A History of Christian Schism

[@tamjammy4461]

Just want to say thanks. I'm an atheist so probably not the main target audience, but I've started "coming to" these talks whenever I have spare time. You make the subject matter come to life , and approach it with an objectivity which I seldom find in talks given by Christians ( I'm genuinely sorry that I have to say that , and I'm not ,,of course ,saying there are no other good Christian scholars) . So thanks. I'm looking forward to the next one, and hopefully many more.

[@NightDoge]

if you like these lectures by John Hamer i recommend you look up Bart Ehrman. he’s a new testament scholar who i think John recommended for additional reading.

[@tamjammy4461]

@@NightDoge Ta. I've actually been watching Bart Ehrman' s podcast for a while now, and do enjoy ( and have learned from) his work. I do find it amazing how scholars have been able to piece together so much information about the origins of the biblical texts , and yet at the same time how large the gaps in our knowledge still are. Ta for the heads up on Bart Ehrman's work though. It's considerate of you to have suggested it.

[@theunapologeticjew]

@@NightDogeI like Dr Ehrman but for a historian he tends to be eclectic which parts of history he debunks. He just assumes, for example, that Paul’s persecution of Christians and John’s “I am’s” are historical.

[@simonslater9024]

Please read my other comment. God bless. Ps an atheist ironically does believe in a god - him or herself because if one rejects the true God Jesus Christ then they dethrone Jesus Christ and place themselves on his throne! This was the sin of Adam and Eve - you’ll become like god’s.

[@theunapologeticjew]

@@simonslater9024 i’m sure that’s what you believe re-atheist or non-Christians, but none of us believe ourselves God. We just don’t believe in yours.

[@saquist]

I left the Jehovah's Witnesses 14 years ago along with my friends and family. I had to find new friends and new people I consider family. On that journey I discovered more knowledge than I could possibly articulate and I think the honesty I've found here is emblematic of my entire search. You are not hiding from history You ask what can we get from these stories YouYou tell us everything You let us ask questions You aren't afraid of our criticism It really feels like something new here.

[@morpher728]

You should become muslim

[@michaelmcintyre5719]

I'm Catholic, and I am enjoying the genuinely Christian commitment, intellectual sweep and scholarly rigour of these lectures enomously.

[@hamnchee]

I got goosebumps when you gave a shout out to UsefulCharts. My two favorite channels coming together in a KZbin anti-schism.

[@angelawossname]

Dr Baker unfortunately spread misinformation on his chart about Christian denominations, blaming a couple of splits over disagreements on same sex marriage. A few members from these churches tried to correct him, even a pastor from one of the churches, but he ignored them and never corrected himself. The problem is that he collaborated with Ready to Harvest, who claims to be objective and neutral, but will blame anything and everything on "the gays" given half the chance, because he's an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist. My admiration and esteem went down a bit for Dr Baker after this. I thought given his background he wouldn't want to support someone belonging to such a cultish, high control church. As a gay Jew, I certainly wouldn't call him an ally, and I thought he was.

[@Tony_toblerone]

I wonder how many of us found this channel because of useful charts or vise versa

[@davioustube]

Thanks!

[@centre-place]

Thanks for supporting the channel!

[@carytodd7211]

This was a tremendously informative presentation. I learn so much from this channel. As a former member of the Utah church, I appreciate the values of the Community of Christ.

[@Questioner365]

All religions naturally divide and divide... Mormonism is already up to over 300 sects, in attempt to be the correct ones, "Chosen Ones."

[@alwilliams5177]

Thank you for your wonderful ministry. I just wanted to share that as a member of the Anglican communion, I (and many in out communion) identify as reformed Anglo Catholic. Any baptized Christian can take communion unless the priest has a reason to refuse them. I believe anyone who has a relationship with Christ and has invited Christ Jesus crucified to be their personal God is the most accurate definition of "Christian." I've met "real" Christians in many denominations when I worked as a church directory photographer in the 90's. Thanks for your well made presentations. Peace.

[@ThisLiberalPopulist]

“Personal God”? So, I guess I (and Christians like me) wouldn’t be welcome then… 😕

[@alwilliams5177]

@@ThisLiberalPopulist Don't see why not. I meant personal as apposed to one dictated by dogma. How you define that relationship is up to you. If you're not into the whole 3 person God concept please keep in mind that it's not the time or place to go into that. Only those whove been baptized can participate but that's a matter of conscience.

