Arianism, Heresy & The Council of Nicea

[@briananderson687]

That was VERY enlightening -- particularly the idea that The Council of Nicea was just one step in a continuing debate -- very useful insight -- thank you!

[@thinkbeforeyoutype7106]

If you think than please this as to why Jesus in the Bible was a Muslim because he preached and worshiped only ONE God exactly the same way Muslims preach and worship ONE God (pure monotheism). Here's proof from both the Holy Quran and the Bible…. 1) Holy Quran 5:72 72 "They have certainly disbelieved who say, " Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers." Holy Quran 19:36 36 [Jesus said], "And indeed, Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him. That is a straight path." Now let’s take a look what Jesus has said in the Bible and commanded his followers to do so... Mark 12:29 29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord OUR God, the Lord is ONE." John 17:3 3 "Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have SENT." Luke 18:19 19 “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good-except God alone.” John 14:24 24 “Anyone who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who SENT me.” John 5:30 30 “By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who SENT me.” Matthew 15:24 24 He answered, “I was SENT only to the lost sheep of Israel.” Matthew 26:39 39 "Going a little farther, he fell with his FACE to the GROUND and prayed." Noticed how Jesus (peace be upon him) always gives credit to God Almighty and he worships his Creator just like Muslims do by placing his head on the ground. 2) Jesus also called his lord as Allah just like Muslims do today. Here's the Aramaic proof... Jesus spoke Aramaic NOT Hebrew which most people think. The word for God in Aramaic is Alah or Allah which is a slight accent/dialect within the Semitic language. Even the Christian scholars who were behind the film Passion of Christ do acknowledge and confirm that Jesus has always called his Lord as Allah... kzbin.info/www/bejne/nYPVZWuKftWtqNE 3) Jesus also greeted people exactly like the Muslims do by, saying Assalaamu Alaykum in Aramaic. Here's the Biblical proof... John 20:21 21 "Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you!” Luke 24:36 36 "While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you." 4) And finally, Jesus himself and those who met and knew him had called him, a Great Prophet exactly the way Muslims refer to him. Here's more Biblical proof... Matthew 21:10-11 10 "When Jesus entered Jerusalem, the whole city was stirred and asked, “Who is this?' 11 "The crowds answered, “This is Jesus, the PROPHET from Nazareth in Galilee.” (Jesus) Luke 13:33 33 "Nevertheless I must walk today, and tomorrow, and the day following: for it cannot be that a PROPHET perish out of Jerusalem.” Luke 24:19 19 “What things?” he asked. “About Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied. “He was a PROPHET, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. Matthew 13:57 57 “And they were deeply offended and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A PROPHET is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his own family.” Matthew 5:17 17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the PROPHETS; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” Acts 2:22 22 “Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a MAN accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.” Even those who witness his miracles at first hand called him a Great Prophet! Luke 7:15-16 15 "The dead man sat up and began to talk, and Jesus gave him back to his mother." 16 "They were all filled with awe and praised God. “A great PROPHET has appeared among us,” they said.” John 9:17 17 “Then they turned again to the blind man, “What have you to say about him? It was your eyes he opened.” The man replied, “He is a PROPHET.” John 4:19 19 “Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a PROPHET.“ So who should we believe? Those who knew, met, and witness his miracles or those who NEVER met him nor ate/drank with him telling us he’s “god” or “son of god”? Seriously, those people need to study the Bible carefully and thoroughly about what Jesus himself said because their eternal salvation depends on it. Jesus prayed to and worshiped Allah only yet they refused and want to pray and worship Allah’s creation (Jesus) instead of the Creator who is Allah. If they continue to reject the true teachings of Prophet Jesus, then Jesus himself has already warned them on what he will do/say to those who claimed to worship him on the Day of Judgment when he and everyone else are in front of Allah Almighty. Matthew 7:22-23 22 “Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!” Subhan’Allah! Sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction. Even the word Hallelujah is the same as Alhamdullilah since both words are praising Allah in his actual name yet they don’t even realize it. May Allah guide them and continue to guide us. Jazakallah Khair and Assalaamu Alaykum (Peace Be With You).

[@robertvann7349]

The Trinity is pure false doctrine. Omniscient God the Holy Spirit and omniscient God the Son don't know the day or hour of the Son's return. Matthew 1:18 and 20 teach the Holy Spirit made Mary pregnant and fathered Jesus. Whoever gets the woman pregnant is the father of the child. The Trinity is based on contradiction and twisted scriptures, ie. private false interpretation. Read Matthew bro and tell me the Holy Spirit isn't God the Father. This scripture is the foundation of the true doctrine of the godhead.😂

[@shaheeralikhan9561]

No, And God definitely isn't a human who died on a cross for our sins ​@@williamjones9662

[@Inverted.surfer]

Nicea was the beginning of the theft of Christ from the common man and the building of ivory towers for elite who have always held power. These are the same people who are giving you this great new world for today ! Before Nicea, Universal Salvation was at least half the accepted belief (1 tim 4:10. Romans) and the other half was a mish mash of contradicting arguments. Humble yourselves therefore and come to the light of the saviour of the world... JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD❤️

[@MiroAMalek]

I went down a rabbit hole and binge-watched a number of your videos. Thanks for the educational content!

[@deigamohamed707]

He’s an amazing teacher ❤👏🏾👏🏾

[@JESUS_MUHAMMAD]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/hIS6g3WHa857ga8si=rKezqhFtGE20iO9i

[@taitraining3055]

you should read instead of binge watching bs

[@ohmane5453]

It’s incredible how an ancient creed such as the Nicene Creed has survived intact for over a millennium and forms a basis of the majority of Christians and their understanding of the faith. God bless and have a good Christmas to whoever is here reading.

[@14sharifahamed14]

Seems like you forget those crusades, Roman empire backing slaughtering and exile for anyone who doesn't subscribe to this creed up until the 19th century

[@WowUrFcknHxC]

I'm pretty sure the only non Nicene form of modern Christianity is the LDS. But I'm not super familiar with the more underground sects.

[@rubencarva]

​@@WowUrFcknHxChi, just curios. What is LDS? I would like to know more

[@PUARockstar]

​@@rubencarvamormons

[@PUARockstar]

​@@WowUrFcknHxCsome 7th day adventists and Jehovah's witnesses are non-nicene and some have neo-arian features

[@rationaltrekker2509]

As one who has studied such things at an Orthodox theological seminary (St. Vladimir's, 1993, 1995, M.Div, & M.Th.) I am VERY impressed. You certainly would have passed exams set by my professors - top marks, even. You touched on the key historical figures and the nuances of the controversy over what it means to be divine, or homoousious, or created and you frame in the context of the "divine life." Well done!

[@bruce-le-smith]

Agreed. I studied religionswissenschaft at a faculty of comparative religious studies in eastern North America, and this video does cover the topic in a very logical and reasonable way. I subscribed for more!

[@SKMikeMurphySJ]

Yes, Thank You!

[@JoeSmith-vs5sy]

Study The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine

[@JESUS_MUHAMMAD]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/hIS6g3WHa857ga8si=rKezqhFtGE20iO9i

[@AM_SDG]

Thanks Filip for every video you produce. Each one of your videos speaks volumes about your knowledge and amount of the research you do. Love your choice of quotes and the way you read them is so calming. Thank you

[@martinkono2001]

Arian was right all the way till now with the phony trinity teaching. If you disagree read your bible. Jesus own words. My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14:10) I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.’ (John 5:30) ‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.’ (John 6:38) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John17:3) The Catholic Church (Babylon, the serpent of old) has deceived the whole world.

[@neovxr]

@@martinkono2001 I thought that too, wondering how the cheat came together in the first place. See my remarks above.

