Video summary
The video centers on an intense debate between two speakers regarding the historical reliability of the Gospels and the resurrection of Jesus, specifically from a Christian perspective that relies heavily on non-canonical texts like Enoch One found in Ethiopian Bibles and Dead Sea Scrolls. The interlocutor challenges the speaker to explain why they believe events prophesied in these ancient writings actually occurred historically, rather than simply accepting them as true because they are written down or agree with other scriptures. While the speaker argues that their version of the Bible is preserved by divine protection due to Ethiopia never being fully colonized and cites archaeological evidence like artifacts from the Dead Sea Scrolls, the challenger points out a logical flaw in this reasoning: agreeing texts do not prove historical fact if the authors could have manipulated history to create an illusion of fulfilled prophecy.
The core conflict arises when the speaker admits that it is possible for Gospel authors to manufacture stories or alter history to make prophecies appear as though they were being fulfilled, yet simultaneously claims there is no evidence suggesting this actually happened. The challenger presses on how one can be certain such manipulation did not occur if the only supporting documents are those very Gospels under scrutiny. This leads to a circular argument where the speaker insists that because their specific Bible contains Enoch One and matches Dead Sea Scrolls findings, it must be reliable, while conceding that other possibilities exist but dismissing them as unproven without independent verification outside of Christian tradition.
As the conversation escalates, frustration mounts on both sides regarding what constitutes valid evidence in a historical context involving religious texts. The speaker repeatedly emphasizes their belief system and reliance on spiritual preservation over empirical proof, stating they do not need to convince anyone because truth is found through faith rather than debate. Meanwhile, the challenger highlights that admitting something is "possible" does not equate to proving it did or didn't happen, noting a cultural difference in how Americans versus others interpret such possibilities during arguments. The dialogue concludes with an impasse where neither party can agree on what counts as objective evidence for historical events described centuries ago, leaving the question of whether the Gospels were corrupted by human invention unresolved between them.
Read the full video transcript
eyes. Maybe I am a Christian. But if
Enoch one
>> So why do you believe in the
resurrection of Jesus?
>> Because Enoch one said it would happen.
>> And why do you believe that that's true?
>> Because it's the oldest. It was found in
the Dead Sea. So
>> how do you know what happened? Why do
you believe it happened?
>> It's evidence. It if you if you want to
be technical, I wasn't there when the
corruption happened. I don't know what
was corrupted or not.
>> The evidence that I have
>> That's not what I'm asking you.
>> You said what did you ask me?
>> I'll explain to you. So, you're saying
in Enoch one, it's prophesized. I'm
assuming
>> it's prophesized that.
>> Okay. Okay. So, it's prophesized it was
going to happen. Yeah.
>> Correct.
>> Okay. Why do you believe it happened?
>> Because when I read Enoch, I believe it
was true.
>> No. No. That's prophecy of it happening.
How do you know it happened? Why do you
believe it happened?
>> Because it's going to happen. And
somebody claimed that it did happen.
>> No, no. The point is this. Why do you
believe the claim it happened? What is
convincing?
>> Great. Enoch one is a part of my Bible,
right?
>> No. Okay.
>> No, no, listen. Listen to listen. Enoch
one is part of my Bible. Enoch one is my
my whole Bible. So a part of my Bible is
that it happened and Enoch 1 said it
would happen.
>> Okay. Where's it where does it say it
did happen?
>> And the corrupt gospels that you're
going to go to.
>> Okay. And why do you believe they're
historically reliable?
>> Because someone before me because I
wasn't alive added Enoch one which
agrees with the gospels.
>> No. No. Why do you believe what the bos
gospels say? Because Enoch won.
>> All right, let me change my question.
>> And I believe Enoch won over the
gospels.
>> Let me rephrase my question. Let me
rephrase my question.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Um, is it possible that the authors of
the Gospels manipulated history to make
it look like prophecy was fulfilled?
>> Absolutely.
>> And how would you know if they did or
not?