[@ThisLiberalPopulist]

I don’t believe Jesus is God and my baptism was in Jesus’ name, not trinitarianism. I don’t see myself or trinitarians as more or less Christians, but I know most trinitarians openly reject my faith in God through Jesus as illegitimate and have even been told point blank by trinitarian Christians that it’s too bad I can’t be burned at the stake as a “heretic” like in the “good ol’ days” because I apparently “deserve” it for affirming the exclusive, singular, and indivisible divinity of the Father, only affirming Jesus as human. I have no doubt in the validity of my faith, the faith of Jesus and the apostles, or in legitimacy of my baptism or in assurance of conscience I live my life with, as I too have the Spirit of God. Unfortunately I’ve largely been marginalized and mocked for this and even well-meaning trinitarians don’t tend to realize how even they slam the door shut on countless Christians like myself who are denied fellowship and community simply for affirming what we understand to be the ancient apostolic understanding of God and God’s Christ. Anyway, I agree this isn’t the time or place for a debate about dogma, just wish we could actually be the one, holy, catholic church of God in Christ, and not building invisible walls littered on both sides with ideological barbwire and dogmatic landmines.

[@alwilliams5177]

@@ThisLiberalPopulist How do you know how most trinitarians feel about you? You're psychic? Most trinitarians can't spell "unitarian" much less explain their beliefs.

[@ThisLiberalPopulist]

@@alwilliams5177 Was talking about my personal lived experiences. No one’s pretending to be psychic not should anyone pretend to be defensive about someone else’s bigotry.

[@paulhand5015]

marvelous intellectual objective and fascinating thankyou

[@SepulvedaBoulevard]

Really appreciate these lectures, and always look forward to the next. As a Quaker with a Stone/Campbell background, I feel right at home with Community of Christ❤

[@simonslater9024]

Please read my comment. God bless.

[@nonameronin1]

My only complaint about this lecture is that "Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite" is clearly a name better suited for a cat.

[@GoAlamo]

Or a heavy metal hair band.

[@alwilliams5177]

Many ancient Greek names make excellent pet names.

[@tamjammy4461]

Even if I hadn't enjoyed the talk it'd have been worth listening to every second of it to get to this comment 😁. I just hope my future cat agrees.....

[@stalfithrildi5366]

​@@alwilliams5177banging a spoon on the food tin and shouting "Diogenes!" with increasing volume and underlying panic

[@ubertrashcat]

I prefer Fluffius Josephus

[@espritdragon]

Thanks for the thoughtful tour and insights.

[@charliebrownie4158]

I would love to see you do a series on the schisms within the different schools of Islam and Buddhism?

[@wvlcan]

I always enjoy your perspective.

[@alwilliams5177]

I think the reference is to Peter's answer as the foundation, i.e. the foundation is recognition of Christ. That's from the Greek. Jesus uses masculine singular to refer to Peter but "foundation" using the same stem with feminine plural.

[@simonslater9024]

Please read my comment. God bless.

[@daveyork0]

Dude is the founding President of Teachaholics Anonymous

[@alwilliams5177]

Maybe the truest understanding of the trinity is that God is greater than anyone can Imagine. We accept God in humility with whatever understanding we have.

[@Mercury-Wells]

*accept dogma unthinkingly

[@nosuchthing8]

It's an interesting view. Like infinity, we can't fathom it. But since there are many infinities, there could be many gods.

[@alwilliams5177]

@@nosuchthing8 I suspect that the total number of gods is equal to the number of believers but they all intersect in some ineffable way. I can't tell anyone anything about God. I'm happy to share what my understanding is like. I don't need to tell others what to believe in order for what I believe to be true. That's so spiritually insecure.

[@nosuchthing8]

@@alwilliams5177 good post

[@alwilliams5177]

Great job! Huge topic to compress into such a breif presentation. Please reguard my previous comments as my opinions for your consideration. I want to find out more about your denomination.

[@notanemoprog]

I appreciate the attempt to bait that nitpicking Mcmidwit into replying again

[@lingshwelingshwe6465]

Thank you so much sir.

[@adamfrederick4198]

If the Paulina tradition is the one that won out in the end how did Peter become the head of the church with Paul saying the opposite actually happened

[@StoneInMySandal]

Sheer numbers. Pauline Christianity allowed everyone to become a Christian. Petrine Christianity (Jewish Christians) required converts to follow the Laws of Moses and Jewish commandments. Over time, it became evident that most Gentiles did not want to become Jewish Christians. They were however, willing to believe in Jesus and be Christians, as long as they didn’t have to do all the weird Jewish stuff. By the 4th century and the codification of Christianity the Paulines vastly outnumbered the Petrines, and here we are today.

[@adamfrederick4198]

@StoneInMySandal so basically both groups coexisting side by side sort of merged and each kept some of their original ideas and lost other things when they merged??

[@eatfrenchtoast]

Paul prescribed dominating the women which was more popular.

[@theunapologeticjew]

When do you think the actual schism took place between Judaism and Christianity? And what do you think was the major factor causing it? Thanks

[@mysteriousjungalist]

Lol, it was probably Jesus

[@theunapologeticjew]

cute answer but the actual schism didn’t occur, at least not completely, until the Second or Third Centuries. That’s the angle of my question.

[@nightowl5396]

Good question. I'd like to know also.

