29. The Rise of the Roman Republic

[@ashtonelvismusic]

I've always enjoyed history but it really comes alive when you can tell the teacher loves the subject as well! Thank you for being such a great speaker and teacher!

[@paulfaigl8329]

Bruce Gore is absolutely fantastic 😍😍😍

[@koksalceylan9032]

Mr. Gore is a Gem of a Teacher. So clear, understandble,...love to listen to his lectures. Thank U very much.

[@bobdylan4846]

Thank you Bruce. You are a brilliant teacher. I have learned so much from you. I am trying to do my own adult Sunday School classes in the UK. I am so grateful to the Lord that I found your ministry.

[@GoreBruce]

Thank you!

[@josephhebert1785]

Bruce Gore binge here i come

[@bdav7436]

Bruce, thanks again for your teachings here on you tube; they are a blessing. Your lesson at the end was so timely. Our church is going through a reading plan, and the Story of the centurion’s faith was a topic of discussion for my wife and me yesterday. I love how you summed up the idea of Jesus being ‘amazed’, not that Jesus was surprised or taken of guard, but rather as a parent does for the benefit of a child to impress the joy in the model of faith. Well done.

[@kevanhess2105]

8 years ago.......wow where is he now.Very educative and interesting. BRAVO.

[@Cory_P]

Appreciate it Bruce.

[@onthechristianlife]

Very enjoyable once again. Better than any TV series out there!

[@GoreBruce]

Thank you as always!

[@golgumbazguide...4113]

Explore Golgumbaz with Guide Jahangir,Bijapur, karnataka.

[@craignedoff991]

Excellent teacher, thank you 🙏

[@lisetterivera2133]

Thank you for the information on the Roman Republic!

[@elijahwest7126]

He had me at 13:20. I love this guy. I’d be for a dual consulship

[@mclark23]

Can you put this as a podcast so i can hear it in my car with less battery and bandwidth

[@GoreBruce]

Limits on time have prevented me from doing the podcast thing up to this point. The mp3 audio files may be downloaded for your use, if that would help. Contact me at [e-mail].

[@gregharris3114]

This is great. Thanks for posting.

[@motorbike650]

A big thankyou

[@AutoEngineerVideos]

Correction from about 33min 30sec: Antiochus III (the Great) wasn't also called Epiphanes. That was Antiochus IV.

[@GoreBruce]

You are quite correct! Thanks for the clarification.

[@AutoEngineerVideos]

@@GoreBruce you're welcome. 😁

[@tiggergolah]

When my father attended college in the early 1960s at a state college, both Old Testament and New Testament Survey were taught. The Bible, and all its contextual history, were thought worthy of teaching at our institutions of higher learning. I wonder how many millennials are even aware of what they have been denied in their education, including the birthright to question the science of the day.

[@GoreBruce]

+tiggergolah A very worthy question! Thank you.

[@PMMagro]

+tiggergolah Progress it is called. We still know and reseach the Bible history (and shoudl keep doing so). But science is not static, it grows over time.

[@tiggergolah]

No, that 's not progress. Its abscence is a sign of the contempt in which the Bible is held on today's campi. The declining math and science abilities of today's graduates are further evidence of the decline of America's colleges and universities.

[@PMMagro]

tiggergolah The bible is still very much available and tehre si loads off possible places to learn about it and that time. It is by no means lost. Only new thinghs have been added as available knowledge. I am into the antiquity, sure many tody are not doing that but loads off greta stuff is avilable online and teh reseach is goin on all the same.

[@tiggergolah]

Being available and being respected enough to be taught in its own course and taken seriously are two vastly different things. As a student of many periods, most especially the 20th cent., I assure you that the decline of the status of the Bible among secular academia is historical fact.

[@vidapeters7677]

Thankful for your Voice your love ❤️ you are the public thing that is transforming me into better Christ like people. Translating this book and oh my lord it has put in my place with a magnificent view of my LORD CHRIST. عزیز مادر (dearest to mother)mother Vida

[@GoreBruce]

Thank you!

[@miketurany2082]

I've always wanted to know about ancient roman history compared to today very informative 3,445

[@GoreBruce]

+Michael Turany Thank you!

[@danmannz]

Such blessings are Bruce Gore's videos! The Roman Republic wasn't all bad! loves its checks and balances. Dueling 'presidents' that can veto each other sounds pretty impressive! I love how the simple folks could elect a leader that could veto the ruling class powers. Anyway's we could learn a lot from its republic (F the empire) Way more than Greece's democracy. I love how the Roman (republic paid a lot of gold/silver for some ruler to basically go away (far better to win at great cost with violence). Anyways in the year of 2020 (orange man bad), covert19, and into 2021, I can't wait for there to be mass nonviolent civil despondence. I can't wait !

[@guate4]

I fail to understand why Mr. Gore take the iron-clay feet as part of the iron legs. The feet are another empire.

[@Luapnampahc]

Where’s the BC?

[@AndersErichsen-rr7vs]

I need help with the Beast... 5 has fallen... one is in the time of John... Now I would think this Beast is a Roman beast following the idea of the Statue having 4 beasts and the last being Roman.