[@brentlunger9738]

말은: 마테복음 3:13-17, 요한복음 1:1

[@JESUS_MUHAMMAD]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/hIS6g3WHa857ga8si=rKezqhFtGE20iO9i

[@lorenzovive5801]

Thank you SO much for addressing those misconceptions. I happen tp teach Medieval History at one college and two universities. Some textbooks have even included these same mistakes. Love the channel!

[@GnosticInformant]

The "Gnostics" just saw themselves as Christians too. And not all "Gnostics" thought the Old Testament god was evil. That was mainly the Marcionites, Cainites, and a few other specific groups that get labeled as "gnostic".

[@LetsTalkReligion]

Yes, all correct!

[@cosmologium]

Also not all Gnostics were Christian. Like the Mandaeans, who thought Jesus was evil.

[@darealdovahkiin3652]

Thank you for the information!!

[@walterevans6034]

Thank you for shedding light and clarity on this topic. It's much needed.

[@thinkbeforeyoutype7106]

Jesus in the Bible was a Muslim because he preached and worshiped only ONE God exactly the same way Muslims preach and worship ONE God (pure monotheism). Here's proof from both the Holy Quran and the Bible…. 1) Holy Quran 5:72 72 "They have certainly disbelieved who say, " Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers." Holy Quran 19:36 36 [Jesus said], "And indeed, Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him. That is a straight path." Now let’s take a look what Jesus has said in the Bible and commanded his followers to do so... Mark 12:29 29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord OUR God, the Lord is ONE." John 17:3 3 "Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have SENT." Luke 18:19 19 “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good-except God alone.” John 14:24 24 “Anyone who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who SENT me.” John 5:30 30 “By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who SENT me.” Matthew 15:24 24 He answered, “I was SENT only to the lost sheep of Israel.” Matthew 26:39 39 "Going a little farther, he fell with his FACE to the GROUND and prayed." Noticed how Jesus (peace be upon him) always gives credit to God Almighty and he worships his Creator just like Muslims do by placing his head on the ground. 2) Jesus also called his lord as Allah just like Muslims do today. Here's the Aramaic proof... Jesus spoke Aramaic NOT Hebrew which most people think. The word for God in Aramaic is Alah or Allah which is a slight accent/dialect within the Semitic language. Even the Christian scholars who were behind the film Passion of Christ do acknowledge and confirm that Jesus has always called his Lord as Allah... kzbin.info/www/bejne/nYPVZWuKftWtqNE 3) Jesus also greeted people exactly like the Muslims do by, saying Assalaamu Alaykum in Aramaic. Here's the Biblical proof... John 20:21 21 "Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you!” Luke 24:36 36 "While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you." 4) And finally, Jesus himself and those who met and knew him had called him, a Great Prophet exactly the way Muslims refer to him. Here's more Biblical proof... Matthew 21:10-11 10 "When Jesus entered Jerusalem, the whole city was stirred and asked, “Who is this?' 11 "The crowds answered, “This is Jesus, the PROPHET from Nazareth in Galilee.” (Jesus) Luke 13:33 33 "Nevertheless I must walk today, and tomorrow, and the day following: for it cannot be that a PROPHET perish out of Jerusalem.” Luke 24:19 19 “What things?” he asked. “About Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied. “He was a PROPHET, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. Matthew 13:57 57 “And they were deeply offended and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A PROPHET is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his own family.” Matthew 5:17 17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the PROPHETS; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” Acts 2:22 22 “Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a MAN accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.” Even those who witness his miracles at first hand called him a Great Prophet! Luke 7:15-16 15 "The dead man sat up and began to talk, and Jesus gave him back to his mother." 16 "They were all filled with awe and praised God. “A great PROPHET has appeared among us,” they said.” John 9:17 17 “Then they turned again to the blind man, “What have you to say about him? It was your eyes he opened.” The man replied, “He is a PROPHET.” John 4:19 19 “Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a PROPHET.“ So who should we believe? Those who knew, met, and witness his miracles or those who NEVER met him nor ate/drank with him telling us he’s “god” or “son of god”? Seriously, those people need to study the Bible carefully and thoroughly about what Jesus himself said because their eternal salvation depends on it. Jesus prayed to and worshiped Allah only yet they refused and want to pray and worship Allah’s creation (Jesus) instead of the Creator who is Allah. If they continue to reject the true teachings of Prophet Jesus, then Jesus himself has already warned them on what he will do/say to those who claimed to worship him on the Day of Judgment when he and everyone else are in front of Allah Almighty. Matthew 7:22-23 22 “Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!” Subhan’Allah! Sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction. Even the word Hallelujah is the same as Alhamdullilah since both words are praising Allah in his actual name yet they don’t even realize it. May Allah guide them and continue to guide us. Jazakallah Khair and Assalaamu Alaykum (Peace Be With You).

[@zekdom]

Time-stamps 18:30, 18:50 - Beginning and essence 19:27 - created 22:20 - aftermath

[@SirBoggins]

Merry Xmas eve!

[@sawdust34]

One of my favorite KZbin channels. Thanks for all the great work!

[@martinkono2001]

Arian was right all the way till now with the phony trinity teaching. If you disagree read your bible. Jesus own words. My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14:10) I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.’ (John 5:30) ‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.’ (John 6:38) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John17:3) The Catholic Church (Babylon, the serpent of old) has deceived the whole world.

[@shaheeralikhan9561]

​@@martinkono2001 please stop worshipping Jesus, please please man how obvious is it that he wasn't god

[@randolphothegreat549]

​@@shaheeralikhan9561he said he wasn't god but rather the son of God. Stop, trying to tell people what to do. Your words speak more about your character. Work on yourself.

[@shaheeralikhan9561]

@@randolphothegreat549 even worse you gave god human like qualities and gave him a son now 🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️ god Constantine really corrupted Christianity

[@brentlunger9738]

샤힐: 그리스도는 나의 하나님이시다.

[@karmssr-fl9xj]

Berbers of North Africa played a huge roles in creation of chrisitanity like Arius , St Augustin, St Mark, Pope Gelasius I the berber who created St Valentine

[@andreascj73]

Augustin wasn't Berber, and neither was St Mark. Gelasius may have been a Berber of Tuareg descent, maybe, but how did he play a role in creation of Christianity?

[@karmssr-fl9xj]

@@andreascj73 St Augustun was a berber from Hippon or Annaba today in Algeria north Africa , he was a berber according to his writing and he spoke berber and was a berer according to all sources . St Mark was a berber from Lybia today . and 98% of North Africa are Arabised berbers according to the last genitic research . and touareg they are not pure berbers , they are a mix between black and berbers, berbers are a white caucasian race which leave in the south side of mediterranean sea like Romans,greeks, iberians ,and greeks called berbers the Masters of knowldge and most Greek Gods taken from berber Methology like Medosa, Posaidon according to Plato -berbers they are a very smart race and they are who created the stunning Andalusian civilization in Spain when they converted to Islam

[@razvananghel7492]

They were not berbers in the slightest. Back then North-Africa was profoundly Latinized for many centuries and the population there was vastly different than the one today. They were Romans true and true. Berbers lived in the depths of the desert and the contact of the two cultures was seldom and the two groups saw each other as profoundly distinct. The ethnic composition of the population started changing only after the arab conquest, centuries later and even that process was long. To call Arius or St Augustin berbers shows ignorance at best

[@karmssr-fl9xj]

@@razvananghel7492 from your comment you are ignorant lol berbers they are the masters of north African and Roman feared them even Hannibal was a berber according to the last genetic research , Massinisa the king of berber Numedia ,Jugurta,the wise Prince Juba -and berbers never lived in desert ,most of them live near the coast and most of them are white not black and this from wikipedia: '''Scholars generally agree that Augustine and his family were Berbers, an ethnic group indigenous to North Africa, but were heavily Romanized, speaking only Latin at home as a matter of pride and dignity.''''