[@VSP4591]

Excelent presentation. Thank you John. We have the term Monophysite and Biphysite.

[@nicholastaylor9398]

Very informative. Thank you.

[@wolfpregel]

Could you please clarify how you make the connection between James brother of Jesus and the Ebionites? When you look up Ebionites it is said to be founded in the 2nd century AD.

[@denaisaacthiswasgreat.thum7598]

The word for poor is similar to Ebionite in Hebrew.

[@stephenwright6315]

Informative!

[@robertbricker]

It's fascinating although unmentioned - that the image of Joseph Smith Jr is from a South Park episode. I won't say more aside from recalling the old mantra of a picture being worth a thousand words.... Ahem ....

[@eatfrenchtoast]

Love these talks but the comment sections are the real drama

[@edwardholmes6332]

Thanks for the Ethiopian and Coptic information I wish to there was more

[@heynow1388]

Doesn't it say in 1 Corinthians 14.33 . . . "For God is not the author of confusion". Well, as a humble atheist, it doesn't seem like it given the tremendous variations of belief amongst Christians.

[@matthewwithum8372]

‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭14:26‬ ‭KJVAAE‬‬ [26] How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. The belief in Jesus death for the sins of the world = Christianity. The rest is mostly just mans expression of their interpretation of the rest of the Bible.

[@heynow1388]

Many thanks for your reply. I really appreciate it. You are saying that the problem lies with people misinterpreting God’s message, but surely some fault must be attributed to the messenger? It always truly puzzles me that Christians never stop and ask themselves why their God has made such an awful job at transmitting his story and his message which, if true, must be the most important thing ever communicated to humanity. If the Christian God exists, and he is omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, etc, then his message must be the most important one ever, yet he chose to transmit it in one specific place, within a relatively primitive culture, written decades afterwards in a language (Greek) not spoken by most of the principal characters in the story, and written in a book which has allowed a vast range of interpretations. Surely Christians should at least consider that their God has done a very bad job here; surely they should ask themselves what it would look like if this entire thing is the product of fallible human beings? It certainly looks like this is a man made, not a God made, phenomena. Basically, this conversation (and most other apologetic conversations) should not be necessary. To end on a positive note, there is some good news. I always tell Christians that we can all be better and more moral than their God because we can all forgive without the need for torture, without the need for a blood sacrifice of anyone’s life, without requiring that someone worship us, love us, or obey us, without making our love or forgiveness conditional upon threats of damnation and promises of salvation. Unlike the Christian God, we can all simply forgive. @@matthewwithum8372

[@matthewwithum8372]

​@heynow1388 True Christians should stop and think on the Word of God often. What part are you having trouble understanding? God gave man free will. Man chose sin, creation was corrupted all the way down to you and I. When you think of the structure of the universe, the ability for your mind to think of such things. There is a better chance of a tornado going through junk yard and spitting out a space craft than there is of nothing creating something complex as the human mind, soul and body. The messages of God are woven into the fabric of existence.

[@timandmonica]

Thank you for this. Couldn't have worded my own thoughts any better, especially your last paragraph.

[@heynow1388]

Thanks for your comment. Yes, it is very puzzling that Christians never seem to question why a “Perfect Being” should choose to transmit what, if true, would be the most important message ever in such an imperfect way. Also, I’m glad you like the last point. When talking to Christians I find it a very powerful and effective point to make. They almost always just assume that their God is moral; this is because I think most have never actually read the Bible, or if they have done so they have cherry picked the nice bits. Above all, they never seem to question why a blood sacrifice is neccessary for forgiveness, or why their God's love is so condition, and is backed up by a threat of punishment. i.e. hell, damnation, etc. Best Wishes. @@timandmonica

[@jeremycunningham7897]

Someone asked about books.. a good one vol intro to all this is ‘east and west, the making of a rift in the church (from apostolic times to the council of Florence)’ by Henry Chadwick (Oxford Uni Press 2003). Paperback version 2005

[@simonslater9024]

Please read my comment. God bless.

[@fsommers94]

A lot of comments about this being revisionist church history. I am about 3/4 of the way through, and it seems quite within the understanding of history and church history that I have studied. What specifically do you think is revisonist?

[@fsommers94]

About 3/4 now and still have yet to find anything that is completely off historically. I do not agree with everything theologically because I believe that if you study the Bible, which is the absolute authority, with an understanding of science, history and reason, you will come to a close unity with others who do the same. There has always been the true church of Christ and it is not always the biggest most popular church.

[@fsommers94]

Ok, I listened to the questions and I disagree with much theologically but still what he said about history is pretty accurate. He may inject his ideas sometimes like he thinks the Christian Crusades were largely ineffective. Some may have a different opinion on that.

[@rileym411]

​​@@fsommers94Are you brain damaged? The crusades were a joke. The only thing the crusader's managed too accomplish was destroying the largest Christian city on earth.

