Wes Huff Says He Has Proof Jesus Rose From the Dead — Rabbi Singer Destroys the Claim!

Added: 2026-05-19

[00:00:00]But that's not what Wes Huff is saying.

[00:00:02]Wes Huff is claiming that the very people who are eyewitnesses were given a choice to believe in this and die or renounce it and then live and they chose willingly to die. What is your source for that? The answer is there is no source for that.

[00:00:26]Wes Huff, who's a Christian apologist, Mikuela Peterson, asks him some very important, fundamental, straightforward questions about like why should we believe that Jesus rose from the dead? And Wes Huff provides some of his what he says is the most compelling reason to believe that Jesus rose from the dead.

[00:00:56]>> Best historical evidence for the resurrection.

[00:00:59]>> Oh, okay. Best historical resurre evidence for the resurrection. I mean, I take I take kind of a cumulative approach to the resurrection in that one of the best pieces of evidence that I think speaks to the tangibleness of the resurrection is that you and I, Michaela, are talking about it 2,000 years later.

[00:01:21]>> Yeah.

[00:01:22]>> In that there are other messianic movements in the ancient world, but I bet you couldn't name any of the individuals involved in those. And there's a reason why we're asking questions about Jesus of Nazareth and nar and not Simon Barulkva.

[00:01:39]And that's because Simon Barulva led a revolt and died and his movement died with him. It >> this is mind-blowing. So he the claim is that given that there are other messianic movements meaning the Bakba revolt which began was launched in 132 CE and ultimately Bakba was killed in 135 and and therefore all the people who thought Baka might have been the Messiah realize that he is not the Messiah. most famously Raba doesn't demonstrate that therefore Jesus is true because people are still talking about it. What it demonstrates is that number one Christianity has no guard rails which means that if they want someone to be the Messiah they have no way of being able to discern that he's not the Messiah especially when Paul is moving forward and advancing. For those who don't know this, the earliest surviving literature in the Christian world are the letters of Paul. We are told that 13 out of the 27 books in the Christian Bible are written by Paul. And there seven of them we're very confident were written by Paul. I think it's more than that. Regardless what steelmen all this all 13 letters of Paul were written during the 50s. So what Paul is doing is he's saying I've got a mystery, a brand new mystery. And that is that Christ is risen. And then he 1 Corinthians 15 verse 3 and 4 says the Hebrew Bible says that the Messiah is supposed to rise on the third day which is totally made up.

[00:03:28]So therefore what Christians are doing is they're playing tennis without a net.

[00:03:33]There's and this is the problem of all these religion that sort of spin off from Judaism. They have no guard rails.

[00:03:43]So in fact like how do we know that Baraka wasn't the Messiah, right? Well, the reason we know that is he was killed by the Romans, which is spectacularly insane. Because if this was in fact the reason not to believe it, then if that's the case, then well, Jesus was killed by the Romans. But what happens is a new theology which is completely antithetical to the Hebrew Bible is introduced. And therefore, aha, the Messiah is supposed to die. I mean, in case you think that I'm like like making this up or I'm embellishing or I'm saying something that like um just it's sort of like a a great apherism and because I have an unflattering view of a different religion, a competing religion, you're making a huge mistake.

[00:04:37]What I'm saying is explicitly conveyed in the Christian Bible in Paul's letters where you'd expect to find it in 1 Corinthians chapter chapter 2 verse 7 and 8. Paul says explicitly that this whole thing was a grand mystery that no one was expecting this.

[00:04:58]And if they would have known the grand mystery, you find Paul speaking about this grand mystery in in Ephesians chapter 3 that no one else knew that the Messiah was to die and rise if so nobody else knew that. So what he's doing is he's create he's introducing a new rule that could rescue a false religion. So bingo. That's exactly what happened to Christianity. Therefore, Christians can't be wrong because all you need is somebody who's willing to do what a legitimate rabbi would never do. And that's exactly what happened. Number two, and I think is very helpful, and that is whereas Paul was the most important convert to Christianity.

[00:05:43]No question. He created Christianity.

[00:05:45]The Christianity that you know is utterly Pauline. As it turns out, we have our second most important convert to Christianity and that's Constantine in the fall of 312. So unlike the Baraka revolt where Hadrien is not only not impressed with Barakwa and this war that went on for nearly three years, six decades after destruction of the second temple was brutal and it was brutal not for the Jews but for the Roman Empire.

