Bart Ehrman vs William Lane Craig: Resurrection Under FIRE скачать в хорошем качестве

Bart Ehrman vs William Lane Craig: Resurrection Under FIRE

In this episode of MythVision Reacts, we dive into a classic historical debate: Bart D. Ehrman vs William Lane Craig on one explosive question: 👉 Is there historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus? William Lane Craig argues that the resurrection is the best historical explanation for the burial, empty tomb, appearances, and early Christian belief. Bart Ehrman strongly disagrees — arguing that miracles have no place in historical methodology and that our sources are late, theological, and unreliable. I’ve enhanced the original poor-quality audio using AI so we can finally hear what’s being said clearly — and then I react to it point by point, without skipping the hard arguments. In this reaction we explore: 🔹 Can miracles be used as historical explanations? 🔹 Are the Gospels independent historical sources — or literary theology? 🔹 Is the empty tomb actually attested outside Christian texts? 🔹 Paul vs the Gospels: what do we really know? 🔹 Apologetics vs critical scholarship 🔹 Why certainty is the real problem in resurrection arguments Whether you’re a believer, skeptic, or somewhere in between — this debate matters. 👇 Comment below: Do you think history can ever prove a miracle? 👍 Like • 💬 Comment • 🔔 Subscribe (hit ALL) for more deep-dive reactions into religion, history, and myth.