[@rbrjb1959]

How to discover the Truth -- Do “Restorationists” have any adherence to the essentials of knowing -receiving the fullness of the promise Jesus gives us (John 16 ) for the Spirit of and leading into Truth ? Or do they merely ascribe to cessationism- the gift of the 3rd Person-presence/operation being restricted -confined to a brief segment of time?

[@brotherjongrey9375]

Do we have any attestation of James agreeing that Paul should preach the word to non-jews? I know PAUL says that James sent him off to preach to the gentiles. It seems to me far more likely that Paul tried to preach Christianity without the rules of Judaism in Jerusalem and James expelled him for it... Then Paul simply went out and preached as if he had a mandate.

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

The gospels being written after the destruction of the temple is provably false. Luke's gospel was written prior to Acts. Acts includes neither the death of James the Just nor the destruction of the temple. James the Just was a pivotal character in Luke's chronology and it makes no sense that he would omit his murder. Furthermore, it also makes no sense that Luke's gospel account would not take a victory lap after Jesus predicts the destruction of the temple. All other fulfilled prophecy in the New Testament is loudly proclaimed. Why mute this major event? The bias of modern "scholarship" is on display in this guy's talks. He is as ignorant of the content and context of the New Testament as are James Tabor and Bart Ehrman. They're all in it for the money.

[@andrewsuryali8540]

@@GizmoFromPizmo Wait, what are you talking about? The story in Acts ends sometime in the 50s, while James was killed in 62 (according to Josephus). Why would Acts include James' death? The story never reached that year chronologically.

[@timandmonica]

My question as well. Trying to follow @GizmoFromPizmo's thoughts but he lost me on the factual portion of what he wrote.

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

@@timandmonica - Let me make it simple for you. Did Peter die before or after the Day of Pentecost? After, right? So, in John 21, we see: Jn. 21:18-19 - Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdest thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. 19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me. We know by these verses that by the time they were written, Peter was already dead. John takes a victory lap (of a sort) by pointing out that Jesus accurately identified how Peter was going to be led to his death. This is typical of how the gospel writers pointed out the fulfillment of prophecy. Now, switch over to the prediction of the destruction of the temple. The way these writers hail each fulfilled prophecy of Jesus, why not say, "See? Jesus called the destruction of the temple!" This hints to the fact that none of the Synoptic Gospels were written after the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. Otherwise, there would be a little end-zone celebrating. That lack of celebration pushes the Synoptic Gospels to before 70 A.D. And the only Gospel that was written AFTER the destruction of the temple doesn't even mention Jesus' prediction.

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

You're assuming that Paul needed or wanted James' authorization. Don''t forget that Paul was taking his marching orders from Jesus Himself. So, it doesn't matter how he got in the field. Furthermore, Paul never once claimed to be "preaching Christianity". In fact, he never uses the term "Christianity" (at least that we have any record of). He did, however, claim to preach "Jesus Christ and Him crucified". Paul defends his authority as an apostle. Read Second Corinthians for some of his best work in that regard.

[@monsterguyx]

I feel the inescapable conclusion is that the very fact that there can possibly be such disagreement and division - just among people who all call themselves "Christians" - and that each group necessarily believes that they have the exclusively correct view - casts doubt upon the accuracy of any particular one of them, and invalidates any specific claims to biblical inerrancy.

[@thapack45]

@monsterguyx Few groups believe they are “exclusively correct.” Most differ in more minor matters such as the method of baptism or positions on church leadership. But even if you were right about this it wouldn’t demonstrate anything about the integrity of the Bible. It has been thoroughly researched and established that the text is quite pure. Unfortunately this guy takes an atheistic perspective about the origins of scripture and makes assertions here which aren’t challenged as he isn’t debating anyone and has no one to check him for his assumptions.

[@BryanKirch]

I’d love to see everyone come back to the One True unbroken church

[@ubertcoolie8694]

your videos are great.

[@theunapologeticjew]

I really enjoy this series. Claiming to be messiah or even having miracles attributed to you were not outside the Jewish pale (they were a dime a dozen in the First Century). The schism would have come when Jesus began to be considered God Himself. The blessing (of the Amidah) against heretics (which was designed for just those “Jews” ) made its debut in the late 100’s/early 200’s. It’s uncertain exactly when the split occurred but it certainly wasn’t in the lifetimes of any of his followers.

[@nathanlowry3764]

“If you don’t have a question after this lecture, what is wrong with you?” 😅

[@simonslater9024]

Please read my comment. God bless.

[@TheFlyingHaggis]

If they were all so pety, like much of your lecture suggests, what makes you so sure Paul didn't leave Peter out his letters on purpose? I'd like to know how you made that jump?😊

[@K_A86]

Enjoyed this lecture. I often wonder how many churches tend to operate without any real degree of accountability or central authority. Just a dangerous thing in my opinion.

[@karenloveland1428]

Are there Amish communities in Canada?

