People will refuse to accept the reliability of the Gospels based on the false idea that they were written too late after the life of Jesus to be trusted. If we applied this thinking across the board, much of history would have to be rejected. Like other historical events, how do we know that the Gospels were written in a time frame that does not diminish their accuracy? Check out what Dr. Mike Licona has to say about it!
???? ???????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????? (????????????-????????????????????????????????????????) ????
? Website: https://crossexamined.org/donate/
? PayPal: https://bit.ly/Support_CrossExamined_PayPal
???? ???????????????????????? ???????????????????? ????
? Facebook: https://facebook.com/CrossExamined.org
? Twitter: https://twitter.com/Frank_Turek
? Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/drfrankturek/
? Pinterest: https://pin.it/JF9h0nA
????? ???????????????????????????????????? ?????
? Website: https://crossexamined.org
? Store: https://impactapologetics.com/
? Online Courses: https://www.onlinechristiancourses.com/
????? ???????????????????????????????????? ???????? ???????????? ???????????????????????????? ?????
? iTunes: http://bit.ly/CrossExamined_Podcast
? Google Play: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Google
? Spotify: http://bit.ly/CrossExaminedOfficial_Podcast
? Stitcher: http://bit.ly/CE_Podcast_Stitcher
#Gospels #LegendArgument #Skeptics #Bible #Apologetics #MikeLicona #DrFrankTurek #Christianity #Bible #Church #Christian #QuestionsAboutTheGospels #CrossExaminingIdeasAgainstTheTruthOfChristianity #IDontHaveEnoughFaithToBeAnAtheist
Download FREE Cheat Sheet “The 4-Point Case For Christianity” 👉📱https://cutt.ly/ZYMC4nl
@mrgmft5746 Says:
These speakers are missing the obvious. The ENTIRE New Testament was obviously written before 70AD.
@tedgrant2 Says:
Some parts of the Bible are very difficult to believe.
I don't think the Devil actually took Jesus up a very high mountain.
And I very much doubt that Jesus owned a closet (Matthew 6:6)
@b.alexanderjohnstone9774 Says:
The same people keen to discredit scripture would freak out if you said the oral history of native peoples are not reliable. They would say how good illiterate people become at remembering etc.
@alphamegaradio Says:
Jorge, I dig the beard, bro. But more than that — that CONTRADICT shirt! That's awesome
@ShumiIJ Says:
Where is the FULL video, or the link to it?
@emmarajic6530 Says:
Even more so to remember especially being inspired by THE HOLY SPIRIT.
@rebukeandreprove. Says:
The bible is historical and evidential!!
@briansimons9472 Says:
Paul says hardly anything about the life of Jesus, and there doesn't seem to be a reference in his letters to any actual gospel traditions as such.
@JohnDoe-nh8fx Says:
Paul is a black man not a Caucasian neanderthal.
@SkyAvila777 Says:
Too late? Is God a human being so he can FORGET details? No - and it is God that wrote the whole Bible through humans, NOTHING is forgotten of ANYTHING. If you think otherwise - your "God" is a wimp and has no brain, or, you dont want to believe at all.
@sierraclark6129 Says:
“If you declare with your mouth “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved” (Romans 10:9). Now is the time to accept Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior. Obey His commands and repent of your sins because Jesus is coming back soon. Tomorrow isn’t promised.
@NEED4NINTENDO Says:
JESUS !!!!
@InfoArtistJKatTheGoodInfoCafe Says:
Thank you for this video. And the Apostles would have been saying things that ended up in the Gospels and in the Bible right after the resurrection!
@rolandwatts3218 Says:
An argument appears to be that we should accept what believers say about the miraculous claims surrounding the execution of Jesus written decades after the supposed events because in our modern era we accept the testimonies of eyewitnesses to the Vietnam War, whose claims are provided decades after the war had ended.
At issue here is not accepting the ordinary claims such as the execution of a Jew by the Romans nor the war between the Vietnamese and the Americans. Rather the issue is accepting extraordinary claims such as the Jew rising from the grave after three days of death.
In 1914, following the Battle of Mons, after the publication of a short story regarding the sighting of angels who had guided and guarded the British retreat, the legend of the Angel of Mons quickly spread and came to be believed by many British soldiers. That is, there were many eyewitness reports of the Angel of Mons shortly after the Battle. It's easy to believe eyewitness reports of the Battle of Mons. Should it likewise be easy to accept eyewitness reports of the Angel of Mons?