>> I have to be born. Everything is uh So,
here's the thing.
>> So, you're believing they didn't though.
Why not?
>> I'm sorry.
>> So, right now you believe they didn't do
that. I believe that that is possible.
>> No, no. You No, not possible. You
believe they didn't because you wouldn't
believe what they say otherwise.
>> What I'm saying is the the Torah I don't
believe the Torah was corrupt.
>> No, no, no. You're not understanding the
question.
>> Okay. Okay. Can I
>> I don't believe the Gospels was corrupt.
Okay.
>> But it's possible it could have been
corrupt. Yes.
>> All right. It's possible the authors of
the Gospels could have been
manufacturing a history to make the
illusion that prophecy was being
fulfilled. So just whether or not let's
say for for example Enoch one
prophesizes a death and resurrection and
then the author of the gospels make it
look like that happened. They could do
that. Yes,
>> that's possible.
>> Right. How can you be sure they didn't?
>> Right. So this is I have to look at the
evidence around it. I don't just look at
the gospel.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> To make a conclusion.
>> So what's the evidence from that?
evidence is that Ethiopia was a country
that was never colonized
fully. Not fully. They still have their
old artifacts artifacts. And for some
reason, the Most High preserve a old
Bible
that has Enoch one has a completion in
it. And that old Bible was also recently
discovered.
part of it including Enoch one and the
Dead Sea Scrolls which match my oldest
Bible. So here's some evidence. What's
that have to do with the gospels?
>> So I'm looking at the evidence. I said
you evidence.
>> You ask I'm looking I'll tell you why
the evidence you should be looking at
>> is are the authors of the Gospels
reliable? Is the evidence you should be
looking at cuz if the authors of the
Gospels are not reliable Yeah. then they
could invent self-fulfilled prophecy.
But if the evidence that I'm looking at
matches what the author of the gospels
say, then I believe it's reliable.
>> No, but they could have done that to
make you think it's reliable.
>> Absolutely.
>> All right. So, I don't believe that
happened.
>> Why not? So, if I can evidence to you,
for example, if I can evidence to you
that the authors of the Gospels were
doing that, that they were manufacturing
history to act like it was fulfilling
prophecy, then you will have to concede
that they're not reliable.
But I'm saying, look, I'm I'm a I I I
seek truth.
>> I know. I'm here.
>> So, what I'm saying is I'm saying it's
possible.
>> So, I from your from your perspective,
I'll give you evidence. I'll give you
evidence from your perspective. And
because I'm a man and no one should
trust man. Don't even trust me even with
my evidence. Trust the most high because
he's spirit. I'm saying it's possible
from your idea.
>> Right. Right. But I believe it actually
happened from the evidence that I keep
trying to explain to you.
>> No, no, no. The problem is you're
putting the car before the horse. What
you're doing, there's a prophecy about
Jesus being crucified and raised in
whatever. Okay. In Enoch.
>> Correct.
>> Okay. And then a gospel writer claims he
was crucified and resurrected. And
you're saying, "Oh, that makes it true."
>> Right. My point more evidence than that.
>> What What other evidence do you have
besides the gospel? Somebody
decided my my the book that I have is
200 AD. Somebody decided to put Enoch in
the Gospels.
>> Okay.
>> So this that is evidence.
>> No, it's not.
>> Okay. Fair enough. IT'S EV IT'S NOT
EVIDENCE FOR YOU.
>> NO. NO.
>> OKAY. And and with the Torah that you
claim is corrupt. With the Torah. No,
no, no. With the Torah that you claim
that's corrupt.
>> Why you keep talking about the Torah?
>> Because it goes with the same New
Testament. Focus on the gospels. They're
the ones that act like
>> it's a Torah not correct.
>> Where where do you find the Where do you
find
>> Torah not correct?
>> Why do you find the evidence of Jesus
being um crucified and resurrected in
the Bible? Where do you find this
happening happening historically? Where
do we look?
>> Can I ask you a question real quick?
>> Is the Torah corrupt as well?