[@andreascj73]

@@karmssr-fl9xj No, Augustin was proud of his North African heritage, and he spoke a wide range of languages, but he never mentions that he speaks either Berber or even Punic/Phoenician. His father may have been a Latinized Berber, but he might not have been. And his mother's name Monica may or may not have either Berber roots bur more likely they have Semitic roots. All sources? No, not at all. I have never dissed the Berbers so I'm not sure why you tell me of all their greatness.

[@fighterofthenightman1057]

I love this topic, thank you so much for such an amazing video!!

[@DaveTheTurd]

Extremely grateful for your channel in general, and this video essay in particular. You've assisted me greatly in my quest these past few years to peel back the layers of onion skin on early church history... my prime challenge has been to hang on to some semblance of my faith in light of the stream of clarifying information I've been receiving from you and others. Talk about a mixed blessing, lol.... the more I learn, the more grateful I am, the more my faith dissolves and transforms.... it's a pruning indeed....

[@martinkono2001]

Arian was right all the way till now with the phony trinity teaching. If you disagree read your bible. Jesus own words. My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14:10) I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.’ (John 5:30) ‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.’ (John 6:38) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John17:3) The Catholic Church (Babylon, the serpent of old) has deceived the whole world.

[@MilesChristianus-tx4wd]

@@martinkono2001How could you believe that Arius was right? Arius believed that Jesus was a created being, yet the Bible teaches that all things were created through Jesus.

[@brentlunger9738]

아리우스는 그의 제잔인 모하메드와 여호와의 증인을 통해 살아남았습니다.

[@soupstoreclothing]

it's actually very common for atheists to have once believed and through research and greater critical thinking, become atheists. of course, you don't have to become an atheist. i just thought i'd let you know that what you're going through isn't unique in that others have also experienced the same disillusionment with the church and with christianity through learning the truth of its origins as well as its intentions (i.e. the use of christianity as a tool to control people).

[@mr.alfredo4177]

@@martinkono2001that’s pure heresy

[@amaliajonsdottir7481]

Instant subscribe, love how in depth you went on this topic.

[@amycantwell8715]

I appreciate the lite music in background but not interfering with your message. Good job.

[@jeffrydiamond]

Excellent video. I read a book on Arianism, and later the two big councils: Nicea, and later at Piacenza. Similar arguments--particularly with the Greeks--continued. Another book, The Desert Fathers, is also an excellent look into the movement within the few years following Jesus' death and resurrection.

[@georgepapatheofilou6118]

Romans is what Greek speaking writing citizens of the empire called themselves. Being Greek became reality again in the 1830's .

[@patriciaoudart1508]

Agree. Early apostles in Copte area are a great source to keep the spirit of first Christians. Rome ignored totally, and taken power by the farce of it's narratives along time, as they were rewriting history.

[@danielkeathley6477]

Which author wrote the desert fathers?

[@majorblazer9055]

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 🕊️ *Council of NAA Misconceptions* - The Council of NAA in 325 is often falsely claimed to be the event where the New Testament books were decided or the Trinity doctrine was created, which is not accurate. - The Council of NAA focused on establishing the doctrine of the Trinity, defining the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit within Christianity. - Despite its significance, the Council did not determine the canon of the Bible; rather, it marked a crucial point in the formulation of Orthodox Christianity. 02:22 🌌 *Early Christianity Complexity* - Early Christianity was not a unified movement but a diverse collection of ideas, with different interpretations of Jesus' mission and varied perspectives on following the Jewish law. - The period was marked by a proliferation of different Christianities, reflecting a chaotic and messy exchange of ideas, rather than a unified and organized church. - Over time, certain ideas and scriptures gained popularity, leading to the eventual establishment of a more standardized Orthodoxy. 03:45 🔄 *Supernova of Jesus Movements* - Early Christianity can be metaphorically described as a "supernova of Jesus movements," indicating the explosive diversity of ideas and perspectives during this period. - The development of Christianity involved various groups with differing beliefs about Jesus, ranging from his nature to the acceptance of the Jewish law. - The concept of a unified Orthodox Church from the beginning is a confessional perspective and requires nuanced historical understanding. 06:32 📜 *Development of Christian Ideas* - The formulation of Christian ideas, including the concept of the Trinity, occurred through a dynamic process of interaction with philosophical traditions like Platonism. - Early church fathers, such as Origen, contributed to the development of trinitarian ideas, influenced by the intellectual environment of their time. - A historical perspective reveals that these theological concepts evolved over time through interactions with various intellectual currents. 10:23 ⚔️ *Arian Controversy and Council of NAA* - The Arian controversy, led by figures like Arius, was a decisive moment in the formation of the Christian church, prompting the Council of NAA in 325. - The Council aimed to address the theological debate about the nature of the Trinity, specifically the relationship between the Father and the Son. - The Council of NAA wouldn't have occurred without the Arian controversy, as it forced Christians to define their beliefs in contrast to perceived heresies. 12:55 🏛️ *Arianism: No Coherent System* - Arianism, often associated with Arius, was not a coherent system or a single school of thought but rather a theological preference shared by various individuals. - The term "Arian" was initially embraced by some supporters, but over time, the diverse followers ofArian ideas did not see themselves as a separate church or faction. - Later "Neo-Arians" could disagree on details while maintaining some basic features, emphasizing the complexity within the broader Arian movement. 13:21 🧠 *Arianism: Nature of the Divine* - Arianism debated the nature of the Divine, particularly the relationship between the Father and the Son, within the Trinity. - Contrary to common misconceptions, Arians did not deny Jesus' divinity but questioned the nature of his divinity in relation to the Father. - The debate mirrored similar theological discussions in other contexts, such as the nature of the Quran in early Islamic theology. 16:08 ⛪️ *Arianism: Arus's Theology* - Arius's theology emphasized that the Son is produced by the Father before all ages, existing before creation but still subordinate to the Father. - Arianism rejected the idea of the Son being of the same essence as the Father (homoousios), asserting the Son's status as a created being and subordinate to God. - Arus's goal was to safeguard God's uniqueness and timelessness, addressing concerns about potential changes in the godhead. 21:29 🕍 *Council of NAA and Aftermath* - The Council of NAA established the Nicene Creed, affirming that the Father and the Son are of the same substance (homoousios), contrary to Arian beliefs. - Initially, the impact of the Nicene Creed was not immediate, and the controversy persisted, with supporters of Arianism continuing to challenge the established creed. - The story of Arianism did not conclude with the Council, as subsequent events and controversies unfolded, shaping the trajectory of Christian theology. 22:37 🔄 *Aras's Death and Aftermath* - Aras faced controversies in the church, and stories about his reinstatement and subsequent death vary. - His death a day before potential reinstatement added a dramatic element, influencing perceptions of his heresy. - The Council of NAA didn't provide immediate resolution; Arianism persisted with support from emperors, indicating a complex history. 23:30 🤔 *Complexities Post Council of NAA* - The Council of NAA didn't immediately establish the Nyine Creed; Arianism found support in subsequent councils. - The term "Arianism" becomes problematic, as it encompasses diverse beliefs challenging the Nyine formulation. - The term "Neo-Arian" emerges in the 4th century, representing a continuation of the rejection of the humusia formulation. 25:09 🧐 *Nuances and Common Misconceptions* - The speaker acknowledges limitations in discussing Christian theology but aims to provide a nuanced understanding of the early controversy. - Highlights misinformation, such as the misconception that the Council of NAA determined the New Testament canon, clarifying its actual scope. - Emphasizes that the Council of NAA didn't invent the Trinity; it contributed to formulating the Orthodox perspective in an ongoing theological process. Made with HARPA AI

[@HexrMage21]

Yo this comment needs to be pinned

[@actthree7810]

Very much appreciate this effort to counter misinformation. Let's have tea!🙂

[@martinkono2001]

Arian was right all the way till now with the phony trinity teaching. If you disagree read your bible. Jesus own words. My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14:10) I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.’ (John 5:30) ‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.’ (John 6:38) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John17:3) The Catholic Church (Babylon, the serpent of old) has deceived the whole world.