@mahindufrancis9998 Says:
Here is some food for thought. Imagine that Matthew write the gospel and some forty years later he had abandoned his faith and become an apostate. What a scandal. Man's wisdom will never match zero times zero to the power of zero of where God wisdom begins.
@Recess_is_UP Says:
🔥
@Peter-wl3tm Says:
Where did Jorge get that shirt?
@markhorton3994 Says:
I can answer the question about Jorge's beard. God loves my brother Jorge as he is and so do I.
@incredulouspasta3304 Says:
1. Of course it's not too late to be accurate. It's too late to simply _assume_ it's accurate. A Vietnam vet CAN remember details, but they can ALSO forget details, and misremember details. Forty years is a long time for rumors, exaggerations, and legends to grow... especially if they are written in a completely different language than what the disciples spoke.
2. Papias's account is one of the major reasons why modern scholars reject the traditional authorship of Mark. His description doesn't match our Mark. He was probably talking about a different account lost to us. Mike Licona should know this. I wonder why he didn't bring it up?
3. The gospels are not "independent sources", by any stretch of the imagination. Matthew and Luke straight-up copy from Mark. That's the opposite of independent. Why would Mike Licona say something like this? He should know better. At best, you could say that Mark and John _might_ be independent, but even that should be low-confidence.
@rolandovelasquez135 Says:
Amén! Not to mention the early Creeds. Most date from one or two years after the resurrection and are very explicit concerning the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. The New Testament as an historical source surpasses any other source from antiquity by light years and to discount it is an historical absurdity. Praise God forevermore, and his Son.
@hellohowareyou7495 Says:
If Jesus didnt rise from the dead, the jews couldve just prove it by showing the empty tomb and the disciple would lose all their credibility. (Because the jews hate Jesus and his disciple, jews consider them heretics)
@MutsPub Says:
WE DO NOT NEED THE GOSPELS, THE BIBLE, OR HISTORY BOOKS FOR THE RESURRECTION OF THE CHRIST TO BE TRUE!
He is risen indeed!
@nothingbutthetruth613 Says:
Mark was written around 70 and John around 95. The average lifespan back then, even after factoring in infant mortality, was around 35. Mark would have had to have been at least 60 or 70 when he wrote these gospels. The fact that we could interview Vietnam veterans today is because people frequently live to be 80 or 90 or more. This was not the case 2000 years ago. As far as Papias, he was only born in 60. How can he have possibly heard from any disciple. By the time he was born, let alone the time he was old enough to talk to any of them, they would have all been long dead already. Comparing history and the fact that we believe historical facts is no comparison whatsoever to the gospls and the stories of jesus. Whether I believe the Vietnam war happened or not has no relevance to my life. It doesn't change anything in the way I live my life. To believe in christianity on the other hand and live my life based on that, there has got to be pretty strong evidence supporting it. Whether I believe in this or not will determine how I live each day.
@the_alchemy_method Says:
Got it but what about the aspect of us remembering things wrongly? Like in crime if a victim or witness is interviewed he or she will often recall the details inaccurately. Like hair colour, height and skin colour ???
@Kaymen1980 Says:
Dear Christian
Imagine yourself, living with your family, in a town consisting only of atheists. What's your worst fear about this scenario? It's not a trap.. It's just a question. Cheers.
@Introversitive Says:
You made a great point about telling the History channel to stop interviewing Vietnam vets. We know that would be silly, but that is how most atheists think today. To the average atheist, if the gospels were written late, then they aren't true or they don't hold water. What about historians writing about Napoleon? Genghis Khan? And Genghis Khan has NEVER been discovered. We don't even have a burial site and we aren't even close to finding one. Yet atheists say he existed and his history is accurate based on third party testimonies and letters and documents and whatnot. But, the letters, third party testimonies and documents about Jesus and other history, nope, they discredit that. That's not honesty, that is complete, deliberate bias against the Bible because it is the Bible. Period.
@ryeclansen7371 Says:
Gospels were written by Greek speaking scholars for a Greek speaking audience (churches), in Greece or Asia Minor (Turkey), a long way from Jerusalem. Travel and communications were difficult. They also were written after 70 CE (most likely decades later), when Jerusalem was destroyed. Eye witnesses to Jesus would no longer have been around. They would have been dispersed or killed. Nobody around Jerusalem would have been able to confirm or disagree with gospel accounts, or try to correct what was said and written, even if they could read Greek. The claim that the gospels (mainly Mark) were based on eye witness accounts or sources connected to eye witnesses, is just not tenable. Reading the gospels, they clearly contain very little biographical and historical information. They very obviously were written to push a theological narrative, at a time when lots of different ideas about Jesus were floating around, like, was he even a real person? Did he come in the flesh? Was he the predicted messiah? Was he God or man? There were Gnostics, Docetists, Nicolaists, Arianists, Nestorians (or their precursers) and dozens of others, all vying for influence. The crucifixion and resurrection stories were the sort of claims advanced to promote a specific doctrine and cannot in my view be considered reliable or historical.
