You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Dr. Bart Ehrman Historically accurate criticism of the Bible. Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

Shiny once accused me of watching Zeitgeist as well... I always thought it was a 9/11 conspiracy film... I half want to see the film now to see how it goes from Christ myth to 9/11 conspiracy...

Apologist always like pointing out that things that don't matter when talking about the stuff like Horis, the Babylonian Lord of the Harvest and other gods who died and resurrected. There is plenty of pre-Christian stories of them. True the specific details are often post-Christianity, but the general concept has been around long before the Old Testament was put down to paper, back when was just a verbal story passed from generation to generation... somehow avoiding the issues that come up when one plays the telephone game... and somehow avoiding all the errors that we know and can prove cropped up after it was written and copied by hand. When the Israelites were in Babylon, they learned of a Babylonian god which was a god of harvesting, and he sacrificed himself and rose again. It doesn't matter if the time frame of the resurrection was added after Christianity came around, the general story itself existed before Christianity, indeed even before the Old Testament was written in any sort of form we have available today.

I think two important videos relate:
http://videosift.com/video/A-History-of-God-Part-1
http://videosift.com/video/Dr-Bart-Ehrman-Historically-accurate-criticism-of-the-Bible

<snipped a long rant about Christians shopping or going to restaurants on Sunday after church, thereby making people who may have wanted to be at church have to work instead and a lot more...>

There is just so much one has to take on faith... not only the existence of God, but that the errors from repeating the stories, even after they were written down, were God's will, and that the version used by translators is the one God wanted to use, not earlier, supposedly more accurate to the source versions (the Dr. Bart Ethrman video linked above is a nice one for that, in regards to the story of the woman at the well not being in the original texts or commentaries for centuries, but then it appears and everyone likes it so it stuck). You have to take it on faith that not only did fallible men who preserved the word, copied it (errors made not being a result of fallibility but of divine will), translated it, etc. did everything they did perfectly in regards to the Bible. Then fallible men at the Council of Nycea and others that established the books that are generally accepted, somehow were the only ones to become infallible when picking the books that would be in the Bible... differences between the Catholic Bible and Protestant Bible being ignored because many protestants say Catholics aren't even Christian anyhow...Then you have to take it on faith that every person since those times who has had a revelation from God is crazy. You also have to take it on faith that every book or document relating to the church that has been found since then was hidden by God. All to create the perfect infallible word of god...

Anyhow, I am getting off track and enough feeding the troll.

>> ^Skeeve:
My bad, I should have looked at the original better before I posted - I just remembered watching this whole thing on VS before.


It would be a dupe if the other one inked to the whole talk, which I'm sure it probably originally did. Maybe we should *discuss it.

>> ^jimnms:
>> ^Skeeve:
This same lecture is already posted as a playlist instead of a single video. Dupe?
http://www.videosift.com/video/Dr-Bart-Ehrman-Histor
ically-accurate-criticism-of-the-Bible

The playlist seems to be broken on the other one, all I get is one 10 minute segment.


My bad, I should have looked at the original better before I posted - I just remembered watching this whole thing on VS before.

>> ^Skeeve:
This same lecture is already posted as a playlist instead of a single video. Dupe?
http://www.videosift.com/video/Dr-Bart-Ehrman-Histor
ically-accurate-criticism-of-the-Bible


The playlist seems to be broken on the other one, all I get is one 10 minute segment.

This same lecture is already posted as a playlist instead of a single video. Dupe?
http://www.videosift.com/video/Dr-Bart-Ehrman-Historically-accurate-criticism-of-the-Bible

Bart Ehrman was in a debate a few years back with William Lane Craig on the question of Jesus' resurrection. Ehrman, as you might expect, took the negative, opposing his in depth knowledge of the New Testament to Craig's impeccable debating skills and powerful (if misapplied) intellect.

^Brain
Thank you very much for that link; it's an incredible lecture series. The lecture is sifted by the way.

>> ^swampgirl:
I'm currently reading "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart Ehrman. These apologists should talk w/ this guy.

The most respected of them already has!

http://www.videosift.com/video/Did-Jesus-Resurrection-Occur-Craig-vs-Ehrman-debate

I'm currently reading "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart Ehrman. These apologists should talk w/ this guy.



Personally for me, it started with the bible itself. Once you realize that Bible is a human book and not inspired divinely from God then the fabric of the religion begins to unravel. With these apologists, start w/ the "infallible" scriptures.

If a Christian is intellectually honest he will, after further study as Ehrman did, relent to agnosticism. If not then you are basing your entire life on fantasy, myth and your feelings.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'bart ehrman' to 'bart ehrman, bible' - edited by kronosposeidon