[00:06:17]They actually they were struggling so much fighting the Jews that the emperor had to bring in a general from Britain who was their top top guy like Delta Force to be able to crush this. This is a massive revolution. But the point is Hadrien after Baraka was was defeated.

[00:06:37]So all the Jews went okay he died. He did not succeed in liberating Jerusalem.

[00:06:43]Zechariah 12 is not fulfilled. Zechariah 8 is not fulfilled. Ezekiel 38 and39 is now filled contrary to what we're in right now. Incidentally, so all the Jews said, "Bingo, we've got our guardrail.

[00:06:55]He's not the Messiah." What happens in the empire? So whereas Hadrien destroys the Temple Mount, renames um Judea to Fallstina, that's where we can get the name Palestine. renames cities in the land of Israel to names that are not the authentic names in order to dejudaize the um the land of Israel. So he Philistina and so on which are the arch enemies of the Jews not Constantine converts to Christianity because he assigns his the war that he battled in three trials a very critical war because he emerges out of it as the as the emperor of Rome over a unified Rome of both east and west and uh he he attributes that success to um to the to the god of the Christians and in promptly in 313 the very next year he the edict of Milan the next immediately afterwards constantly proclaims that Christianity is a licit religion and that should be supported so it's just exact opposite of course Christianity is going to move ahead when you have Christian emperors that be are Christian you know now there's still inner fighting going on. Uh Constantine wants the issue of the nature of Jesus's nature to be settled, the council of Nika. So there's a c there were earlier councils like Antioch, but this one had the was under the emperor itself and then you had Theodocious at the end of the 4th century. It means the emperors of Rome was squarely right behind this.

[00:08:45]That was like you couldn't possibly bring a worse example. That means this demonstrates that no matter what Christians said it means early leaders of the church whatever they said they would just go along with it. So therefore it can't fail. That's why this is and again Wes Huff I don't know him.

[00:09:06]I never met him. seemed like a nice fellow, but th he said this is his best stuff to prove the resurrection.

[00:09:17]>> To be able to go back into Jerusalem on something like the day of Pentecost proclaiming the resurrection to a group of people who very well could have seen Jesus crucified, something happens. And I think there needs to at minimum be an accounting for that. I mean there's the adage that uh uh liars make poor martyrs in that you will die for something you you believe to be true but something you know to be a lie it's a lot harder to actually go to your grave too >> yeah you won't push yourself that far >> yeah so sometimes when people hear you know liars or sorry yeah liars make bad martyrs point to something like the the like suicide bombers or or those who flew the the the planes into the towers on 911. But the difference between them and the disciples is that the disciples both were there when Jesus died and claimed to have seen him resurrected.

[00:10:11]>> Whereas the people who hijacked the planes on 9/11 weren't there when Muhammad was waging his, you know, escapades in 7th century Arabia. So they're going off of what they believe to be true, not what they know definitively to be true objectively within their kind of own conscious experience.

[00:10:33]>> And so I think, you know, there needs to be an account. I think the breadth of the historical case for the credibility of the gospels is comprehensive enough that it gives us a base work to say that the disciples were not lying, that they believed what they were doing to be true, and that the account for that, all of the kind of alternatives to Jesus's resurrection, I think ultimately fall short. I want you, the viewer, to understand that what Wes is saying here. He is not an outlier. He is a well-informed Christian. This is standard fear is what I want to cuz I know some of you are watching this and are just in shock. So, I want to be very very clear that Wes Huff, who's very popular out there, um what he's saying is mainstream. And that's why this is valuable. means if I showed you something that like no one really believes it, I'd be strawmaning. This is this is mainstream stuff and he's articulating this on a show that has more than a million subscribers. Um Peterson of course is Dr. Peterson's daughter. So you don't really know where to begin with all this because just simply spoken in the Christian Bible itself we are told that Peter who's Jesus premier apostle he says the church is going to be built on you well he's denying Jesus three times in the Christian Bible so as not to get killed and the disciples are shaking in Jerusalem I mean, this is the same guy who said, "I'll die for you." So, like, what do you That's just just the beginning. We haven't even gotten started because all this is all is made up because we have nowhere in the Christian Bible that says that the disciples willingly just died for the religion. I mean, let alone if it did say that, then we would have a question. Could we believe it or not? We have had times where we were on air where Christians have called in and said, "Well, why was Peter willing to die for his beliefs rather than renounce them?

[00:13:04]You've been there cuz you were into, you know, it was our show." And I asked the person, "Where does it say that?" And the person would just flipping through his pages and going, "He can't find it."

