Oh boom on the Oxford shuffle! I have a buddy who teases that he went to Princeton. Not that he studied there...just that he'd been to Princeton, NJ, once.
Excellent critique! The contrast between loopy and rigorous scholarship is wonderfully clear and stark. That "when i was at Oxbridge" scam seems pretty widespread.
I'd like to see Dan do a real top 10 list of archeological finds related to the Bible without any attempt to prove Christianity true. I would assume that most of archeology relating to the Bible would be from later works in the Hebrew Bible, not from the Christian New Testament.
Man it's so nice to see someone logical speak about these things. I remember watching these two guys and it feeling so fake and cringe. Searching for truth these days takes a lot of filtering. So glad to have run across Dan's channel.
Dan’s number one archaeological find is going to be the Dead Sea Scrolls. No discovery at the intersection of Bible scholarship and archaeology is as important.
@@MarcosElMalo2 - I imagine that the Tel Dan Stele and the Ketef Hinnom Silver Scrolls would have to be on the list, too. But do I only think that because I know of so few archeological finds related to the Bible?
The main problem is there are countless people who blindly follow misinformation like you're pointing out. It's hard for people who aren't trained like yourself to catch these misrepresentations. Thank you
Indeed, without wishing to disrespect the educational institutions attended by Johnston - he does that himself by not crediting them but rather hinting at his alma mater being the more ancient seat of learning - "residency" in the city of Oxford whilst actually being attached to a missionary institution there comes perilously close to being misleading. I might propose him for the prestigious Golden Crocoduck award for folk who tell porkies in pursuit of pushing (their) truth.
Man, I can't get enough of your videos. I love how you calmly debunk these nutjobs' claims, but I love even more when you begin with "alright, let's see it"
3:04 I've mentioned this on this channel before, but Dr. Bob Cargill has several excellent videos on this. Mythvision has some great stuff on this as well, including some clips of an interview with Cargill.
for anyone that wanted to watch the original - "10 SHOCKING Biblical Archaeological Discoveries That Give Evidence Christianity is True!" - "the beat by Allen Parr" i'm not going to post the URL. that Allen person has always made me uncomfortable Basically to summarize everything "Hey look this thing has something that's written down in our bible, therefore our bible is true"
Serious scholars such as McClellan show why the single biggest enemy of religion is not evil, but knowledge. 🤔 BTW, the fact that a so-called Christian such as Johnston has no qualms about misrepresenting his scholarly credentials speaks volumes. 🤨
@@koppite9600 Of course. But the problem is when a religious person either chooses to ignore historical evidence, minimize it, misinterpret to match their beliefs, or as McClellan's shorts have shown, just makes up "evidence" which proves to be, to use Dan's phrase, complete and utter nonsense.
@@koppite9600 That's true. But so much of Christianity is founded upon the Bible being the inerrant word of God, when it's known and has been proven that the Bible contains contradictions, and has been changed by scribes (as the printing press hadn't been invented yet) who either didn't interpret the existing books correctly, or inserted their own ideas into the texts. Scholars have also shown that many of the New Testament books were not written by the people whose names were later attached to them. And finally, there's the fact that science had refuted many things that were considered true according to the Bible, such as that the sun revolved around the Earth. People were imprisoned and even put to death for daring to declare what we all know now to be a fact. These inconvenient truths revealed by science has even led to religious authorities shifting to the idea that much of the Bible was written and meant to be metaphors, which wasn't thought to be the case before science was discovered. So the problem comes from the idea in religion that belief precedes scholarship, which in turn must support and prove the belief. Many Christians like to think that the Bible was written by ancient versions of New York Times (or substitute your objective media of choice) reporters, and that's just not the case. The purpose of the New Testament was to publicize and promote religious belief.
I would love to hear you speak on (assuming you haven't already and I've merely missed it...) The use of 'Ho' and the definite articles usage in the beginning of the Gospel of John. Please & Thank You 🙏
one of the things that got me blocked from Inspiring Philosophy's channel was a long discussion I had with him about hte Nazareth Inscription. SUch a small and insignificant part of his argument, and yet he couldn't give it up. It's not just obvious frauds who tout this pseudo scholarship...
