Jon Topping

Since Bart Ehrman doesn't want to have to explain the empty tomb, he has to deny a lot of elements of the crucifixion of Jesus. For starters, he has to deny any evidence that shows crucifixion victims were buried at times. One great example is Josephus, who gives us historical evidence that the Jews would bury crucifixion victims. Ehrman simply asserts (without evidence) that Josephus is lying.

Archeology shows us the remains of a crucifixion victim, during the first century, in Israel, that was buried, in a tomb. This completely destroys Bart Ehrman's complete denial of crucifixion victims ever being buried. How does he respond to this evidence?

Bart Ehrman ripped into me, telling me I'm not doing good history, all because I critiqued his argument against the empty tomb and Joseph of Arimathea. Ehrman is demanding evidence, however, I already gave the evidence in the full video (which he didn't watch). Ultimately, Ehrman is ignoring the historical evidence, so that he can justify his skepticism about the empty tomb.

Arnobius of Sicca is the best example of annihilationist eschatology in the Early Church. That said, once we evaluate what he actually wrote, and study his life, he's not such a great example. In fact, I would argue he probably wasn't even an annihilationist at all.

Which Early Church theologians held to annihilationist eschatology? What did they say about the mortality or immortality of the soul, and how did it affect their view of hell? Here we’ll look at Athanasius, Justin Martyr, Theophilus, Tatian, Irenaeus, Ignatius, and Augustine.

Kirk Cameron argued for annihilationism (also called conditionalism). They gave quite a few arguments, but ultimately, their position is deeply flawed.

Because Joseph of Arimathea was a member of the council of the Sanhedrin, he ends up strengthening the historical reliability of different aspects of the story of the burial of Jesus Christ. However, scholars like Bart Ehrman try to downplay his importance, even to the point of denying the story altogether. But this type of skepticism doesn’t match with what we know about history.

Skeptics will argue that, if crucifixion victims weren’t buried, then Jesus probably wasn’t either. We’ll look at the historical sources showing the fate of crucifixion victims, the sorts of exceptions that were made, and whether Roman and Jewish history lines up with how the Gospels describe what happened to Jesus’ body after He was killed.

The earliest critics of Christianity admitted that Jesus did miracles, and they seem to have assumed the tomb was actually found empty.

Capturing Christianity has posted videos arguing that the apparitions of Mary at Zeitoun are better evidence for Christianity than the resurrection. I go through the data to show how ridiculous this is.

Alex O'Connor challenged Wes Huff's argument for the resurrection by appealing to Marian apparitions. He thinks the appearances of Mary are just as good of evidence as the appearances of Jesus. To evaluate, let's look at the actual data.

Neil deGrasse Tyson and Steve Harvey debate God's existence, and Tyson challenges Harvey with a question he "thinks" destroys his argument.

A skin problem healed on the spot, a severely lazy eye goes straight, and a paraplegic regaining use of his legs.