[00:13:16]And I feel bad for the guy. And I and I say actually it doesn't say this anywhere. So this is very important. I want to make italicize this one point and that is the word martyr could be used in two different ways and we are using it in only one way. Not because I want to straw man any anything but rather I want to steal man this and address the issue. Okay. So, it can be said that any person who dies because he's a Christian, that means just somebody went and killed somebody cuz they wanted to kill a Christian. You could properly call that person a martyr. Okay. So, but we're going to do is because of the nature of this apologetic, the apologetic is that they voluntarily died for what they supposedly believed.

[00:14:20]I mean, they supposedly had a way out.

[00:14:24]They could have said, now these are his words. He says that that liars make poor martyrs. This is his point. So, this is very very important. So if Christians were killed in the first century, that's possible. And if they were, let's just say they were. And in fact, we have reason to believe that Christians were killed during the first century under Nero. We have reasons from Tacus. But this is very critical. The claim is here is that eyewitnesses who putitively witnessed Jesus's ministry and willingly died rather than just renounce it. Got it?

[00:15:08]That proves now that that proves that uh these were sincere people who would not be lying. That's a that's a fair claim.

[00:15:18]That means it doesn't mean that someone wasn't delusional, but I want to grant everything. I just want to grant it all.

[00:15:25]But the one caveat here is the word martyr that we're going to be using is a very specific kind of mo. And it's not because I am setting that up uh to make a great point or anything. It's the Christians that are are forcing me to say, okay, we have to more narrowly define what a modder is. A martyr is someone who espouses a belief and then is given a choice. You either renounce it and you go free or you don't renounce it and you die for your beliefs. So that would be very compelling and he's quite right. The the people who hijacked uh the planes on 911 on that horrible Tuesday morning. It's clear. I I think it's it would be a very good case to believe that the people who did that, who committed that crime and murdered nearly 3,000 Americans, they genuinely believed it. They were murderers. But that's not the point. But they must have believed it logically, right? So, and the people who blow themselves off for whatever religion, they obviously believe it. and Buddhist monks that or Tibetan monks that you know burn themselves alive. I would have to concede that these people genuinely believe it and that actually does happen. But they weren't there going back to, you know, the original Buddha.

[00:16:58]They just believe it. And I am sure that in every religion there are sincere believers. They just they're convinced that they believe it. But that's not what Wes Huff is saying. Wes Huff is claiming that the very people who are eyewitnesses were given a choice to believe in this and die or renounce it and then live and they chose willingly to die. What is your source for that?

[00:17:26]The answer is there is no source for that. It doesn't exist anywhere.

[00:17:31]Now, yeah, you know, Steven is killed, but he's not a disciple. You know, the brother of John, the brother of John, the son of Zebedee, he gets killed. But nowhere does the text say he was given a choice. It doesn't even say in the book of Acts whether he was killed for being Christian. Let's just say he was. It doesn't say anywhere that he was given some sort of choice. This all comes from late late Catholic writings. Now it does say as an example in Clement's re letter to Corenth U Clement of Rome. So this letter which is kind of really written anonymously but I I don't want to make a deal about that.

[00:18:15]So that letter is written let's say in about the year 96. So there it makes reference to that Paul and Peter died.

[00:18:24]Okay.

[00:18:26]Actually, when it talks about Paul's death, he's probably referring to Paul dying in Spain rather than Rome, it's not really very germanine, but it kind of is cuz he says he again the letter is written in Rome. And if he's saying the westernmost part, well, that would be Spain. Now, the reason to think it's Spain is that we actually have in the book of Romans that Paul is saying he's going to Spain. So, if there's anything to that, then Paul actually dies in Spain, not in Rome. I'm not saying you can depend on that letter, but it's not pointing to anything remotely resembling what we find in later Roman Catholic traditions. We have zero, we have nothing, nothing in the Christian Bible that disciples willingly died. In fact, the book of Acts conservatively was written about the year 85. I don't believe it was written 85. I think it's later, but I want this is an apologetics, right? So, I want to steal this. So I want to I'm going to give it 85. The book of Acts, give it 85.

[00:19:31]Which means that the book of Acts was written two decades after at least two decades after Paul was supposedly executed, his head chopped off.

[00:19:45]But the book of Acts ends with Paul being freed from prison.

[00:19:51]I'm not arguing from silence here. If Paul was executed, the book of Acts would have written it.