Is there a place to look up his videos by reference number? Like, he references his video "maklelan1364" (at 3:17), but I am not sure where to go to look up that using that index reference. Just a fan who is looking for a rabbit-hole to go down. Thanks.
funny how they think that because some people and places in the bible is real makes the entire bible real. Knowing that people was crucified during that time period says nothing about Jesus walking on water and spitting on blind people to help them see. It just means that he could have been crucified.
A Summary of STURP's Conclusions Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) "No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils. X-ray, fluorescence and microchemistry on the fibrils preclude the possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image. Ultra Violet and infrared evaluation confirm these studies. Computer image enhancement and analysis by a device known as a VP-8 image analyzer show that the image has unique, three-dimensional information encoded in it. Microchemical evaluation has indicated no evidence of any spices, oils, or any biochemicals known to be produced by the body in life or in death. It is clear that there has been a direct contact of the Shroud with a body, which explains certain features such as scourge marks, as well as the blood. However, while this type of contact might explain some of the features of the torso, it is totally incapable of explaining the image of the face with the high resolution that has been amply demonstrated by photography. The basic problem from a scientific point of view is that some explanations which might be tenable from a chemical point of view, are precluded by physics. Contrariwise, certain physical explanations which may be attractive are completely precluded by the chemistry. For an adequate explanation for the image of the Shroud, one must have an explanation which is scientifically sound, from a physical, chemical, biological and medical viewpoint. At the present, this type of solution does not appear to be obtainable by the best efforts of the members of the Shroud Team. Furthermore, experiments in physics and chemistry with old linen have failed to reproduce adequately the phenomenon presented by the Shroud of Turin. The scientific consensus is that the image was produced by something which resulted in oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the polysaccharide structure of the microfibrils of the linen itself. Such changes can be duplicated in the laboratory by certain chemical and physical processes. A similar type of change in linen can be obtained by sulfuric acid or heat. However, there are no chemical or physical methods known which can account for the totality of the image, nor can any combination of physical, chemical, biological or medical circumstances explain the image adequately. Thus, the answer to the question of how the image was produced or what produced the image remains, now, as it has in the past, a mystery. We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin. The image is an ongoing mystery and until further chemical studies are made, perhaps by this group of scientists, or perhaps by some scientists in the future, the problem remains unsolved." www.shroud.com/78conclu.htm Plus there is far more detailed information about a wide range of shroud related topics here. www.shroud.com/menu.htm
@@koppite9600 It’s been carbon dated to about 1300. It’s an icon now. It may have started as “step right up and see the burial shroud of Jesus, only one florin.”
@@philsphan4414 which no one disputes but it was well known that it had been stitched 1300 years ago and the patch was the part which got dated to that time. The argument is on the main part which should go back to the 20s and 50s
As someone who has much greater knowledge of biological science rather than history or religious studies, it is interesting to see how arguments apologists use that would make sense to me as someone who doesn't know much about history / translation stuff, doesn't really make sense from that perspective
I assume he was a Brookes man. Good uni, Brookes, but it's like Anglia Ruskin, which is in Cambridge but isn't "Cambridge". And hey, it's only Oxford (one guess which Uni I went to ;-) ).
The Alexanenos Graffito is the earliest depiction of crucifixion in the modern popular sense: nail to a tropaeum. But what's going on with the Alkimilla Graffito is more than someone struggling after having been nailed to a T. Alkimilla, depicted as a man (strong v shape, broad shoulders, narrower hips) has been penetrated by his "piercing cross" or acuta crux, which was a horn-shaped vertical peg. Hence the feminine name.