[@fsommers94]

Yes, near Milverton and Aylmer, Ontario.

[@ChristopherWentling]

I don’t know a single Eastern Rite Churches that came into communion with Rome in the 20th Century (I could be wrong and there could be a couple). The vast majority of such Churches came into communion over more than 200 years ago and some such as the Maronites never were separated.

[@simonslater9024]

Please read my comment. God bless.

[@WilliamHostman]

On the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches... The first union was when the Crusaders hit Jerusalem. That's the Maronites. The Ukrainian and Ruthenian are 16th, most of the others 18th and 19th C. No new self ruling churches have come into union since 1900; the Anglican Use is not self-ruling. The eparchy (diocese) of Syriac Orthodox that came to union in the 20-00's were absorbed into the Chaldean Catholic Eparchy for the US West Coast. Indeed, the unions of the two Ruthenian Catholic Church left the Roman communion... St Alexis to Moscow (triggering the creation of the OCA), and the other to the EP, creating the ACROD. One other key group was missed entirely... The Union of Utrecht, also know as the Old Catholics. And from them, many of the "Independent Catholic" groups. Also missing, the Lefebvrists.

[@rbrjb1959]

What question could most connect followers, as their eyes return to the revelation given to John - what does the Lord have against these professing to know, to follow Him? -That you have left your first love… remember.. and repent” - but at least you hate the deeds, the ways of the clergy [hirelings],,, therefore … overcome !

[@WhitSomething]

Roman catholicism lead ppl astray, and used violence to enforce loyalty. The suppression of the book of Issiah on the lost years is inspiring, humble, inclusive, and powerful! The same occurred between Hindus and Sikhs. Sri Guru Granth Sahib is eerily close to Issiah...

[@ambarvalia9757]

i don't find any source saying scissor has an alternate pronunciation as he mentioned i think "schi" and "sci" function differently, and therefore not a good comparison.

[@terencenxumalo1159]

good work

[@charlesbadrock]

Mythology is very powerful in the human psyche

[@jennettpearson3753]

Who is Marion?

[@anselmalmeida]

God is to be experienced, and that's what Jesus' was trying to get across. But organisations and churches tend to "define" God, instead of experiencing Him, and that's why there will always be schisms.

[@br.m]

No

[@alwilliams5177]

I was taught the "3 legged stool": scripture, tradition and reason. Also, I would offer that "fundamentalist/mainline " is preferable to "evangelical." There are progressive/mainline evangelicals. The good news includes the truth that all men and women without regards to ethnicity and economic status all equally in Christ is what fundamentalist are against.

[@Mercury-Wells]

You misspelled "school"! 😂

[@alwilliams5177]

@@Mercury-Wells actually I misspelled "stool" making reference to the 4 legged stool. Thanks for pointing out my thumb typing slips.

[@hamnchee]

I was raised in a fundamentalist church, and for all it's faults, ethnic or socioeconomic elitism was not one (or two) of them.

[@Mercury-Wells]

@@alwilliams5177 no problems, pal. Bad spelling really detracts from a well made point so I'm glad you fixed it. Go well, brother!

[@LaOsanjo-v7i]

Peter was not a pope and there is no evidence whatsoever that he was in Rome at any time. Jesus is the head of the church not the pope . There is no inherited position in Christianity. The papacy is an imposition on Christianity and was identified by Protestant reformation as the anti Christ . As the title says he is the Roman pontiff and all his beliefs and teachings are from Roman paganism. There is not even a single teaching that the pope teaches that is biblical and arrogant claim that all religions must recognise him as the bishop of Rome .

[@martin2289]

The multiplicity of religious denominations - all claiming to have the "true path" to salvation or whatever - is surely one of the most convincing arguments for disbelief in such nonsense. This epiphany occured to me at the age of 5 and nothing whatsoever has so far managed to disabuse me of it six decades later...

[@simonslater9024]

Please read my comment. God bless.

[@mysteriousjungalist]

Further proof that Protestants killed Christianity

[@theleakyprophet]

In regards to the quote from Thomas 12, the best comparison would be Jesus is to Muhammad as James the Just is to Ali ibn abi Talib (from the Shi'ite perspective). That is to say that the charisma, authority, function, and sanctity of Jesus continued in his blood relations, like the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt following the Prophet Muhammad.

[@sebolddaniel]

I like this guy's boyish demeanor. Something about the guy. Is he a Canadian?

[@denaisaacthiswasgreat.thum7598]

He's from the U.S.

[@SKMikeMurphySJ]

I'm catholic too, he ignores oral passage

[@robinstevenson6690]

The first epistle of "Clement 1," a proto-orthodox work, quotes extensively from the Old Testament and is as much a Jewish-Christian as it is a Pauline text.

[@rbrjb1959]

Are you a seminary nerd?