[@GoreBruce]

The best view, in my opinion, is that the five 'fallen' kings of Rome were Julius Caesar, Augustus Caesar, Tiberius Caesar, Gaius Caesar (Caligula), and Claudius Caesar. The current king was Nero, who ruled at the time of John. The 'beast' who was to come, who would reign for only a short time, was Galba (ruled a few months).

[@AndersErichsen-rr7vs]

I was thinking more in Governments types. I don't know much History but so bear with me... But the 4 Beasts in the book of Daniel represents Horns/Heads/Kings - one Beast with one head can represent the main king and continue with other kings until the next Beast in line. Like Babylonian continue as like 3 kings or something before the gold fell to the Silver beast. Then Medo persia continues where the King again rules and one head on the animal and multiple kings until the Bronze Beast of Greece flies by. This Greece beast is represented as dividing into 4 heads which seems to be represented by 4 horns as well which are 4 Grecian kingdoms being ruled by kings. So... If 5 heads has been and it is of the same Beast these heads are attached to, should these heads not be different types of Governments on the same beast? The Beast itself also have the character of 3 of the beasts it seems as Greece, Persia and Babylonian animal likeness seems to be found in it. Leopard body, Bear feet and lion head I think it was. Ahhh... Or do we have a time in history where it takes over, The Horn and the Beast both talk big words right? So maybe the Beast overall is showing the Horn from Daniel speaking great things and thinking to change law and times. But if the Beast is indeed the little Horn in Daniel - then it is still a Roman beast we're dealing with but with Babylonian, Persian and Greek influence in it... I just out on deep water here... This should make sense somehow... Also the Whore which is that great city who rules the kings of the Earth sits on all 7 heads/mountains/kings of this beast - and if that is Rome, then it seems the heads must have something to do with overall Romanism. I'm thinking the Roman Pagan church could be the Whore who could ride all seven heads and at some point merged itself and its wicked doctrines with Christianity? Like why have 7 heads if it represented just kings in line if they rule by the same system and government... We don't see this anywhere else it seems. One head/horn/king seems to be able to have multiple rulers running it - and yet only counted as one.

[@AndersErichsen-rr7vs]

Okay still doing some research. The first king of Gold is Nebukadnetstsar - 2 kings in total of gold. The first king of Silver is Dareyawesh - 4 kings in total of silver. The first king of Bronze but not continuing in his power is Alexander - and multiple kings of the Greek Beast of the 4 kingdoms after Alexander representing the Bronze. Who would be the first King of Iron? It only has one head - so it should continue from that point in the same type of governments or power at least? I was thinking when the Stone is going to come - the stone is representing Jesus for sure... But the Kingdom was sown in the Earth as a seed when he came last time. But the Horn had not yet grown out of the 4 Beast, as it seems he came and subdued 3 kings/Horn later on? So... The Stone should represent his second coming and not his first? If it was to represent his first coming then the Iron and Clay would just have been the Roman empire... But... Anyway there is 2 options I can see - and only 2... Either We are now in the Iron clay time awaiting Jesus return to strike it at its feet or we are at the Mountain growing when the seed of the kingdom was sown. But I think I went astray - the point was, who was the first Roman King of the Iron?

[@str.77]

The dream about the statue is not about "kings" as such but about kingdoms/empires. Gold for the Babylonians, with Nebukadnezzar first. Then silver for the Persians with Cyrus first (not Darius). Then the Greeks/Macedonians with Alexander first, later divided in several branches: for Israel it was first the Ptolemies, then the Seleucids that mattered. Iron for Rome, which was an Empire when they arrived on the Israelite scene but still formally a republic without a single head. Still, the first Roman to overpower Israel was Pompey, followed by Caesar, Marc Antony and finally Augustus. The stone has already shattered the statue and has grown into a large mountain. The "horn" isn't necessarily an end-time antichrist.

[@Thomasw540]