Thanks again Dan. The lengths to which the apologists will reach is telling. As I saw somewhere recently: “If humans need to explain god, that should tell you that god is not real”. I paraphrase, but that’s the essence of the statement. When god reveals himself to me, then I will believe in his existence. Until such time………………………
When he said he moved to Oxford, I wondered why he mentioned that but i didn't think about Oxford university. But since he mentioned it out of context, i think it's quite possible he's misleading
in addendum; The (first) Apocalypse of James begins with; It is the Lord who spoke with me: "See now the completion of my redemption. I have given you a sign of these things, James, my brother. For not without reason have I called you my brother, although you are not my brother materially. And in the Bible it is written; Matthew 12:48 “But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?” 49And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 50For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
Dan, have you read what Raymond Rogers said about the dating of the Shroud, one of the original scientists who examined it in 1978? "The Shroud of Turin is much older than the medieval date that modern science has affixed to it and could be old enough to have been the burial wrapping of Jesus, a new analysis concludes. Since 1988, most scientists have confidently concluded that it was the work of a medieval artist, because carbon dating had placed the production of the fabric between 1260 and 1390. In an article this month in the journal Thermochimica Acta, Dr. Raymond N. Rogers, a chemist retired from Los Alamos National Laboratory, said the carbon dating test was valid but that the piece tested was about the size of a postage stamp and came from a portion that had been patched. "We're darned sure that part of the cloth was not original Shroud of Turin cloth," he said, adding that threads from the main part of the shroud were pure linen, which is spun from flax. The threads in the patched portion contained cotton as well and had been dyed to match. From other tests, he estimated that the shroud was between 1,300 and 3,000 years old." This report was written by Raymond Rogers, one of the original STURP scientists who examined the Shroud in 1978. Thermochimica Acta Volume 425, Issues 1-2, 20 January 2005, Pages 189-194 Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of turin Raymond N. Rogers doi.org/10.1016/j.tca.2004.09.029 Abstract "In 1988, radiocarbon laboratories at Arizona, Cambridge, and Zurich determined the age of a sample from the Shroud of Turin. They reported that the date of the cloth's production lay between a.d. 1260 and 1390 with 95% confidence. This came as a surprise in view of the technology used to produce the cloth, its chemical composition, and the lack of vanillin in its lignin. The results prompted questions about the validity of the sample. Preliminary estimates of the kinetics constants for the loss of vanillin from lignin indicate a much older age for the cloth than the radiocarbon analyses. The radiocarbon sampling area is uniquely coated with a yellow-brown plant gum containing dye lakes. Pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry results from the sample area coupled with microscopic and microchemical observations prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin. The radiocarbon date was thus not valid for determining the true age of the shroud. Introduction The Shroud of Turin is a large piece of linen that shows the faint image of a man on its surface. Many people believe it is the burial cloth of Jesus, making it extremely controversial. Radiocarbon ages were determined in 1988 [1], which should have settled controversies as to the age of the linen. The 1988 radiocarbon age determinations were the best that could have been obtained. Sample preparation methods were compared and confirmed, and the measurements were made with the best available instruments. Damon et al. reported [1] that “The age of the shroud is obtained as a.d. 1260-1390, with at least 95% confidence.” However, that date does not agree with observations on the linen-production technology nor the chemistry of fibers obtained directly from the main part of the cloth in 1978 [2], [3]. The 1988 sampling operation was described in [1]: “The shroud was separated from the backing cloth along its bottom left-hand edge and a strip (∼10 mm × 70 mm) was cut from just above the place where a sample was previously removed in 1973 for examination. The strip came from a single site on the main body of the shroud away from any patches or charred areas.” Franco Testore, professor of textile technology at the Turin Polytechnic, and Gabriel Vial, curator of the Ancient Textile Museum, Lyon, France, approved the location of the radiocarbon sample. However, the operation was done in secrecy, and no chemical investigations were made at the time to characterize the sample." Turin Shroud - Cotton adulterated 1978 Carbon 14 Test ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-51RrDewZqos.html
Would be quite odd for the guys in charge of the Shroud at the time to give a piece of newer cloth for the dating purposes. It would be like shooting youself in the foot. "He estimated" also doesn't hold much weight.