[@robinstevenson6690]

Was early Christian gnosticism simply an outgrowth of Pauline Christianity? The gnostic gospels (Nag Hammadi) bear very few traces of Pauline influence. Also, the gospels of Thomas, Mary, and Philip were not at all Pauline.

[@eatfrenchtoast]

Really makes me question the timeline of Jesus myth origins. All that activity is supposed to fit in mere decades hard to believe. Especially considering the timeline wasn't established until 700 years later.

[@Arcticstar69]

You are so logical. My brain hurts.

[@mossadgynist]

This is the first of your videos that's made me upset. There's no H in "scissors." I guess we just come from different sools of thought

[@BryanKirch]

You’re a really smart guy… If you discovered that the reason people identify as homosexual was related to early childhood trauma would it change your mind on your church teaching?

[@robinstevenson6690]

I don't think it's accurate to portray the proto-orthodox church as being entirely Pauline in nature. There was also a very strong Petrine influence on proto-orthodoxy.

[@JukeBoxDestroyer]

nobody says "skissors", lol

[@pieterkock695]

great lecture, Dr. Richard Carrier though makes a strong case against a historical jesus. not that it matters too much for me, but interesting nevertheless

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

Self-identifying as a "Christian" is just that - a self-identification. But if words have meaning then a Christian should measure up to certain fundamental (foundational) doctrinal criteria. John 5:18 - Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. The Apostle John made it clear that when the term "Son of God" is used that it means that the Son is equal with God. This would mean that anything past John 5:18 that talks about the Son of God should come with that definition. 1 Jn. 4:15 - Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. It is clear that the Apostle John had an agenda - to make it doctrinally clear that Jesus is the Son of God. And by that, he means that Jesus is the divine Son of God and not some meaningless random person or angel. Jesus is THE Son of God - the only begotten Son of God - equal to God. And if you don't believe that Jesus is God - that the Word is not God - then you don't have anything worthwhile, spiritually. And what separates me from a religionist like this KZbinr? Well, primarily I believe as the Apostle John taught - that Jesus, the Son of God, is God indeed. The doctrine of Christ is also the doctrine ABOUT Christ. 2 Jn. 9 - Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

[@telforenyte7632]

Ken Ham is sincere. And his museum and Ark is fun during Christmas

[@Stadtpark90]

2:31:36

[@lakrids-pibe]

Simon "the Rock" Johnson, the greatest wrestler of the apostles

[@littleboy437]

I know ...its crazy

[@BramptonAnglican]

Just recently became Anglican

[@K_A86]

Me too 😊 Was in the non-denominational movement but started to look for a bit more structure

[@BramptonAnglican]

@@K_A86 absolutely love the Anglican style worship.

[@odinsmeadhorn196]

This is what happens when you put the ender of religions at the heart of a religion.

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

Just to clarify: Just as one cannot say that the Gospel of Matthew (for example) was not authored by Matthew because Matthew didn't sign it, with equal authority you have to admit that the Gospel of Matthew may well have been written by Matthew. The absence of evidence does not prove evidence of absence. So this firm stance that the Gospel of Matthew wasn't written by Matthew is pretty hollow because it very well may have been. Just because a Jew doesn't sign his work doesn't prove anything. Church people tend not to blow their own horns because it takes away from the content of the message. This much we know.

[@TheEvolver311]

All of the evidence points to it not being written by Matthew.

[@kidslovesatan34]

Many Bibles explicitly state that the gospels are anonymous. They won't teach you that from the pulpit but Christian scholars know this. None of the New testament authors ever met Jesus. And it's downhill from there.

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

@@kidslovesatan34 - That's funny because the first time I ever heard the fact that the Gospels are unsigned was in a church of Christ back in the 1970s. And just because the culture of these people didn't permit their signing their work (because of the worship, fame and adulation they might receive) does not mean that they did not pen these works. Church of Christ people have such a culture - "Don't blow your own horn!" Jesus taught: "Don't let your right hand know what you're left hand is doing." It's a culture thing. We look at that and think, "Oh, how quaint." But that attitude is a form of bigotry. We impose our culture on those who lived 20 centuries ago in a land on the opposite side of the world from us. We're SO smart...

[@kidslovesatan34]

@@GizmoFromPizmo The alarm bells should have gone off for you in the early 70s then. Mathew was a name assigned to the gospel. We have no idea who wrote it. And at 85CE it is very likely that Matthew was long dead.

[@kidslovesatan34]

@@GizmoFromPizmo Matthew was written by an educated person in koine Greek. The apostles spoke Aramaic. The whole story is really dodgy.

[@jimtaggert42]

chris hedges, also a rev, says the american churches are heretical. worth a read of you are concerned about the growth of fascism

[@farajbeden7786]

How come James the Just - Jesus's own brother is not so prominent in Christianity? Is Jesus's kingdom hijacked from his own family? The kingdom he suffered and died for ended up being inherited by people other than his own family!! What a pity 😕. In fact, I didn't hear of James the Just leading any universal church in Christian history!