RE: Sunday School Lesson - ROME What do you find most rewarding about being a soldier in the U.S. Army? I grew up under the same authority the centurion Matthew 8:5 - 13 submitted himself. That authority has the power of life and death, as testified by Jesus, Himself, on the cross, who had submitted Himself to that same secular rule of law because He, too, was under authority. That’s what “taking up the cross” means in the context of life in the Army. That cross in your life is your daily suck up. It is universal and eternal in a republican military such as Rome’s and the Pentagon, the virtual Praetorian Guard of the United States of America. Not New Hampshire and the other governors. New Hamshire and the other goverors is how the Confederate States of America was organized, which is why Robert E. Lee observed that it was the one form of government that ensured defeat. Nevertheless, the Americans who had submitted themselves to the authority of their various state militias with their subordination to the several state governors, which was the legal theory Grant and Lincoln concluded at Hampton Roads with Sherman and, I think, Farragut, in witness and consensus. That’s why Jefferson Davis wasn’t hung and Robert E. Lee wasn’t shot. That cross each American soldier in the field on either side was the justification for the parole that served as a benediction on the process theology set into motion by Jesus on the cross. As it is written in Luke 23:34 “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” From the perspective of the process theology of Cornelius and the US Army Ranger School, this is a blessing on all soldiers that means “This is above their pay grade, now and forever, world without end.Amen.” That’s the salvation of the cross a soldier bears in a republican Army such as ours. So, you wake up every morning in answer to a prayer the night before and it’s another day in Paradise and yet another opportunity to be all you can be in an Army Strong kind of way, NFL players are allowed to live like that once a year, but not all at once and not guaranteed. Everyday in the Army is another day in Paradise. Just ask John McCain. That’s what bearing a cross can look like. That’s what comes with the paycheck. That’s the legal theory behind not hanging Davis and shooting Lee. The 2nd Amendment is the constitutional basis of this legal chain of authority as above the pay grade of those who shall have borne the battle. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to allow the various states to authorize police and military organizations under the same authority but distinct from the US Army. Mobilization and economy of force is the military reasoning along with avoiding a large standing army but ensuring a manpower pool based on the Minute Man universal service model of local self-defense. WWII is a pretty good example what that mobilization can look like. The legal conceit at Appomattox was that this mobilization occurred in all the various states on the states rights basis of the 2nd Amendment and each participant properly enrolled was legally under Luke 23:34. The salvation of the cross. I was never more sanctified than as a platoon leader in Vietnam. You don’t have to believe in anything but the mission and the presenting situation. This is when process theology begins to flow from the tips of your fingers. As a platoon leader, I was the servant-leader to the 22 guys deployed as my primary weapon. I would say to one “Go!” and he would go. And I would say to another “Come” and he would come. And I would say to my sergeant “Do this thing!” and it would be done. That’s the moment when the cross you bear becomes the Sword of Righteousness and the Shield of Salvation. Just another day in paradise.

[@AndersErichsen-rr7vs]

Was the Macedonians not one of the 4 Heads of the Greek Beast?

[@GoreBruce]

That is certainly a plausible view. Macedon and Greece were under the governance of Cassander after the death of Alexander.

[@AndersErichsen-rr7vs]

was Cassander one of the former Generals under Alexander?

[@GoreBruce]

Cassander was the son of Antipater, a general whom Alexander had appointed as regent for his heirs in Macedon and Greece.

[@AndersErichsen-rr7vs]

Ahh, okay - sounds plausible then that it was one of the 4 heads of the beast then. Thanks.

[@muanthangngaihte4598]

👍👍

[@RobbyHouseIV]

I like to point out how Rome even structured the election of its Consuls to be staggered with one of the two offices holding elections every six months. Regarding Pyrrhus and his involvement in southern Italy (Magna Graecia) and eventually Sicily, while he was greatly motivated by fanciful visions of establishing a strong Greco-Macedonian Empire in the west, he also felt an obligation to help the Tarantines' dispute with Rome. Earlier Tarenum provided Pyrrhus with cavalry and naval support during his fight for control of Epirus and the Macedonian throne against Demetrius Poliorcetes (Antigonus the One Eye's son). With respect to Pyrrhus's 3 set-piece battles with Rome (Heraclea, Asculum, and Beneventum) the first two battles are undisputed Pyrrhic Victories, however today many scholars qualify the Battle of Beneventum as "tactically inconclusive" and perhaps even a slight Roman edge of victory. Most historians view the battle as an unquestioned Roman Strategic Victory, one that would force Pyrrhus to abandon his dreams of a western Empire.

[@GoreBruce]

Thanks! Very helpful!

[@str.77]

"one of the two offices holding elections every six months" That's not actually true. Both consuls were elected simultaneously in the Republic and took office at the same time. Consuls stepping down after six months was a practice beginning under Augustus to give more aristocrats the chance to achieve the by-then powerless office.

[@sedeslav]

Refreshing breeze of common sense and true scholar science on the sea of fairy tales and fantasies on YT. Thanks.

[@VSP4591]

Nice presentation. In some other materials the Diadoh were called Macedonians not Greeks, In fact the army of Alexander was Macedonian as well as his generals. Of course there were some Greeks but the split of the empire among his generals created some Macedonian kingdoms not Greek. I know it is a file line but it is a difference. From what I know, at the beginning Greeks were hostile to Macedonians considering them brutal and not educated.

[@zachdietrich4648]

mr gore, i love your videos, but have always suspected your pronunciation was off. for example, in latin, unless you are a catholic priest, the "ae" sound is "EE" not "AA". preetor. preetorian. do you not realize that in your lack of precision, you are in fact spreading misinformation? you are teaching bad grammar. how Very Modern of you...

[@GoreBruce]

Thanks! I'll try to remember that!

[@str.77]

I don't what these respelling signs EE and AA are supposed to mean but the ae in praetor is properly pronounced similar to the a in bad in vulgar latin and probably like i in sight in classical latin. It's certainly not preeetor

[@donluchitti]

What is this theological bullshit? Corvus was Rome's first dictator and there were other dictators before cesar

[@gregharris3114]

This is great. Thanks for posting.

[@gregharris3114]

This is great. Thanks for posting.