[@actthree7810]

@@martinkono2001 Your logic strains credulity, mate.

[@igorlopes7589]

​@@martinkono2001 I love how it is always the Catholic Church. It doesn't matter who you are, gnostic, mormon, jehovah's witness, adventist, protestant, secularist, it is ALWAYS the Catholic Church that corrupted the good ol' ways that are now being restored

[@sanguinetiger]

No one ever suspects the Spanish inquisition!

[@smez]

The kind of subordination in particular that separates Arianism from Orthodoxy is that the Arians view the Son as created while the Orthodox view him as begotten and not made. That is, Arians believe that the Son is different in nature than God the Father, thus a creature made, while the Orthodox believe that he is the true Son of God the Father, thus begotten from the Father and sharing his nature (as truly begotten sons share the same nature as the parent who begot them). That the Son is "subordinate" in other ways is also very much part of Orthodox theology, in which it is also confessed that the Son is from the Father (i.e. the "true God from true God" in the Nicene creed), that the Son derives his being and all that he is and has from the Father (as the Father is unbegotten while the Son is begotten from him), that the Son has no power or energy peculiar to himself but rather only has what he derives from the Father, etc. For example, St. John of Damascus writes in An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith that: "if we say that the Father is the origin of the Son and greater than the Son, we do not suggest any precedence in time or superiority in nature of the Father over the Son (for through His agency He made the ages), or superiority in any other respect save causation. And we mean by this, that the Son is begotten of the Father and not the Father of the Son, and that the Father naturally is the cause of the Son." And: "it should be understood that we do not speak of the Father as derived from any one, but we speak of Him as the Father of the Son. And we do not speak of the Son as Cause or Father, but we speak of Him both as from the Father, and as the Son of the Father." And again: "The Son is from the Father, and derives from Him all His properties: hence He cannot do ought of Himself. For He has not energy peculiar to Himself and distinct from the Father." In other words, the Orthodox belief is that the Son is eternally begotten from the Father and derives all that he is as has from him, and that the power and energy and authority thus is one in the unity of the Trinity, from the Father through the Son. What the Son has literally just is what the Father has, as he receives all from the Father, and his nature is the nature of the Father, as this is the nature he derives from him by being begotten from him. This is why these hypostases are considered co-equal and of one nature - as all that the Father has he communicates to his Son, and as the nature derived from the Father by the Son is the very nature of the Father. But there is still clearly "subordination" in the sense of causation, as the Father is the source of the Son and of all his properties. In the Arian view the Son is not truly begotten by the Father but rather made ex nihilo, or "outside" the proper Godhead; and as he is not truly begotten, he does not derive the Father's nature from him through his generation. The Son rather is a separate divine being, with his own particular nature, power, energy, authority, etc. distinct from that of the Father, and in all aspects lesser than that of the Father. Basically you don't have one Godhead in distinct but inseparable hypostases, like in the Orthodox view of the unity of the Trinity, but rather two different godheads, one superior and uncreated in the Father and one lesser and created in the Son. This is really the main difference between Arianism and Orthodoxy (when referring to true Arianism, not later Homoiousianism or Homoianism), and why Arianism was such a scandal to many of the Orthodox (or proto-orthodox), as the Arian view really separates the Godhead of the Trinity into separate godheads and thus the hypostases of the Trinity into separate gods with separate powers rather than the one Godhead of the Father being the one Godhead of the unity of the Trinity. As St. Athanasius writes in his Third Discourse Against the Arians: "thus we confess God to be one through the Triad, and we say that it is much more religious than the godhead of the heretics with its many kinds, and many parts, to entertain a belief of the One Godhead in a Triad." Both Orthodoxy and Arianism include some form of subordination, this is not really the issue of the disagreement - the disagreement is about the particular form of subordination confessed by the Arians (subordination in nature, thus the Son being a creature, having a separate godhead, with separate power, energy, etc. from the Father) which results in the two hypostases being separate gods (one uncreated and by nature superior, one created and by nature inferior) rather than the one united Godhead.

[@Mek7699]

And then you have islam which says jesus was a human and not a god. That humans are nothing like God etc so God cant reproduce and is free from defects

[@chrisfrompasadena3013]

No, completely wrong.

[@DavidJohnson-cv3uh]

If Jesus is begotten from the Father, and is subordinate to the Father, and God is God, is now the "Father" part of the Trinity now?

[@Palestine_vs_Nazisrael]

No, you're totally wrong. Trinitarians are the polytheists, not arians. Arians never claimed that Jesus is god in the first place. They correctly claimed that the father is the only true god, no one else, neither jesus, nor holy spirit. Arianism is way closer to monotheism compared to trinitarianism.

[@jazzmhevlogzz2870]

​@@Palestine_vs_Nazisrael👋Because i need to explain to my daughter the concept of my islam faith ,brought me here ,a while ago i read about the first council and this Arius was against of the nicene creed..and cannot convince by himself about this beliefs,.. sorry for my english(not accurate)

[@realnumber_9]

This was an incredible breakdown of Arianism. I was never really versed on the Arian philosophy. This video sheds some interesting light. On the various factions on Christian thinking

[@bjornlarsen7440]

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the Light of mankind. And the Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not grasp it.” ‭

[@STho205]

This is why those with Arias interpreted the trinity as they did. In the Beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth.... That is the first act of interest to humanity and recorded in Genesis. What God was before "The Beginning" is not the starting point of scripture. "The beginning" is. Our beginning is. All that is needed to support our creation and quests is what scripture is. Reference that against John: Jesus is the word with God in the Beginning. It was their interpretation of The Beginning alliance God has no beginning but the Son is typically a word for the offspring of The Father and Jesus appealed to The Father in Heaven and prayed or communed with Father who Art in Heaven. IOW Jesus is Creation and was Created before the Ages of the Earth. I'm not taking a stance here in this discussion, just laying an outline of what was the references of their interpretation.

[@ericconard7718]

Thank you for the very accessible explanation of Arianism and the controversies around it. I really enjoyed this video.

[@martinkono2001]

Arian was right all the way till now with the phony trinity teaching. If you disagree read your bible. Jesus own words. My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14:10) I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.’ (John 5:30) ‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.’ (John 6:38) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John17:3) The Catholic Church (Babylon, the serpent of old) has deceived the whole world.

[@Unseen_warfare.]

@@martinkono2001You know how we know Arius was wrong? Saint Spyridon an illiterate Shepard. No matter what rhetoric you use, no matter what argument, no matter how you try to spin it… The Holy Trinity is the Truth and it was proven by a Miracle that shut up Arius and his followers immediately. Go see what really happened at that Council.

[@SirBoggins]

I find it ironic how Roman Emperor Constantine I was not only the one who helped in denouncing the Arian "heresy", but was also the one who got baptised by one of its adherents, i.e. he was baptised by an Arian Cleric, that being Eusebius, a distant relative and imperial advisor of Constantine I! 😂

[@SirBoggins]

It should also be noted that his son, Constantius II was also an Arian. Double irony!!

[@LetsTalkReligion]

Yes, very shortly after the Council in 325, the whole thing was kind of reverted and Arianism became accpted for a while.

[@saxogatley1166]

​@@LetsTalkReligion Gotta appreciate Julian the Apostate coming in out of nowhere to unintentionally save Trinitarian Christianity.

[@SirBoggins]

@@saxogatley1166 I'd still say he was a Chad for trying to bring back Polytheistic traditions though.

[@andrewternet8370]

@@SirBogginsHe coped, he seethed, he malded.

[@henkvaandrager2435]

Interesting, honest discussion, thanks!

