This Resurrection Argument Doesn't Add Up (Trent Horn response)

In this episode, @TheCounselofTrent responds to critics like Paulogia and Candida Moss who critique the evidence for the Resurrection in the apostle's willingness to die for their faith in Christ.

Defending the "Martyrdom Argument" for the Resurrection

Support Paulogia at

Paulogia Channel Wish-List

Paulogia Merch

Join this channel to get access to perks:

Paulogia Audio-Only-Version Podcast

Follow Paulogia at

Send me cool mail!

Paulogia
PO Box 1350
Lantz Stn Main, NS
B2S 1A0
Canada

[pinnsvein]

Paulogia has quickly become my favorite YouTuber, with his respectful and fact-conscious commentary. Thank you, Paul! You are doing great work!

[andrewfrennier]

The Yasukuni Shrine in Japan is a memorial to the 2, 466, 532 persons who sacrificed their lives in military service, knowing that their emperors were divine. None of them are known to have recanted. That is far more martyrs than “church lore”. Time to start following the descendants of Amaterasu. :)

[azgoalie]

A group of people believing something occured to the point of being willing to die for it only proves their belief, not that the event actually occurred

[drizztcat]

If we want to demonstrate the ease with which stories become warped and defective with oral retellings, all we need to do is listen to Trent mispronounce Paulogia's name over and over and over.

[tomsenior]

"We don't have to prove it..." That sets the tone of Trent's response and pretty much describes how he will handle his "arguments".

[kyleferguson]

I was excited until he said, we don't have to prove it.

[jacobh]

It's the Catholic church, so the jingle should be Gregorian-chant based.

[Narikku]

As a Christian, I really appreciate your content, Paul.

You present your objections in a very concise, digestible manner that really hits at the weak points of Christian Applogetics - and I think this is a very, very good thing.

Christian Apologists do frequently overstate their case, and asking for the specifics and asking "What evidence do we have?" is always a wonderful thing to do.

You seem to present yourself as "Just a YouTuber", but you are much more than that. I enjoy your humor, your content, and your level-headed consistent rationality. You do your homework.

Every video, I am very impressed by how educated you are on a wide breadth of topics. Keep up the good work. (:

Pursuing the Truth should be the highest goal.

[lnsflare]

"For The Pope Tells Me So" should use an instrumental snippet from Tim Minchin's Pope Song.

[mylord]

I have never seen an honest apologist.

[WayneRossi]

The idea that "Who would die for a lie?" is a good argument is simply laughable.

Part of it is that we obviously don't know that people had the dramatic "recant or die" choice until considerably later. We certainly don't know if it was a choice offered to any of the leaders of this movement, very different from rank and file members 50 years after the Neronian persecution.

Part of it is that we don't know the circumstances or mental states of these people. Someone could tell a lie, have it all blow up and get caught up in a movement much bigger than them, and have no choice when they actually get killed. This literally happened in the case of Joseph Smith, so it's hardly impossible that this happened in antiquity. Or someone could be mentally unwell, persist in their delusion, convince others of its truth, and get a lot of them killed. Again, this happened in the case of David Koresh and is hardly impossible in antiquity.

I don't think that lying is the most likely circumstance. In historical terms, thinking that you can get a clue to the mental state of some person in antiquity is simply a bad methodology. Unless you have concrete evidence either way. All we can really say as reliable history is that people claimed to have seen the risen Jesus. The idea that this was "sincere" or not is not a good historical question because we don't have access to these people or their personal thoughts.

[tonydarcy]

This apologist is so manic, you'd think his income depended on defending the RCC's views !

[davidofoakland]

Another bravura video, Paul. Your use of graphics really helps clarify your points and makes comprehension easier. I certainly hope you are able to continue producing such quality work.

[Trigger-xwgq]

Once you realize that "beliefs" are like drugs, you realize why so many believers are reluctant to let them go.

[Julian]

7:32 I find hillarious apologists classify _minimal corroboration_ as "highest possible evidence" and _not even one corroboration_ as "second highest possible evidence"

[martinmckee]

I don't understand this argument. If i accept everything that the apologist offers it only gets me to "people sincerely believed Jesus rose from the dead." That in no way demonstrates it actually happened. People can be (and often are) sincerely wrong.

[bengreen]

this is Trent all over. There's not an assertion he can make that he isn't willing to fail to produce evidence for.

[greg]

People so sincerely believed Bernie Madoff that they gave him their retirement savings. Sincere belief is lunacy.

[rickelmonoggin]

there were lots of martyrs who certainly didn't witness the resurrection, so clearly witnessing the resurrection wasn't a requirement for being willing to risk being a martyr

[ariellalima]

I love Paulogia's calm and collected way of debunking apologists' claims.