[@wright661]

Hank you 2:48:18

[@chrisrobertson9264]

It’s about control and recruitment has nothing to do with Jesus

[@angusmackaskill3035]

other cults want a piece of the action

[@wim1101wim]

the bottom line is that Christianity, in its Trinitarian belief of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, is difficult to think of as a monotheistic religion. Add to that the Virgin Mary, sundry Angels, the Devil, various other evil spirits, the numerous Saints and other demi-gods and you have a religion at par with Hinduism in numbers of Deities. Thank God that I am an Atheist!

[@OllytheOl]

Can't we do better than the trinity? Would it make more sense if God 'the creator' - who can do anything - had himself begotten/born as Jesus, the messiah of peace, lived, suffered and died. Thus Jesus is the one God and we now live in Jesus's universe, who is different to other gods because he lived, suffered and died as a human, so he has a human perspective, and experienced human suffering.

[@langreeves6419]

I don't believe peter was the pope of rome But if we think of Peter as the Pope then that makes Paul Martin Luther.

[@quakers200]

And just it is said that God is not the author of chaos the church only became unified under the first of Rome, nearly literally on the foundations of pagan churches. Just my opinion.

[@lakrids-pibe]

Wait? Can _'scissors'_ be pronounced _'skissors'_ ? Haha! Or did he just talk about the root of rhe word _'scissors'_ being the same as _'schism'_ ? I pronounce _'schism'_ as _'skism'._ I also pronounce _'scythian'_ as _'skythian'_ , _'macedonian'_ as _'makedonian'_ , _'mycenaean'_ as _'mykenæan'_ ... english is not my first language.

[@JS-tm1gq]

1:01:51 As an atheist, the Nicene Trinitarian Formula doesn't defy logic. Change the inputs to Cat, Dog, Hippopotamus and Animal and you'll see the logic works fine. A cat is an animal, a dog is an animal and a hippo is an animal. A dog is not a cat, a cat is not a hippo and a hippo is not a dog.

[@TheEvolver311]

That doesn't work, actually. "God" isn't equivalent to a taxonomic clade in your example it would be cat, dog, hippo, and bird; god is a being also in this equation. The problem is that modern people and some ancient/medieval ones want it to make rational sense when the concept is born out of Eastern mysticism traditions, not philosophical rationalism. It comes out of a tradition asserting impossible qualities to the divine as a focus of meditative contemplation on the nature of the divine, a process which is believed to bring the mystic closer to the divine. The trinitarian doctrine was a compromise between the different attitudes of thought amongst the clergy as the more neo-platonic factions couldn't actually formulate a christology that made sense they settled on accepting a Eastern mysticism approach towards a fundamentally mysterious thing. This is why it is an affirmation of faith and not axiomatic or a demonstrative proof.

[@JS-tm1gq]

​@@TheEvolver311 You've gone off on some theological history which fails to address my point. Boil it down to a simple logical equation. Rather than view it as a taxonomic grading system, view it as a set theory equation. Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all subsets of God. But are not equal to each other. This is to say God is made of parts [A, B, C], Father is made of [A, B], Son is [B, C] and Spirit is [A, C]. All the sub-elements are elements contained within the greater set. The logic is mathematically sound. A guitar is an instrument, a trombone is an instrument, a piano is an instrument. A guitar is not a piano is not a trombone. I'm an atheist and don't believe it's real, but the logic is completely sound. Batman is a superhero, Spiderman is a superhero, The Flash is a superhero. Spiderman is not Batman is not the Flash.

[@andrewsuryali8540]

You've committed the Partialism Heresy. In this example, "animal" is the major clade group of which cat, dog, and hippo are parts or components. This is why Trinitarianism is so much fun. John said in one of his lectures that within five minutes of trying to describe the Trinity, anyone will inevitably fall into heresy, and he's right, lol.

[@petrosidius]

The major difference here is that nobody claims there is only one animal!

[@TheEvolver311]

@JS-tm1gq God is an entity in their belief system he isn't equivalent to "superhero" so no you making an error in your logic and unwilling to acknowledge it.

[@michaelwrong1606]

I do not agreed that oka jesus Yhsuawh told peter he will build his church on him, because Matthew 16:23 speak for it self Peter the only one was called a satan, and described as an (offense Stumbling-Block to him) and he peter was a lier Matthew 26:70-72-74 and that he peter do not served the things of God but that of men and in agreement with Saul in contradiction and command jc not to go to the Gentiles cities go there not. ...If I'm about truth, why should I put a lier in charge ? It do not make no sense!

[@cariboubearmalachy1174]

Man, Raiders would have been so much cooler if they went to Ethiopia to get the ark instead of Egypt.

[@cariboubearmalachy1174]

Or Abyssinia, I don't know.

