I was wrong above when I said:
This new video is the same crap from their older videos, which were debunked repeatedly. They've simply added in a few new lies and smears after going through the new Sourcebook
Chris White, Keith Trash and the rest have been informed of the information below and know for a fact that they are lying to their Christian audience who are easily duped by videos such as these telling them exactly what they want to hear. Many more honest and decent Christians are fully aware though and are embarrassed by these guys.
At 31:30 - White tosses the claim: "Did Jesus exist? There are over 42 sources within 150 years of Jesus' death, which mention his existence and record many events in his life
LOL, that's the same load of BS that 'Zeitgeist refuted'
tried to pawn off on everybody except, Chris White is clearly padding it up a bit when he says "over 42." This claim is easily refuted, but it keeps getting repeated by wishful Christians across the net anyway.
ZG Refuted at 53:35 "Is there evidence for a historical Jesus?"
"42 authors mention Jesus within 150 years of his life.
9 traditional authors of the N.T.:
Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, author of Hebrews, James, Peter, Jude
20 early Christian writers outside the N.T.:
Clement of Rome, 2 Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Martyrdom of Polycarp, Didache, Barnabas, Shepard of Hermes, fragments of Papias, Justin Martyr, Aristides, Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch Quadratus, Aristo of Pella, Melito of Sardis, Dhognetus, Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, Epistula Apostolorum
4 heretical writings:
Gospel of Thomas, gospel of Truth, Apocryphon of John, treatise on resurrection
9 secular sources:
Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, Phlegon, Lucian, Celsus, Mara bar-Serapion, Seutonius, Thallus.
"Historical documents confirm that Jesus was executed as a criminal under Pontius Pilot who ruled Judea under Emperor Tiberius"
"ZG Refuted" is laughable at 53:35 - LOL, It's not always just what devotees say that is wrong it can often be what they don't say. For example, not a single one of the "42 authors" ever met Jesus while he was alive. The four canonical Gospel writers were all anonymous until the names Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were added as authors late in the 2nd century. There is no contemporary eyewitness testimony for Jesus at all whatsoever. Nobody ever wrote about Jesus during his lifetime and the canonical gospels didn't exist as we have them today until around 180CE - that is what the literary and historical records show i.e. evidence that actually exists.Ten Reasons to Reject the Apologetic 10/42 Source Slogan
Even top Christian NT scholars can't agree on evidence for the historical Jesus:
"One would naturally expect that the Lord Jesus Christ would be sufficiently important to receive ample notice in the literature of his time, and that extensive biographical material would be available. He was observed by multitudes of people, and his own followers numbered into the hundreds (1 Cor. 15:6), whose witness was still living in the middle of the first century. As a matter of fact, the amount of information concerning him is comparatively meager. Aside from the four Gospels, and a few scattered allusions in the epistles, contemporary history is almost silent concerning him."
- Merrill C. Tenney
- Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ
* Dr. Tenney is a conservative evangelical Christian who was a professor of Theological Studies and the dean of the school of Theology at Wheaton College. Tenney was also one of the original translators of the NASB and NIV editions of the Bible.
"Apart from the New Testament writings and later writings dependent upon these, our sources of information about the life and teaching of Jesus are scanty and problematic"
- F.F. Bruce, a founder of the modern evangelical movement
- "Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ" (WWJ) page 84
"...there are very few sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus beyond the four canonical Gospels. Paul and Josephus offer little more than tidbits. Claims that later apocryphal Gospels and the Nag Hammadi material supply independent and reliable historical information about Jesus are largely fantasy. In the end, the historian is left with the difficult task of sifting through the Four Gospels for historical tradition."
- John P. Meier
- "Who Was Jesus?" page 86
* Dr. Meier is a Catholic University New Testament professor, Catholic priest and monsignor
"The gospels are in fact anonymous"
- Dr. Craig L. Blomberg
- WWJ (60)
"The Gospels are neither histories nor biographies, even within the ancient tolerances for those genres."
- Dr. John Dominic Crossan
- WWJ (24)
Jesus famed far and wide:
"These "great crowds" and "multitudes," along with Jesus's fame, are repeatedly referred to in the gospels, including at the following: Mt 4:23-25, 5:1, 8:1, 8:18, 9:8, 9:31, 9:33, 9:36, 11:7, 12:15, 13:2, 14:1, 14:13, 14:22, 15:30, 19:2, 21:9, 26:55;
Mk 1:28, 10:1; Lk 4:14, 4:37, 5:15, 14:25, etc."
- Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ" by D. M. Murdock page 85
"Additionally, even though many times in the gospels Jesus was claimed to have been famed far and wide, not one historian of the era was aware of his existence, not even individuals who lived in, traveled around, or wrote about the relevant areas. The brief mentions of Christ, Christians or Christianity we possess from non-Christian sources are late and dubious as to their authenticity and/or value. Nor is there any valid scientific archaeological evidence demonstrating the gospel story to be true or even to support the existence of Jesus Christ. Despite this utter lack of evidence, Christian apologists and authorities make erroneous and misleading claims that there are "considerable reports" and "a surprisingly large amount of detail" regarding the life of Jesus and early Christianity."
- WWJ page 257
The one constant theme is, there's no credible evidence for a historical Jesus, same as there was no valid evidence amongst the 1st Xians either. The earliest Christians never had any evidence they could point to in order to demonstrate Jesus actually existed. If Jesus was really a carpenter, there was no work done by his hands. There were no paintings, rock carvings, writings - nothing by him at all. And, there's no evidence that the earliest Christians ever tried to claim anything by him ever existed. And what about Jesus' own family? Isn't it odd that nobody ever went to them for an interview of any kind? Where's Jesus' supposed family today? If they were real people i.e. Joseph, Mary and Jesus' siblings etc. don't you think Constantine and his mother would've sought them out? NOPE, nothing, notta, zippo, ZERO! There's never been anything beyond 'anecdotal evidence' or evidence based on hearsay.
So, it appears that in 2,000 years nothing has changed. Which is significant considering all the research, investigations and all the money / funding spent on them. So, it's really bad form for NT & biblical scholars to rigidly adhere to the a priori assumption that Jesus must have existed when there's no valid evidence substantiating that claim.Jesus Christ Never Existed
From there, at 32, Chris White claims: "No serious historian believes that Jesus didn't exist"
Chris claims that quote is from Bart Ehrman so, I'd like to see the citation for it.
Religion and the Ph.D.: A Brief History
"As for this tiresome business about there being "no scholar" or "no serious scholar" who advocates the Christ Myth theory: Isn't it obvious that scholarly communities are defined by certain axioms in which grad students are trained, and that they will lose standing in those communities if they depart from those axioms? The existence of an historical Jesus is currently one of those. That should surprise no one, especially with the rightward lurch of the Society for Biblical Literature in recent years. It simply does not matter how many scholars hold a certain opinion."
- Dr. Robert M. Price
, Biblical Scholar
There are outright lies from Chris around 48:30, 1:11:00 and elsewhere and probably more. I simply don't have time to waste on these guys. As I said previously, these guys are simply repeating the same lies that some Christians merely want to hear but, there are many more far more honest Christians who have the integrity to study the material for themselves. The facts and credible evidence is on our side.
"The cult of Sol Invictus, the 'Invincible Sun,' became dominant in Rome and in other parts of the empire during the early part of the second century A.D. And evidence abounds that Roman sun cults influenced Christian thought and liturgy."
- Christian theologian Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi, Signs of the Times (6/10)
- Jesus as the Sun throughout History