[00:19:58]The book of Acts was very into Luke Acts is very into martyrdom.

[00:20:03]It would have recorded it. It didn't. He went free. That's really, really, it's not just significant, it's mindblowing.

[00:20:13]If you want to find books about Peter and Paul, now Paul wasn't there at the crucifixion. So that really he wasn't there at the puditive resurrection.

[00:20:26]Doesn't get let's just concede everything because I want to you would have to go to lay books. You would have to go to the Acts of Peter, a book you probably never heard of. The Acts of Paul, you probably never heard of, written hundreds of years later. Say it was written in the second century.

[00:20:47]The But even there, it's not clearly laid out. So what he's doing is he's making a claim that disciples were willing to die and died for their faith and had a way out. That's Wes's claim. That's a complete fabrication. And I remind you when he's saying this to Miss Peterson, he's saying these are his best arguments. Like I don't want to hear his this is not his mediocre arguments. This is the best stuff he has.

[00:21:23]That's mind-blowing. Now there are some Christians I've heard it said that well Peter's death is predicted in the book of John. Okay.

[00:21:34]All right. We should address this cuz someone's going to write a message going to write you know going to post something and go well. So the book of John has 21 chapters.

[00:21:47]It is widely believed for good reason that John 21, the last chapter is a later appendix was put there later.

[00:21:57]I'm going to ignore that. We're going to just not cuz I want to steal man this completely. Okay. So now, but the book of John is very late. Meaning the book of John is written again conservatively 95. Okay? If you opened up your Christian Bible, that's the data you're going to find for the book of John. There are many scholars who think it's later than that and they think P52 is later than when they say it is.

[00:22:29]That's a the earliest New Testament fragment of John 18. I want to like steal man this. So there's a passage in John 21 which somehow Christians think Christians believe or insist supports the notion that Peter willingly died rather than renounce his Christianity.

[00:22:54]Now in the gospels we have Peter actually denying Jesus. So this doesn't make sense but I want to concede everything. I want to concede everything because I want to make this book this point. uh please look at John chap 21 verse 18 and 19.

[00:23:11]So here Jesus is speaking to Peter and he says to him verily I say unto you that when you were younger you did whatever you wanted. I put that in meaning you dressed yourself and you went wherever you wanted to. You were a free person. But when you're old and you will stretch out your hands and someone else will dress you and lead you where you don't want to go. So that's Jesus speaking puditively speaking. I don't believe this conversation is historical but let's just concede it all because we want to make a strong case. So that would be in a red letter edition in red.

[00:23:56]Jesus speaking there. The narrator then steps in. Whoever wrote the book of John who steps in and says there in verse 19, Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would be glorified would glor be glor would glorify God.

[00:24:18]Okay. So, so the the narrator then adds that point here. So, I want to just concede everything. If I concede everything, then the Christian has all of his work ahead of him. If I were to say that in the year 95, which would be after Peter would likely be dead, the author says that Peter was killed. Well, he the text explicitly says that it's against his will. That means nowhere in verse 18 and 19 of the last chapter of the book of John, John chapter 21 does it say that Peter did this willingly on like Wes is saying it's just the opposite. The text actually is saying the opposite. It's saying you're going to go where you do not want to go against your will. Whereas in when you were young you did things as you wished voluntarily. The text says that in fact one day you're going to do something that you do not want to do un it's not going to be voluntary. So therefore it is not only inconsistent with what it doesn't support what Wes is arguing here. It argues the exact opposite that you're going to be taken where you don't want to go. So this is a terrible example of the all these arguments are simply what they should do is say we believe on faith. The problem they get into is that it all of this is completely uh contradicted by the Hebrew Bible which doesn't say anything about the Messiah dying and rising on the third day. Even though the Christian Bible says that the Tanakh, the Hebrew Bible foretold that the Messiah would die and rise on the third day. And it actually in Luke 24 last chapter verse 44- 46 um claims that it says that in Tanakh in the Hebrew Bible and it doesn't say it anywhere.

[00:26:25]It's just made up. It's completely fake.

[00:26:27]And now these um stories are these fictional stories are invented later for sure and this will become like a a cottage industry of inventing stories about the martyrdom of the disciples and so on and don't ask but this is all much much later. It has no source that's in the Christian Bible in the Christian cannon as these people argue.

[00:26:56]So this is shocking. Anyways, I rest my case.

[00:27:02]>> If you enjoyed this program, please like and subscribe.