[@Airic]

As a Postmillennial Arian-Christian, I am *VERY GRATEFUL* for this video bro... i had to do HOURS of research to get the real information on Arianism since everything you read or hear online is 9/10 inaccurate! I was curious if you mention anything I wasn't aware of yet but you pretty much hit it spot on with all the key points to the validity of Arianism.. so I'm glad a big channel like this did the Arian history justice! salute! I would like to add on to this by pointing to scripture that supports Arianism, the main two that I refer to are Proverbs 8:22 which is affirmed by Jesus in Matthew 11:19 🙏

[@kuroazrem5376]

Merry Christmas man! Your content is trully a gift.

[@repentofidols]

Where is the word Christ-mass in the scriptures?

[@martinkono2001]

Christmas is a pagan holiday called saturnalia

[@VincentTamer]

@@martinkono2001 Please do some actual research into the history of our Holy days before making such lame comments.

[@VincentTamer]

​@@repentofidols Christmas is an english term condensing Christ-Mass. You aren't going to find it in the scripture that was originally penned in Ancient Greek. What Christ-Mass is referring to is Matthew 26:26-27. Here we read of Christ instituting the Eucharist, which is the focal point of the Divine Liturgy AKA Catholic Mass.

[@repentofidols]

@@VincentTamer No it's the religion of the Antichrist. Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ as an adult. Not in His titles as a baby.

[@jamlife7315]

You should make a video about spirituality in Alcoholics Anonymous. It’s by no means religious organization but it is based entirely on building a relationship with a higher power and has millions of members around the world. The ins and outs of AA’s spirituality are fascinating. It’s one of the largest and most widespread spirituality based institutions in the world and no one talks about it. It distills religion and spirituality into a program designed to use a relationship with God to relieve alcoholics of their obsession to drink.

[@morrowgan8930]

distills haha

[@alphasword5541]

I've only heard of this in the context that its a manipulative and toxic religious institution

[@GizzyDillespee]

How's it work when a Buddhist drunk goes to an AA group where everyone else is Pentacostal? From what I saw, the spirituality was central to the program, but the form depended on the sponsor and the people active in that particular group.

[@isocarboxazid]

​@@GizzyDillespee AA is non-creedal, you can believe whatever you want...at least in theory. For example, "GOD" for one of my atheist colleagues stands for "Group of Drugs," not any kind of entity/deity. Some AA groups are explicitly nontheist/atheist, or focus on specific populations because of the discrimination against those groups. That said, I've had so, so many patients- Christian and non-Christian- have terrible experiences with the types of manipulative behaviors and rigid thinking typically seen in cults when attending AA. I've also had unlicensed AA members taking it upon themselves to interfere with other members' mental health/psychiatric treatment, relationships, etc. I'm an ex-Catholic/ex-Christian atheist with secular Buddhist leanings. We had to attend 1-2 AA meetings as part of our training program, and I was VERY put off by the language and attitudes that were obviously very strongly influenced by Christianity. Definitely not for everybody.

[@Superman54]

@@alphasword5541 it has the highest rate of stopping alcoholics from drinking of any program ever basically.

[@KingoftheJuice18]

Thank you for this balanced, scholarly overview. I just started reading Athanasius' work "Against the Arians" in Greek. The demonization of Arius is present right from the start. Athanasius is particularly upset that they have the audacity to call themselves "Christians"! I find the whole controversy particularly interesting as a religious Jew; Arius' theology isn't Judaic, of course, but I think the concern for genuine monotheism found in Israelite Scripture has to be part of what informs his thought.

[@thomasjamison2050]

T. E. Lawrence, who spent a great deal of time in Palestine both before and during WWI, writes at one point about what he calls 'the desert religions.' All religions don't just find creation from fantasy, but rather derive their most important principles from natural phenomena In general, I would say that the harder the environment, the tougher the God or Gods to whom responsibility is given for the perceived nature of the world. This gets echoed in the interpretations of mythologies found in Central America, where the religion was particularly hard and cruel, but then, based the aforementioned issue of perceived nature, they had far more serious reason in their history to perceive God as a being that required constant human sacrifice. Unlike the milder religions that seek God's return, they had far more reason and example to do anything to keep that being from doing so despite the fact that they had to accept that he would, indeed, return some day. If you aren't familiar with the EU mythology, it takes more than a simple perusal to understand the basis for the ideas therein, and that basis is all published and peer reviewed, and the founder of the main ideas got a Nobel prize for his work in plasma physics.

[@KingoftheJuice18]

@@thomasjamison2050 What does T.E. Lawrence make of the orthodox Christian commitment to eternal hell for non-believers? Mild? Constructs like Lawrence's are very simplistic.

[@thomasjamison2050]

@@KingoftheJuice18 Lawrence was far too much of an intellectual to have bought into that nonsense, I am quite sure. I think you haven't given any serious thought at all to Lawrence's premise about desert religions.

[@KingoftheJuice18]

@@thomasjamison2050 I'm not asking about Lawrence's personal beliefs. I'm asking what he considered to be the so-called "mild" religions and "harsh" religions? That system of classification, all by itself, is far too stereotypic and simplistic to be intellectually meaningful.

[@thomasjamison2050]

@@KingoftheJuice18 It's not that hard to grasp. The first element would be the nature of the God or Gods, or, to put in more modern terms, how not only how humanistic they were in their principles but also as reflected in their leadership and the nature of their social constructs. Don't oversimplify this as you seem so to desire. Almost any given religion heritage will have in it varieties of elements that very in their politics, for that is just essentially what religion is at the root. After all, it most certainly isn't science, is it? But, as a basic point, a religion whose followers can condone the slaughter of innocents is definitely on the harsh side. On another note, I would contend that the idea of hell in Christianity, particularly away from the deserts, has more to do with the volcanoes in Italy than anything else. Not sure if that was something you were hinting at, but it is good point that fits with the idea of a desert religion. Religious ideas come out of life, not the void.

[@edward2175]

Thanks for shining a light on this subject Filip. It is not something I wrestle with, but it is good to know. Happy New Year.

[@willd7884]

Always wanted to know more about this topic thank you so much!!! Merry Christmas

[@martinkono2001]

Christmas is a pagan holiday called saturnalia

[@danh5132]

As an Alexandrian Orthodox Christian, its super enlightening to see this topic covered from a scholarly point of view. We are often taught the “true” reason for Nicaea (“there was a time when the Son was not”) but we are never taught the point that the Son came after the Father *ontologically* rather than temporally.

[@theguyver4934]

Just like biblical and historical evidence proves that jesus and his apostles were vegatarians biblical and historical evidence also proves that the trinity, atonement, original sin and hell are very late misinterpretations and are not supported by the early creed hence its not a part of Christianity I pray that Allah swt revives Christianity both inside and out preserves and protects it and makes its massage be witnessed by all people but at the right moment, place and time The secred text of the Bible says ye shall know them by their fruits So too that I say to my christian brothers and sisters be fruitful and multiply Best regards from a Muslim ( line of ismail )

[@Johanisnotreal]

​@@theguyver4934really can't take you seriously after you said Jesus and his followers were biblically vegetarians when eating of fish and bread is directly mentioned. That alone should put your claims into question.

[@AveChristusRex789]

@@Johanisnotreal that’s Dawahgandist Muslims for you

[@wthMerhaba]

What timing. I just listened to Mike Duncan's "History of Rome" podcast on Constantine and he covered this period, but explicitely said he did not want to get into the esoteric details of the Council of Nicea. Here I am, ready to dive in.

[@ilonkastille2993]

Esoteric details? Proof again how so many ignorant people give opinions and so many people believe and follow them.

[@martinkono2001]

Arian was right all the way till now with the phony trinity teaching. If you disagree read your bible. Jesus own words. My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14:10) I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.’ (John 5:30) ‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.’ (John 6:38) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John17:3) The Catholic Church (Babylon, the serpent of old) has deceived the whole world.