[@joehinman1026]

Your view of historicity of the gospel is not quite true. You are not historical but they are taken from the view's of the community that did have eye witnesses,

[@eatfrenchtoast]

Eyeroll

[@piratesapper]

I’m pretty sure that most of the things I’ve heard you say is actual heresy.

[@ahorton880]

Orthodox Christianity should have been a single bubble. It's disingenuous and factually false to have separated the Orthodox Church along ethnic lines as if to imply they are the same as denominations. All Orthodox churches; Greek, Russian, Georgian, Jerusalemite, Romanian etc. have the same theology and practice.

[@maxzation]

There are minor theological differences whitin them, but are mostly tertiary

[@HeardFromMeFirst]

Funny that this god character, didn't make a better effort to clarify his Plan, There would not be so many different churches... It's so glaringly obvious......god Man made.

[@awm9290]

Dude is just making wild claims left and right that fly in the face of what we know about early Christianity. I don’t 90% of this audience know how wildly revisionist this presentation is.

[@StoneInMySandal]

It sounds like you’re an American Protestant. They don’t know the history of their religion any better than they know the history of their country.

[@ThisLiberalPopulist]

My Unitarianism is definitely closer to the earliest apostolic concept of God (i.e. the Father) and Jesus (a purely human man chosen and exalted by God, totally subservient and subordinate to God, not God, a god, nor a hypostasis or avatar of God). To me, Jesus is an admirable and worthwhile exemplar because he’s only a human like us, but he exemplified perfect faith in and love for God and each other, just as we should, in so reflecting God in his actions, just as we should. No need for (imho) somewhat convoluted hypostasic or modalistic dogmas, literalistic incarnationism, docetic/gnostic hyper-supernaturalism, or the conceptual and semantic gymnastics of Arianism. Just to clarify what I mean by “Unitarian” (which is very much Christian) as opposed to what most think when they think Unitarian-Universalist today.

[@skylarkprowrestler]

If none of the shits "real" why do people believe in this?

[@johnbarnesNnaptown]

The devil is a liar.

[@giuseppelogiurato5718]

Is this a "Kids in the Hall" sketch? How does "CANADA" figure into anything? No one cares what Canada thinks, lol.

[@slowmoe1964]

If you smell what The Rock is cooking, Rack me. I'm first 😅

[@odinsmeadhorn196]

Christ came to make all men priests.

[@jayessoto-zv6gf]

Great example of wolves disguised keep shinning bright 😂

[@TheFlyingHaggis]

Another miss Marple ffs. Captain hindsight more like. Gees peace.

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

The gospels being written after the destruction of the temple is provably false. Luke's gospel was written prior to Acts. Acts includes neither the death of James the Just nor the destruction of the temple. James the Just was a pivotal character in Luke's chronology and it makes no sense that he would omit his murder. Furthermore, it also makes no sense that Luke's gospel account would not take a victory lap after Jesus predicts the destruction of the temple. All other fulfilled prophecy in the New Testament is loudly proclaimed. Why mute this major event? The bias of modern "scholarship" is on display in this guy's talks. He is as ignorant of the content and context of the New Testament as are James Tabor and Bart Ehrman. They're all in it for the money.

[@VSP4591]

I do not think so. The chronology of Gospels is well established and is no rom for debates.

[@kidslovesatan34]

Matthew was written around 85CE when the average life expectancy was maybe 40 to 50. On that basis there's no good reason to believe that Matthew wrote it.

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

@@kidslovesatan34 - And the authority for that claim boils down to "Because I say so." Matthew was written about the same time as the other gospels. Did the authors share a lot of information among themselves? Most assuredly. Does that make them uninspired or untrue? Not at all. One thing is for certain, no New Testament author passed up an opportunity to do a "See, I told you so." when it came to prophecy yet all of the authors who quote Jesus predicting the destruction of the temple never once said, "See, Jesus was right!" If these things were written post 70AD then surely Jesus' prediction would be highlighted as "Prophecy fulfilled!" That's how you date these things. You don't just spitball a date based on your Atheist agenda and call it truth. You examine the content and go from there. That's what any true student would do. The others are just selling books and speaking engagements.

[@kidslovesatan34]

@@GizmoFromPizmo You seemed to be totally unaware that a majority of Christian scholars dispute your account. The way the gospels have been dated is through textual analysis. Why do you think many Bibles explicitly state that the gospels are anonymous?

[@GizmoFromPizmo]

@@kidslovesatan34 "A majority of Christian scholars..." is an appeal to authority. It is a debating tactic and NOT evidence. The majority of religious officials always agree to destroy the things of God. Does it harm the content of the gospels to point out that they are unsigned? If so, how? The content is the content.

[@stalfithrildi5366]

Why did Jesus give Simon the name Petrus (The Rock)? ... IT DOESN'T MATTER WHY HE CALLED HIM THE ROCK

[@TheFlyingHaggis]

God chose the isrealites to fight evil of the time. They've survived more hatred than any other race on earth, yet still they live 🙏