@alanbaraka9800 Says:
Well the gospels have unknown authors with unknown written dates with unverified claims. That makes the bible pretty far from true or verified.
@nicholasemond1388 Says:
Wow. The Vietnam vet part was insane. Those guys were actually there during the war. The writers of the gospels never even claim to have been there at the time. That's the big difference, that and a claims about a war we know happened and claims about a guy being a God which cannot be proven are very different. And are they saying the one guy talked to an associate of the disciples who was still around 100 years after jesus's death? Possible but doubtful. Even if he did talk to a guy who knew a guy who knew jesus, that really means nothing without other evidence backing up what is being claimed.
@steveaustin7997 Says:
Why are there no writing regarding Jesus youth to age 30 ?
@TheTheologizingSubject Says:
Not unless you also want to throw out any literature of antiquity
@frameshifted1999 Says:
Valid point. Puts it in a good perspective
@DarkBlade37 Says:
Matthew, Mark, and Luke were all written by AD 69
@drumrnva Says:
"Rooted" in eyewitness testimony? Yeah... and the flavor of vegan cheese is "rooted" in actual dairy products. 🙄 None of the gospel writers claim to be eyewitness. That's just the way it is. The Heaven's Gate people left behind hours of testimony on video. They're far more credible.
@williamhutcheson6511 Says:
The question that keeps recurring to my mind about the Resurrection accounts is this-----is this a contrivance or a conveyance? I've come to believe the latter.
@RobertA-oi6hw Says:
The pharisees could have simply presented the body of Jesus and stopped Christianity in its tracks. Why didn't they? Maybe because there was no body to present? Anyway nice video guys! Great job continuing to preach and teach and show people about Jesus.
@RobertA-oi6hw Says:
The great beard of Jorge. Legend. 😅🤣
@IAMhassentyou-h5w Says:
Jesus Christ is King of kings and Lord of lords! Amen
@evangelismencounters6430 Says:
Excellent and to the point guys!!
@PandaFury-Goku Says:
Paul quotes Lukes gospel in 2 Timothy and that was written in 64 A.D. so Luke wrote it before than and Luke grabs from marks Gospel so mark is written before Luke so before 64 A.D
@savedbymylovegodthelordjes8394 Says:
praise the only true living Lord and GOD bless you all glory be to the HOLY TRINITY forever and ever amen 💖✝️✝️✝️
@skellingtonmeteoryballoon Says:
I still remember when rain drops 🌧️ evolved into cats and dogs 🐈🐕
@immortalwarrior4722 Says:
im pretty sure mark was written b4 Matthew
@JesusD0nlyway Says:
I'm 40 yo and I can assure u some memorable moments in my life still stuck and I can tell everyone every details in those moments I'd been. Trust me. I'm a woman 🤣😂
@breatheeasily4013 Says:
I got 2 very strong reasons for the Gospel being true:
Even If the Bible was not written, the crucifixion and ressurrection of Jesus would be true, because, it doesn't need to written in paper, it happened in reality, the Bible could not be written and it still would have happened, because it happened in reality, the apostles could share the Good News by word of mouth and it would still be true. You don't need a Bible to tell you what happened, like, you don't need your grandma to give you a book to tell you what happened in her day, it would be true by word of mouth because it happened in reality.
@aaronmonroe7932 Says:
There was a man who said the sun doesn't circle around the earth. That man was declared a heretic and burned. The truth doesn't need that type of protection. Only a lie does.
@abctodabctod3256 Says:
Eyewitnesses might forget some teachings or make up one (Telephone game). Jesus must speak more in time range of 3 years than those that were recorded in the gospels.
@JeffCheek3D Says:
Comparing stories in the bible to stories about the Vietnam war is absurd and they all know it. Bible stories are hearsay at best, and outright lies at worst. You can find any number of Vietnam veterans who will give you first-hand accounts of the war, yet first-hand accounts in the bible are curiously missing.
@raindacer Says:
Learnt that from the infographic channel about jesus
LATEST COMMENTS