>> Just real quick.
>> Are you asking me is the Old Testament
corrupt? Yes.
>> Okay.
So that makes my answer change because
you're asking me a question. I want to
find the question.
>> Why was Okay, one second. One second.
One second. One second.
>> Why would I think
>> I was going to use that?
>> No, to prove that Jesus was crucified
and resurrected.
>> No, no, no, no. But
>> so I CAN'T USE NOTHING.
>> YEAH.
>> NO, NO. I CAN'T USE NO EVIDENCE. I GET
IT NOW.
>> NO. That's not it. OKAY.
>> OKAY. I DON'T NO EVIDENCE I CAN EVER
HAVE. OKAY. I GET IT.
>> NO. NO. NO. Let let me help you.
>> Can't use the Torah. Can't use Dead Sea
Scrolls. CAN'T USE ENOCH. CAN'T USE
THAT. I ONLY CAN USE THE QURAN AFTER IT.
>> OKAY.
>> I didn't mention the Quran. What are you
talking about?
>> OKAY. WHAT EVIDENCE?
>> IS THERE EVIDENCE THAT EXISTS?
>> OKAY. LISTEN, LISTEN, LISTEN,
>> HOLD UP, HOLD UP. IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE
THAT EVER EXISTS THAT THE Gospels could
possibly not be corrupt?
>> Yes. What
>> is See, that's why you need to listen.
>> What's that got to do with Is there any
evidence that I can even make up TO YOU
THAT WOULD BE EVIDENCE THAT THE gospels
are not correct?
>> Um,
>> no. NO. EXACTLY. SO, NO MATTER WHAT MY
ANSWER IS, YOU ALREADY KNOW THE ANSWER
IS NO.
>> NO, but here's the thing.
>> SO, NO MATTER WHAT I SAY EVIDENCE AND NO
MATTER WHAT I SAY IS EVIDENCE THAT THE
GOSPELS ARE NOT CORRUPTED, THE ANSWER IS
THERE'S NOTHING THAT THE YOUR ANSWER
WILL ALWAYS BE THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THAT
EXISTS THAT THE GOSPELS ARE NOT
CORRUPTED. Understand one thing. Let me
help you.
>> What the
>> But here's the problem you have. Should
I explain THE PROBLEM?
>> I KNOW. I GOT A BIG PROBLEM. I HAVE NO
EVIDENCE POSSIBLE.
>> OKAY. I got a huge problem.
>> No, THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
>> YOU'RE RIGHT.
>> THAT'S NOT THE CASE. I mean, your
nervous laugh isn't going to help you.
Let me help you.
>> You're the only one laughing.
>> Okay, here's the thing. You see, I'm not
asking you to convince me of anything.
>> I KNOW I CAN'T.
>> I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO.
>> THERE'S NO EVIDENCE. I'M NOT ASKING YOU
TO CONVINCE YOU. BUT I'M NOT ASKING YOU
TO. BUT I'M NOT ASKING you to.
>> YOU'RE SAYING WHAT'S MY EVIDENCE, RIGHT?
>> NO. DID YOU ASK ME TO EVER ASKED NO, NO,
NO. I'll explain what it is. No, no, no.
THAT'S NOT WHAT I SAID. YOU DIDN'T ASK.
YOU KNOW, YOU ON CAMERA.
>> NO, that's not what I said to you.
>> No, on camera.
>> Oh, understand. Let's understand
something. I think you've got this
twisted. Okay. Okay. This conversation
has nothing to do with me. First thing,
okay?
>> This is not you. I'm not asking you to
convince me of anything. All right?
>> I'm just showing you the evidence why I
think you know I can't convince you.
>> Okay. Let me help you. I'm not asking
you to convince me. I'm I don't care.
I'm not
>> I'm not trying to. I'm just answering
your question. Can can you just be quiet
just a second? Okay. Okay.
>> I don't I'm not asking you to convince
me of anything and I don't care what you
think about Islam. These are two these
are two principles. Okay. Understand
those when you answer my questions.
