@DerrickthePinecone Speaking in tongues came with the Gifts of the Spirit and the Gifts ceased at the end of the Old Covenant age in 70 AD. The Old Testament prophecied that these gifts were for the final generation of Old Covenant of Israel, which was from 30 AD (the cross) to 70 AD (end of the age). You're right, it was a sign the end was coming.

@@70AD-user45 Exactly my point! I agree!

Yea books written around the Mediterranean with no form of instant communication, read by the very witnesses of Christ and their followers, was copied haha. That is a funny joke. You don’t have to be a Christian to recognize that the Gospels are not a copy of each other.

Surprisingly that 4 people wrote about Jesus and they are similar?

To speculate that the pagans/etc. who required a blood sacrifice is no real profound proof that the God of The Bible doesn't exist, which is what's implied in your comment. Have you ever perhaps stopped and think that maybe the pagans were mimicking God? You should do a deep study of Blood and what it really is and what it means. There's 'life' in the blood. Have you ever wondered: "Where did blood come from?"

@@DerrickthePinecone The early delusional confused superstitious hypocrites, who made up the Abraham story, did not realize that they were contradicting their own definition of their imaginary God. If God is omniscient then God would have known about Abraham's sincerity without needing to resort to child abuse.

@@DerrickthePinecone *Please explain,* *-In what context it is moral to turn children into indentured servitude volunteered workers?* *-In what context it is moral to treat indentured servitude volunteered workers as property?* *-In what context it is moral to pass indentured servitude volunteered workers to children as permanent inheritance?* *-In what context it is moral to treat indentured servitude volunteered workers so bad that relatives shouldn’t be treated that way?* *-If it was indentured servitude volunteered work, then why it is restricted to only foreigners?* Leviticus 25:44-46 However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. * Please explain, in what context it is moral to beat indentured servitude volunteered workers with many blows?* Luke 12:47 The servant who knows the master's will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. * Please explain, in what context it is moral to beat indentured servitude volunteered workers as long as they don't die?* Exodus 21:20 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property. * Please explain, in what context it is moral to kill non-virgin brides?* Deuteronomy 22:20-21 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you. * Please explain, in what context it is moral to kill unruly children?* Deuteronomy 21:18-21 If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his home town. And they shall say to the elders of his city, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard." Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear of it and fear. * Please explain, in what context it is moral to slaughter infants?* 1 Samuel 15:3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and *infants,* cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.

@@DerrickthePinecone It is obvious that delusional superstitious barbaric hypocrites made up the God of the Bible. You really should be ashamed of yourself for praising a God who orders the slaughter of even one infant in any context.

@@DerrickthePinecone Reading the Bible isn't enough; you have to read the Bible & actually think about it to realize the truth that the God of The Bible was conjured up by hypocrites who were intellectually comparable to today’s Afghan warlords.

😂😂😂

Meanwhile in reality Christianity is falling apart in all western countries.

You putting forth all islamic arguments which have been refuted long back. Each and every scriptures you quoted are out of contest.

@@rajeshshetty4862 where are the come backs...its not Islamic arguments its what the bible says. Jesus says he doesn't know the hour...but Christians say he did!!!

@@yeahbuddy4712 IF you read further long Jesus mentioned that “before Abraham I am.” All Jews knew that name and recognized it and they wanted to stone him for that claim to the name ( a name God gave when Moses asked who are you). Jesus clearly claimed that he was God and all NT scholars agree. Now Jesus is also a Man. That is why he was called the Son of Man. He is God incarnate in the form of a humble being who had the authority of God at the same limiting his power so that he may suffer for mankind.

@@yeahbuddy4712yes because they used the moon and stars as their guides for feasts of The Lord Days So it’s going to be on the biblical feast calendar! Passover 70AD the Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem! The believing Christians fled The religious went into the city

@@JoshJ12 he didn't know when the hour would be??? I thought God would know that??

He was barbaric too, with the woman at the well, right? No Jew would speak to a Samaritan, much less a female! But he chose to address that poor miserable female’s loneliness! And when the locals dragged a (adulterous) woman before Him, to force Him to condemn her, He turned their spite (toward her) into self examination! By the way, do you know any ancient books that were focused on the lives of lowly women, other than the book of Ruth, and the book of Esther from the Bible? Tell me in which global cultures women were safe and valued more than the Judao civilisation?

This is how you have an incorrect analysis of what Jesus said. Jesus was talking about the laws of God concerning sin, the Ten Commandments and laws of repentance etc. He wasn’t talking about day to day laws that Moses gave. He rebuked divorce even though Moses gave the right to divorce. Jesus knew how some of the law was abused and how some of the laws of Moses. The “pain” aspect is the important part where pain is brought into the world and the first pain to be experienced is childbirth and that is a testament to all humans about the result of sin.

The original sin theology is not part of Judaism. It was invented long after Jesus' death in the 4th century AD. We can agree that Judaism wasn't good to women, but that has absolutely nothing to do with Genesis 3.

@@lepidoptera9337 You have to be careful when describing original sin as something that was invented. For example, original sin is the first sin committed and that is of disobedience of God, but the concept of how that sin impacts the world is different across Christianity. For example, the Orthodox believe that the son shall not inherit the sins of the father, but the the impact of sin can be seen through generations. Likewise, the sin of Adam and Eve caused themselves to be removed from Eden, and their removal of God’s presence allowed spiritual death and other curses of evils to persist, not because a baby deserves it, rather the bell of evil rings throughout the world.

@@JoshJ12 Dude. Read Genesis 3. It doesn't even have the word "sin" in it. Or the words "fall" or anything else that actually correlates with the theological bullshit that your priest/preacher/Dad/friendly self-made internet theologian told you. You were simply sold a bunch of goods as a child and you can't let go of it, no matter the actual textual evidence. That is exactly how religion works: it completely removes your ability to think independently. :-)

That is a sudointelectual bubble bro

Jesus is described as reading the scroll in the synagogue in Luke 4. So at the very least he could read Hebrew. Secondly, we know from Qumran and other places that the Septuagint Greek translation of the scriptures were used in the synagogues. So it is possible He could read Greek as well.

Jesus could read and write.

Luke 4:16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. And as was his custom, he went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and he stood up to read. See the last word in that verse there?

No. He could read and write. Every Jewish boy learns these skills because of their education system.

The book of Mark is said to have been out in the lifetimes of eye witnesses.

Yup; and it's amazing more people can't see that.

Which means, "I don't understand what he is saying."

Dd S “I don’t like what he’s saying so he’s a conman.”

I'm not believing what NT Wright says, but I always feel like it's still 1000x better than the kind of morons who pretend to know when someone's crazy or "full of shit", as such arrogance always reveals a person who doesn't know shit about religion, what exactly people believe, and how exactly belief functions in most normal people.

Bennyamin exactly people who say mean things about the opponent do so because they have no real counter argument

Unless of course, what he was saying was: "Don't you realize that by calling me good you are calling me God?" He is not rebuking the man for his presumption, He is asking him rhetorically to think through the implications of what he is saying. Jesus leaves the question "Why do you call me good?" hanging unanswered, because the answer he is looking for is: " I call you good because you are God"

You have totally misunderstood or misread the text. "Why do you call me good?......" means Jesus is saying " You are absolutely right here. I am God"

Got it, Ian Hall?

Read the other commenters to your response and see how your exegesis falls flat by taking it out of context completely. Nothing more need to be said on the subject.