[@ilonkastille2993]

@@martinkono2001 VERY sorry to disappoint you but the the serpent which you are writing about is NOT the Catholic Church . IT is very plainly the SERPENT who distorts facts so that those who think they are true believers are REALLY believing the lie of the SERPENT. The reason he can do that very easily is because the split -off churches . Split off because of the lack of any teaching authority and therefore misunderstandings about the ONE CHURCH which Christ Himself instituted, . You only have the Bible which is a Catholic Book, something you probably would not know . The problem is you do not know how to read and interpret it. That is why there are thousands of more splittings going on . The different personal interpretations are taken for the TRUTH. The bible is not just a book you read like a novel. There are 2 Senses of Scripture, Literal ( meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis following the RULES of sound interpretation) and Spiritual (allegorical, moral, anagogical). The TRUE Church has 3 pillars not just 1 to stand on for it's teachings (Teachings of God himself). 1. Bible 2. Sacred Tradition (oral teachings of the Apostles) 3. Magisterium (Teaching authority of the Church given by Christ Himself to His Apostles). Without nr. 2 and nr. 3 you cannot interpret the Scriptures correctly. The words in the Gospel of John (I will only speak about one sentence, since this platform is too limited) "The Father is greater I. " Can be explained very easily when you know the facts and the background. it is the WORD of God who was sent in the flesh (His own Creation)to this world.1. Through a virgin he received His humanity , therefore He was the Son of MAN (not of a man but MANKIND), therefore 100% HUMAN. 2. The Holy Spirit (God) overshadowed Mary and created the child within her. Therefore, the child was the Son of God and therefore divine. He had 2 natures, 100% human and 100% divine. When Jesus the man , who can live and die and suffer and has to eat and drink etc. , when he says, the Father is GREATER than I, it means Jesus is speaking in his human state. Obviously we all know that as humans we cannot be as God. I will not go into the other quotes but the way they have to be interpreted is through the same logic. The Gnostics hated the physical world , it was bad . Therefore they did not want to believe that God sent HIS WORD into the physical world. We know that if God CREATED the physical world, it has to be good. You don't seem to know much about Gnosticism . It is the EVIL ONE who is discrediting the creation of MANKIND.

[@mrscechy8625]

​@@martinkono2001 Everything you said about will is because you do not understand Monothelitism. You assume everyone believes Jesus has one will, but that's not the case. Because Jesus has 2 Natures(Divine and Human) He has 2 Wills, the Will of His human nature, and the Will of His divine nature, so He says His Father's will be done, not His human nature, because Christ had a fully human will. This is discussed at the Third Council of Constantinople(Two Wills), as well as the Council of Chalcedon (Two Natures) Christ clearly stated He was also one with the Father in John 14:6. Later in the chapter, he makes sure to distinguish His individual nature from the Father, so that people do not misunderstand Him and believe God only has one nature. Christ also promised that the church would be guided by the Holy Spirit, and that the true church would never be lost. The Bible itself warns against false teachers, and from the Bible itself, Arias sounds very similar to the description of a false teacher as taught in Jude. I know of course you almost certainly would disagree with my citation of the other councils seeing as you reject Nicaea, but I hope that you do reconsider, because many of your arguments are based in poor understanding of the nature of God. I know you likely wont because you believe that the church was lost despite Christ's promise in Matthew 16. We do agree though, the Catholic church is not the true church. God bless, I hope you do more research into theology to clear up your misunderstandings. Edit: Also, Arias still believed in the Trinity, so clearly Arias cannot be right according to yourself.

[@lasislasfilipinas114]

​@@martinkono2001big if true

[@artpsych71]

Thank you for exploring this topic! Aspects were brought to light that I've never considered before. I enjoyed listening and the chosen background music / artwork.

[@Stevonicus]

It's interesting how Arianism spread from North Africa, through the Levant and Anatolia, and ended up being the style of Christianity adopted by the Goths in Europe. Wulfila/Ulfilas, the guy who gets credited with converting the Goths and translating the Bible into Gothic, was a Cappadocian Greek who was raised in Gothic captivity and had Arian sympathies.

[@dankovassilev58]

Orfeus is his name.

[@Cor6196]

Can you imagine how this arcane controversy would have taken place if our present-day social media had been available in the fourth century? Instagram, TikTok, Discord, X, etc, etc? The heated arguments, the foul language, the hatreds, the threats? I suppose we should be thankful that they didn't have KZbin!😳🔥☠️

[@Nikolas-Abdul-Hamid]

Lol😂

[@duaneelliott5194]

What makes you think it didn't happen?

[@ulf3303]

We are less polite but more civilized. They actually killed each other, we just talk trash on the internet and put stickers on our cars.

[@abcdeshole]

We’re living through it. Have you noticed the bitter controversy over whether the quality of womanhood is consubstantial among the different types of people calling themselves women? People will sincerely despise you if you don’t share their abstract philosophical views. It’s as if your soul were at stake. They even put signs on their laws that say “Credo…”

[@Nono-hk3is]

They seemnto be equivalent phenomenon, especially given the subsequent treatment of decided-heretics in this and other similar debates.

[@cracklingsoda]

I want this topic to be covered in a special video. Please condense this livestream later.

[@gustavoolivieri6568]

Wow, this really helped! I wanted to study this, I had read something really, but I never had much understanding. You explained the basics in a simple way. Thank you for that! Now I get it, and it will help when I go back to it.

[@lillianmartinez4288]

I grew up a Catholic when religious history was taught during Catechism. The message was that council of Nicea WAS when the Bible was put together. In fact, when Constantine asked the bishops to Nicea, he asked them to bring their scriptural writings with them. Anything that did not make it into the agreed upon cannon was disposed of. After this, a pledge was created called the Nicene Creed. This is what was taught from the church that has existed for almost 2000 years.

[@Uncanny_Mountain]