Okay. My question was to you why you
believe why you believe. Now if you
think the gospels is evidence for you,
you can tell me why you believe in it.
That's what I'm asking you. Okay. So
your response was um using this
Ethiopian Bible in
>> I said evidence first because of the
evidence.
>> One second. And your evidence was what?
Yeah.
>> That in Enoch it talks about Jesus being
crucified and resurrected. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Okay.
>> That's my evidence.
>> That's the claim. Okay.
>> And then I asked you, how do you know
what was prophesized in Enoch happened
in history? Okay. That was my question
to you. Then you went
>> What did I say?
>> Then we went to the Gospels.
>> No. What did I say to your question?
>> You said I'll say this was your
response. Okay. You said the go what the
gospels say confirms what Enoch says.
That's what you said.
>> And then I said your claim could be
possible that one THAT WAS I ALWAYS SAID
THAT HIS IDEA could be possible.
>> No no no. I said this is my evidence.
>> No. No. No. You you you're again putting
the horse before the cart. Okay. So you
said because the gospels agree with
Enoch, it makes Enoch true. This is what
you said.
>> That's my evidence.
>> All right. Then I asked you, is it
possible that the authors of the Gospels
manufactured history to make it look
like prophecy was being fulfilled?
>> And what did I say? Yeah, it's possible.
Okay.
>> Right. Right. Right. So, it's possible.
Okay. Right. All right. It's possible.
>> Okay.
>> Again, for the 100 times.
>> ALL RIGHT. IT'S POSSIBLE. OKAY. OKAY.
And then And then the next And then the
next question is, how would you know if
they did or didn't?
>> WHEN I SAY IT'S POSSIBLE, I ain't
believe it DIDN'T HAPPEN. BUT I AIN'T IN
WHEN I SAY IT'S POSSIBLE. For the
record, every time somebody say it's
possible, because I don't know how Y'ALL
THINK IN ENGLAND,
>> BUT IN AMERICA, EVERY TIME YOU SAY
SOMETHING'S POSSIBLE, THE OPPOSITION IS
POSSIBLE.
>> SO WHEN YOU ASK ME A QUESTION, HOLD UP.
WHEN YOU ASK ME A QUESTION, HOW DO YOU
KNOW THIS THING COME THE CART BEFORE THE
HORSE OR THE HORSE BEFORE THE CART? WAS
IT THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG? I DON'T. IT'S
POSSIBLE THE CHICKEN CAME BEFORE THE
EGG. AND IT'S POSSIBLE THE EGG CAME
BEFORE THE CHICKEN. I BELIEVE THE
CHICKEN BECAME FOR THE EGG. YOU BELIEVE
THE EGG CAME FROM THE CHICKEN. OKAY.
IT'S POSSIBLE. THAT'S WHAT IT MEANS IN
AMERICA.
>> IT DON'T MEAN THAT IN IT DON'T MEAN HERE
IN THE US. IT MEAN I DON'T KNOW HOW
Y'ALL DEBATE, BUT I SAID IT'S POSSIBLE.
>> ALL RIGHT. AND HOW WOULD YOU KNOW? How
would you know
>> if they did or not?
>> OKAY.
>> HOW DO I KNOW? I BELIEVE BY THE EVIDENCE
THAT ONE CAME BEFORE THE OTHER. I
BELIEVE THE CHICKEN CAME BEFORE the egg.
IS IT POSSIBLE the egg that CAME BEFORE
THE CHICKEN? POSSIBLY.
>> BUT MY CHICKEN,
>> THAT DEAD CHICKEN THAT I BELIEVE CAME
BEFORE THE EGG, I FOUND IT IN THE DEAD
SEA SCROLLS.
>> The chicken WAS IN THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS.
>> PC on Tik Tok. Can I have a picture with
you? Quickly.
>> I felt like I was on Tik Tok.
>> Get out of here. Keep asking me the same
question. Is it possible?