@@svezhiepyatkithey didn't know at the time they cut the sample and the Catholic Church refused for them to take another sample. They have sinced used laser imaging to verify the area that was sampled is a patch sown in. If they had the technology at the time to image it... They wouldn't have snipped from that part.
It should be noted that Christos was commonly misspelled Chrestos and Christianos is often misspelled Chrestianos in antiquity. Eta and iota were pronounced the same in many contemporary accents.
"Chrestus" was a common slave name and Suetonius said Claudius kicked the Jews out of Rome somebody named "Chrestus" was causing trouble there. Suetonius mentions "Christians" elsewhere so he knew the difference.
But I don't think "By the enchantments through chrestos" (Chrestos?) refers to Jesus. At all. Unless what the Jews wrote in the Talmud was accurate of the historical Jesus.
@@Ken_Scaletta And Tacitus mentions Chrestians in his recount of Nero punishing those he thought set the fire. But the sentence mentioning Christus, Pilate and Tiberius was most certainly tampered with if not forged totally.
Oxford Brookes? Somehow I doubt an American student of religion would have any reason to be there, though it's apparently a great place to study for architecture or chartered accountancy. The old name was Oxford Polytechnic. I do wonder under whose auspices he was there... Okay, I looked it up. According to his own website (search for his name and "Christian Thinkers Society" which is apparently his organization), he was in Oxford "in collaboration with Oxford Centre for Missions Studies" which is headquartered in a decommissioned parish church up on Woodstock Road. It's a respectable Evangelical nonprofit, but its master's and doctoral degrees are granted by Middlesex University and NOT University of Oxford. It is incredibly disingenuous of him to carry on constantly about studying "in" Oxford, obviously meaning to imply that his degree is from OU. If I had been aware of this, I wouldn't have trusted him even if I were still an evangelical Christian.
Really wish the usa would stop handing out degrees and PhDs like candy for anyone who can pay for it. Religious based "universities" should be illegal or the economy and real world should just stop recognizing the degrees.
The holy grail is not a cup, it's a womb and Bloodline , Adam and Eve came from a female Annunaki womb thru artificial insemination, Tiamat is the only one made from a portion of the Mourning Star 's rib,woman did not come from the rib of a man ,did you know it was 2 Eve's Tiamat Mother of modern man,Titi mother of the Demigods of the king's,I only know Titi Eve's birth date= 334,000 then the King's List 270,000 all within 445,000 - 12,000 = ATLANTIS ,I want them to test Queen Puabi DNA,they will find Annunaki DNA from planet 10 , look at her,that not skull binding,those are the ones who lived longer than modern man , Nibiru's orbit = 3600 earth years,as we count our age by years , being true hybrids mixed with the Annunaki, explains the longer lives ,I have no respect for scientists who are not objective ,and teach lies to generations Adam and Eve /Adappa and Titi
What a rollercoaster of a comment. I'm gonna try to help you out. "The Holy Grail is not a cup it's a womb and bloodline. Adam and Eve came from a female Annunaki womb through artificial insemination. Tiamat is the only one made from a portion of The Morning Star's rib. Women did not come from the rib if a man. Did you know there were two Eves: Tiamat - Mother of Modern Man, and Titi - Mother of the Demigods & of the Kings. I only know that Titi Eve's birth date is 334,000. Then The King's list 270,000 all within 445,000. 445,000 - 12,000 = Atlantis I want them to test Queen Puabi's DNA. They will find Annunaki DNA from Planet 10. Look at her: that is not skull binding, those are the ones who lived longer than modern man. Nibiru's orbit is 3,600 Earth years. Since we count our age by years being true hybrids mixed with the Annunaki explains the longer lives. I have no respect for scientists who are not objective and teach lies to generations: Adam & Eve = Adappa & Titi. " This was my best shot of an edit but I still have no idea what you were trying to say in the middle so I simply gave it my best guess. Hope this helps!