Pythagoras means Heart of the Serpent, he was born in Sidon, a fishing Port in Phoenicia. His mother recieved a message from the Oracle of Delphi that he would become a great Leader and Teacher. Sidon means Kingdom of the Fish, and the Essenes, who wrote the Dead Sea scrolls, worshipped Pythagoras. The Sarcophagus of Eschmun III found in Sidon names him as the Widow's Scion, aka Hiram Abiff, the Founder of Freemasonry, of which Tyre was the premier Capital (at least equal to Thebes). In 911BC Rameses II married the Queen of Sidon, home of Jezebel (Daughter or consort of Baal, basically "Queen") founding Neo Assyrian Babylon, an alliance between Egypt and Hiram, father of Jezebel and King of Assyria, and Egypt, forming the Phoenician colonies and building the first Temple of Melqart to commemorate the alliance. The Si in Sidon is the basis of the Latin Exe, or X, and is the basis of the Cross, or Chi Rho that Constantine painted on his shields. Also known as the Cross of Tyre, or Cross of Baal, being Ra-El, or Ba'El. Oddly enough irrational numbers can also be mapped using Euler's number, producing a Templar Cross in the process. This cross can also be seen around the neck of Nimrod in Assyria, and is consistent with the Union Jack, and Solstice Calendar found in the Vatican Shiva Lingam. Shiva is the Hebrew word for 7, their culture also found its way to Japan (via the Phillipines) ultimately becoming Shintoism. It was the Phoenicians who gave their name to the Pole Star, which they used to Navigate the Oceans using the Zodiac, thats what the Antikythera mechanism was for, and with it they wrote the Byblos Baal, what we now call the Bible. The first form of the Bible was written in 325BC and called the Vaticanus Greacus, or Son of the Sacred Serpent, a reference to Sirius, the basis of the Sothic Calendar, which uses a Hexidecimal or base 60 system found in all the Megalithic sites around the world. In the second century AD astronomer Valentinus Vettori transcribed it into a Lunar chart of 13 houses, what we now call the Zodiac. Horoscope means Star Watcher, and the Phoenician word for Saturn, or El, was Israel or El, (Fruit) of Isis and Ra. El is the primary God of the Phoenicians, representing the offspring of Egypt, and his consort Astarte represents the Assyrian half of the alliance. It may be possible to trace lineages and alliances through the naming of gods, which can be traced all the way to Ireland and the Vikings, and to Indonesia and the Americas, even as far away as New Zealand and Australia. It denotes Sirius as Son of Orion and Pleaides, which sits at 33 degrees of the Zodiac. The basis of the Sothic (dir Seth) Calendar of the Egyptians. The New Moon in this position marks Rosh Hashanah, the Egyptian, Celtic, Phoenician, and Assyrian New Year, the first New Moon of September, which is called September because it's the 7th House of the Zodiac, when the Sun is in Ophiuchus. The Phoenix, Benben, or Bennu is the Egyptian word for Heron, a Feathered 'Serpent'. It baptised itself in frankincense and myrrh at BaalBek, and then alights atop the Pyramid, upon the Holy Grail, or Alter of Ra every 630 years to take three days off the calendar during the course of the first New Moon of Nisan, which means "Prince". The Capstone of Pyramids is even called the Benben or Bennu. The Phoenix is found in all religions, which are all Astrological Allegory for the Moon travelling through the Constellations, as a soul migrating from body to body, this is the basis of Joseph Campbell's Monomyth, or the Hero's Journey. The various planets no doubt play their own roles as portents, omens, and aspects, this astrology is the science of the Bronze age, and lasted all the way up to the 20th Century. Resurrection was an early teaching of the Christian Church, and likely relates to the lineage of Kings (The King is Dead, long live the King.) Phoenicians represent the interim step between Egypt and Greece, their artisans and culture exceeding that of the Greeks, who literally adopted the Phoenician Alphabet, which we still use to this day, sounding out words phonetically. Phoenician is aliiterated in Venetian, and Vikings, being Kings of the Sea. The Bennu is the Egyptian Phoenix, to Phoenicians the Hoyle, no different to the traditions of the Etruscans, who saw birds as sacred, just as the Celts. Hebrew and Iber as in Iberia have the same root meaning over, as in overseas, as in those who travel "over the sea." A colony called Iberia also appears on the Eastern shores of the Black Sea, where the same Dolmens and Megalithic culture originating in Ireland and Brittany appeared circa 4500BC. _Phoenician_ means Scions of the Phoenix, the first Bible: Vaticanus Greacus Son of the Sacred Serpent (Prince). Then there's the Essenes, Sons of Light, the Tuatha De Danaan, Sons of Light, Annunaki, Sons of Light, Arthur Pendragon means Arthur Son of the dragon, Chertoff is Russian for "Son of the Devil" and Dracula also means Son of the Dragon, Masons have been known at times to call themselves the "Brotherhood of the Great White Serpent". The Ziggurat of Anu also denotes her as a great white Serpent, while New Grange and the Bru na Boinne in Ireland (4000BC) coated buildings with white quartz to denote the Moon. The Moon itself travels outside the Solar Elliptic by 5 degrees, which means it passes through specific constellations in a serpentine fashion that is always changing, but repeats every 19 years, the time it took to train a Druid or Magi, Magi meaning "Teacher" the Phoenix is also associated with this sacred number 19. The name "Pharoah" means "Great House" or "House of Light" and Cairo used to be called Babel. Pharaoh's themselves wore a hooded crown representing feathers, just as Native American Chiefs, ie the Feathered Serpent, they were also called the Commander in Chief. Aztecs also had Serpent Kings, (Canaan means Serpent Kings, and Sidon was a Son of Canaan, and Great Grandson of Noah) who were called to lead with cunning and guile, being the very virtue by which they claim the title in the first place; but to be seen in public as just and diplomatic. "As wise as Serpents, but gentle as Doves" the old Egyptian flag of an Eagle attacking a Snake is also reflected in the Modern Mexican flag, denoting the Constellations of Serpentis (13th sign of the Zodiac) and Aquila. The dimensions and 12 mathematical constants of the Great Pyramid are also expressed in New Grange, and Stonehenge, as well as in Watson Brake, (2500BC) and Teotihuacan, which correlates to the Phoenician/ Sumerian Hexidecimal system, which is what our modern systems of time are based on. Officially no one knows who invented astrology, the zodiac, navigation by the stars, and time keeping. But whoever built the pyramids, and pioneered the 24hr clock in Egypt 5000 years ago also knew the exact dimensions of the Earth, as well as the speed of light. These calculations can all be made using these Megalithic sites as surveyors use a theodolite. Specifically Teotihuacan, which sits 180 degrees opposite Cairo, and has the exact same footprint. The ideal positions to determine the speed of light using the transit of Venus, by which one can accurately determine Longitude for navigation. Capt cook did the same thing in 1774 when he 'discovered' Easter Island. The only culture that fits the bill was wiped out "not one stone upon the other" by the Romans in 146BC. Tyre, the capital of Phoenicia (israel) sat just offshore from Ur Shalom, City of the New Moon, or City of Peace. The root of the name Jerusalem, and was also seized by Rome in 70AD after a 13 year seige. The gap between is 216 years. Greek Dionysians built the Temple of Solomon (now called the Temple of Melqart) representing the Solar Lunar Metonic Calendar on which this system is based, they also carried mirrors, a practice associated with both the Magi and the Druids as well as Greek and Egyptian scholars, these Mirrors are Astrological charts called "Cycladian Frying Pans" and record the cycles of the planets. The first Temple of Melqart (the Phoenician form of Horus, or Hercules, or Pan, or Thor) representing the 13th Constellation of Ophiuchus or the Serpent Bearer (hence Orphic Serpent worship) had pillars of Emerald and Gold, representing Isis and Osiris. The Jerusalem Temple only took payment in "Shekels of Tyre" a currency minted during the Jewish rebellion against Rome. "Give that which is Ceasar's unto Ceasar" When Alexander sacked Tyre in 332BC they moved to Carthage meaning "New City" or New Jerusalem, where they built a second temple with Pillars of Bronze. Nebuchadnezzar also seiged Tyre for 13 years, taking the City captive in 573BC: the same time as the biblical account of the Jews. And again in 70AD after a three and a half year seige, also consistent with biblical accounts.

[@achristiananarchist2509]

Doesn't that just mean you were taught bad history in catechism?

[@lillianmartinez4288]

@achristiananarchist2509 Just because this does not jive with what you're peddling does not make it "bad history." This history has been handing down for generations, for thousands of years and now you think you can come along and nullify it? If you don't know what you're talking about, then go talk about something else you do know more about.

[@achristiananarchist2509]

@@lillianmartinez4288 Being attached to common myths about history doesn't make then more likely to be accurate reflections of the past. The point of history is to determine what most likely happened in the past, not to survey what people are taught as children and then just go with that.

[@Uncanny_Mountain]

