Why Alex O’Connor’s Claims Against Christianity Just Don’t Add Up
In a recent video, Alex O’Connor responded to Wesley Huff's interview with Joe Rogan on his podcast.
Alex takes issue with several points made by Wess during the Rogan interview. In this video, I will highlight three of these points, as I believe they are the most significant regarding the credibility of Christianity.
Alex claims that Jesus never claimed he was God.
Alex believes Mark’s gospel fails to mention the resurrection.
Alex argues for a later date for John’s gospel.
Jesus’ Claims to Divinity
Many agnostics, atheists, and skeptics, like Alex, view the first-century writings of the Gospels through a modern Western lens. Alex is projecting his secular worldview onto the biographical accounts of Jesus by arguing that since Jesus does not directly and explicitly say in these words, “I am God,” well, then, he never claimed to be God.
However, we must understand Jesus' Jewish culture in the first century Galilee. A very clear and noticeable way Jesus claimed He was God was in the way He taught the people. For instance, Jesus frequently prefaced His messages with the words “Amen” or “Truly” to inform the audience that what He was about to convey was true and infallible (Matthew 19:23, 28). Rabbi’s never stated “Amen” before their teachings. Jesus did.
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus demonstrated complete self-authority when He said, “Ego de Lego,” which translates to “But I say,” emphasizing that what He had to say represented the final authority and full revelation of the will of God (Matthew 5:22, 28, 34).
The Jews clearly grasped the significance of Jesus saying "Amen” or “Truly" at the beginning of His teachings; it meant He is God!
The British New Testament scholar N.T. Wright says, "When Jesus used 'Amen' at the beginning of His statements, He was making the stunning claim that He Himself was the source of divine truth."
In addressing the skepticism surrounding the accounts of Jesus’ deity, especially as articulated by Alex, it’s fundamentally important to recognize that disbelief in these narratives does not diminish their historical significance. While Alex may dismiss the Gospel accounts as unsubstantiated, it’s important to emphasize that numerous eyewitnesses and testimonies from the first century support Jesus’s statements as well as the miraculous actions He did that are reported in the historical accounts of the canonical Gospels.
For instance, Jesus performed miracles like healing the sick and raising the dead. These actions attracted large crowds because much of what Jesus did occurred in public and was seen not only by His followers but also by His enemies.
One particular example recorded in the Gospel of Mark chapter two, where after Jesus forgave the sins of the paralytic, the scribes thought to themselves, “Who can forgive sins but God alone” (Mark 2:7b)? Jesus then explained to the scribes that he forgave the paralytic so that “you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mark 5:10).
What’s fascinating about the title “Son of Man” is that it connects to a prophetic designation from the prophet Daniel (7:13) referring to the coming of Jesus as God. Jesus interpreted Daniel's prophecies as referring to Him, which explains why “Son of Man” is the title Jesus most often used for Himself. In the New Testament, “Son of Man” occurs forty-three times, mainly identifying Christ as God in human form.
Not to mention in Mark 4:39-41, Jesus enacts His divine powers by calming the storm, transfiguring in His heavenly glory in Mark 9:2-7. Those are just a few examples of the gospel writers reporting on the deity of Jesus.
Mark and the Resurrection
Alex claims, according to scholars, that the gospel of Mark was written around AD 70, which pushes its origin about forty years after the supposed ascension of Jesus Christ—long enough for most, if not all, eyewitnesses to have died off.
I believe Alex is being presumptuous here.
Scholars refer to Mark as the “Markan Priority” because it is the first gospel which provides details and guidance to the gospels of Matthew and Luke, both written before AD 70.
Good evidence indicates that John Mark wrote a biographical account of Jesus based on the Apostle Peter’s firsthand testimony in the early 50s while in Rome (Peter refers to Mark as his “son” in 1 Peter 5:13). Papias, a student of the Apostle John and Bishop of Hierapolis around AD 130 or 140 in Exposition of the Oracles of the Lord, observed that the Apostle John himself noted that Mark, in writing his Gospel, "wrote down accurately.. whatsoever [Peter] remembered of the things said or done by Christ. Mark committed no error... for he was careful of one thing, not to omit any of the things [Peter] had heard, and not to state any of them falsely." Irenaeus (AD 130–200) also verified that this early writing came from John Mark.
Despite the absence of Mark 16:9-20 in the earliest and most complete Greek manuscripts, Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus from the 4th century, this does not undermine the claim that Jesus rose from the dead. Here are several points to consider:
Other Gospel Accounts: The resurrection is documented in three other Gospels—Matthew, Luke, and John. These accounts provide robust narratives of Jesus’ resurrection, ensuring that the core message remains intact regardless of Mark’s shorter ending.
Key Details in Mark’s Gospel: Even without Mark 16:9-20, the preceding verses in Mark 16:5-8 convey critical details: Jesus was buried in a tomb, the tomb was found empty by the women, an angel informed the women that Jesus, who had been crucified, had risen, and the disciples were instructed to meet Jesus in Galilee.
Brevity of Mark’s Gospel: Scholars often point out that the abrupt ending of Mark fits the overall brevity and style of his Gospel. Early church fathers Eusebius and Jerome noted this characteristic, suggesting that a shorter ending may be more consistent with Mark’s writing style.
Scribal Additions: Even if verses 9-20 were added later, it’s possible that scribes had access to earlier manuscripts containing these verses.
Irenaeus’ Reference: The fact that Irenaeus quoted Mark 16:19 in his work “Against Heresies” (AD 180) indicates that some manuscripts included the longer version of the resurrection. This reference serves as historical evidence that supports the idea of a more extended ending existing at that time.
Even without the verses in question, the resurrection of Jesus remains a well-supported event, bolstered by multiple sources and historical context. Thus, the absence of Mark 16:9-20 should not be seen as a discrediting factor regarding the resurrection of Jesus.
Dating of John’s Gospel
In 1934, C.H. Roberts sent photographs of P52 to three European papyrologists, who dated it to AD 100-150. When it came to similarity in writing style and parchment, Roberts found the closest dated parallels were Papyrus Fayum 110 (AD 94) and Papyrus Oslo 22 (AD 127). As well as the handwriting being similar to papyri discovered during the reign of Emperor Hadrian who ruled from AD 117-138.
While the date of P52 is debated between AD 100 to AD 150, what truly stands out is the preservation of the gospels and the New Testament letters. As Sir Frederick Kenyon, a notable biblical scholar in ancient manuscripts, stated in Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, “No fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith rests on a disputed reading…. It cannot be too strongly asserted that in substance the text of the Bible is certain: Especially is this the case with the New Testament. The number of manuscripts of the New Testament, of early translations from it, and of quotations from it in the oldest writers of the Church, is so large that it is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved in some one or other of these ancient authorities. This can be said of no other ancient book in the world.”
The preservation of the Gospels can be trusted, and each one of them offers us the message of eternal life found only in Jesus Christ! I appreciate Slex O’Connor’s rigorous study and desire to know the truth. I hope one day he will come to know Jesus as his personal Savior!