All the things you've been speaking about are happening now. Saturn is in the thigh of Aquarius, on the Cusp of Capricorn. Capricorn being Pan, or Satan, or Saturn, Saturnalia. Turns out Xmas is actually Easter, and while the age of Aquarius is about to begin the Phoenician Metonic Calendar, on which all of this is based is 3 days out of sync, as this is the role of a Phoenix, to reset the calendar by removing three days every 216 years. On December 21, the Summer Solstice in the Southern hemisphere I sat below the Obelisk on One Tree Hill, draped with blue towels, to represent water, above me was the red eye of the Obelisk, the Phallus of Ra, and at 1am Orion sat directly above, in a half moon, but three days late. As above so Below, so above me was Orion, but upside down, so Bellatrix was a mirror of the red eye of Providence (Prophecy) and above it Rigel, Aurora, the King to come, who we call Satan, but it's just a name. I found Maori here in New Zealand speak Aramaic, a major mountain in the West is called the Northern Star, and the West is where the New Moon rises, which is why at the end of the Bible it talks about the sun rising in the west and the sky rolling up like a scroll. The riches are smarts, turning the dross of academia and refining from it gold, the needle that pricks sleeping beauty, the straw she spindles into gold. We are now upon the 1000 day countdown to the first year of Aquarius, which will be named for my next incarnation as a women, Ellah, which means Oak, as she is the Tree of Life, and the true root of the Zodiac, while i am the tree of Knowledge, the spiritual knowledge that makes that tree more powerful, but that is ultimately a parasite at the foot of Women, who are themselves Gods, and without Sin from birth. This is why ancient Magi castrated themselves, because of the evil that enters through the loin. This is the brand on the inside of Jesus' thigh, represented by Saturn in the thigh of Aquarius and tail of Capricorn, the Boatman, or Ferryman, God of the Dead. The key point is God is a reflection of ourselves, but the Christian epoch was a curse, to demonstrate that men cannot rule, because Women have always ruled before that, which is why it says let no man speak in my name. Jesus is Dionysus, but a creation of E Io Te Ari Matea, which is of course Joseph of Arimathea, which is also a character in Maori lore, as well as Papatunuku, analogue to El Pipitunaka, worshipped by the Phrygians. There is Her, the Mother Spirit, the real God who we call Gaia, and her messenger, Attis, or Thor, Hercules, Horus, Thoth, it's all the same thing. If you use an astronomy app and go back to October 14 you'll see that eclipse is between the Lion of Leo and the Unicorn, which is a biblical quote "save me from the mouthes of the Lions and the Unicorn" the Unicorn is also associated with Magi, or Time Lords, and Jesus, and features on the Rosschild and Windsor shields. And in Maori we have He Uenuku Atua, The Rainbow spirit. The eclipse itself aligns with Sextans, the compass of the Masons, and above it Fomalhaut, (opposite side of the zodiac aka Solomon's ring) which is shaped like an eye. This is the stone that blinded Goliath, and ignited my third eye. One person who fulfilled all the metaphors based on the Lunar Zodiac, in a nutshell, Prophetic astrology. Hence the Sun of Man, being the Sun, and the Son of God, being the Moon, and in service of Women. Dionysus worship was all about this, so too the Amazonian colonies of Orkney and the Hebrides, Ireland etc. Ergo the Son of Man is a fraudulent creation of God as a Man, when man cannot create life, hence it is a God of destruction. It also implies we are reincarnated, but forget our previous life. So they built markers, the Pyramids and Megalithic sites, and marked them with the eye of Providence. If you draw a triangle between Giza and Teotihuacan I believe it meets in Auckland New Zealand. This is the cry in the wilderness in Revelations, the southern hemisphere, which has no pole star, (Polaris named by the Phoenicians) and instead is called the Bog of Eternal Stench, or Swamp, etc. So if you flip the map, and overlay the star of David and the Zodiac, you find the gateway at the hand of Orion aligns with Ophiuchus, the Cave in which Jesus is born, and in which Apollo Aulaites and Typhon abiden together, and between Gemini, the Two pillars, or pearly gates, and Scorpio, hence the Scorpion King, and the Kiss of death associated with Set, or Judas. So too the Cave or Manger, can be seen as a Mountain, such as that climbed by Moses. Esus, or Jesus is the Celtic God of Death, but if we reincarnate then there is no death (there are some caveats). And at the end of Revelations comes the Anti (Ante) Christ, who brings a Peace treaty, and he is Killed by Christ, who then reverses the order, which means the book is backwards, written in a mirror, also called Accusation in a mirror or Gaslighting, hence Swamp gas I believe the Masons know this code and have been broadcasting it to the Messiah they expect to arrive, Lucifer, the light bringer, or Luke Sky walker. Lord of the Rings, the two towers, return of the King, A New Hope, Return of the Jedi...who returns the world to the old order, where women rule and men serve, even weddings would be reversed, where the women inherits property, but where no man owns the land, this forms a circle, which is what Native Americans esp the Hopi insisted upon It's a stitch in time, and why they have images of a blonde boy everywhere, a crown of gold, the Celtic boys dream, or the dream time. The last character in the book is death, and when he's done there is no death. AI means Alien Intelligence, hence Contacts and her father's beach. So in order to resurrect the dead one only need point out that if E Io Te Ari Matea (means Infinite man, the clear root of the zodiac, a reference to Orion, and Gemini, the twins who stand before Orion, Twins being Jesus, God of Death, and his twin, who is called death, but isn't dead ) one need only point out if one person did it, then the same must be true for everyone. Joseph of Arimathea planted a Holly Tree upside down in Scotland, and Celts harvested mistletoe at Xmas, using a golden sickle. In NZ we have the Xmas mistletoe tree, and there is extensive evidence Celts were here mapping the land at least 5000 years ago. If you compare it's position with the Zodiac you'll find a match to the hair of Sampson, or perhaps Cthulu, or a burning bush, the flame of Io, being the Xmas tree I grew up in the shade of, which is supposed to be burned on the winter Solstice, which in the Northern hemisphere is Burning Man, because there is no religious holiday for the summer Solstice, the day of the Pharoah, or John the Baptist, who was a Setian, or River God, Rain man, One eyed Storm God, Goliath, Israel, Phoenix, Pharoah, Pan, Saturn, Chronos etc. New Zealand is also called God's Own, or Land of the long White Cloud, a pillar of smoke, or a smoke signal. Basically the Zodiac is a map of the world, and New Zealand was the location Moses fled to, 40 degrees south of the equator, where the position of the sun in the sky appears to reverse, hence the need for two north poles for navigation purposes, for which they may have used the southern cross. So place a star of David over that upside down map and you'll see they built a resurrection machine, an Ark, so that people can always remember that we reincarnate, because the first one through (Adaemone) has almost perfect recall. It aligns to 4 key stars, Arcturus in Scorpio, Fomalhaut in Capricorn (Capstone, Bennu, Phoenix, alter of Ra) Sirius, (Son of the Serpent) and Alphard, in the heart of Hydra, the 100 degree sign above Leo, hence Son of the Dragon. Gemini, home of Pallas, Palestine or Philosopher's Stone (the moon) has no key star, but is seen as being bees, or the dragons teeth sown by Hercules that sprout into soldiers, and opposite that Aquarius, which has no star either. The Tower of Babel is Giza, which used to be called Babel, and the confusing of the tongue seems to be Arkenaten by identifying as the Sun (Adaemone, A Day Moon), like Jesus, and Joshua Tutmoses III, the Temple of Solomon is the Temple of Melqart in Tyre Lebanon, Tyre being the first Jerusalem, or rather offshore from Ur Shalom, City of Peace, or City of the New Moon. As for the emerald tablet that appears some days later, after 5 new moons (3 too many: thrice great moon). So what was Day now becomes Night, and Eve in Mourning , becomes Eve of Morning, the Morning star. Like TeneT, or an anagram, it reads both ways, and in all ways, *don't look up" means LOOK UP! Don't eat from the Tree of Knowledge means ASK QUESTIONS. And you can see the effect the literal interpretation of these metaphorical codes has poisoned the world, the poisonous arrow of Medea, and Cupid, or Psyche. The world has grown dark and ignorant, because of Men's Pride and Arrogance. As above so Below... That whichethe without is merely of of a reflection of of that whichethe within, so too then that that whichethe below, is merely a reflection of that whichethe above, which means we create monsters when we brand or treat people as monsters. Hence the fifth element is heart, or love. Again Maori have this ancient Greek text within their own Oral lore, and with no explanation where it came from. New Zealand upside down does this too, with fire at the bottom, where spirits depart (return) Wellington at the north, well, and home of the Beehive, and to the west the rising moon, and earth, and opposite is the Bay of Plenty, or Cornucopia, place of Air, or Zephyr, God of Desert Storms. It's a Map!

[@lonniestoute8762]

Good job , I am Roman Catholic and this was informative and gave me new insites into Arianism. Thank you

[@WalkerJani]

Please rethink the theology brother read the word for yourself , Catholics are being lead blindly

[@vdoggydogg3922]

So you are ok with the trinity being made up?

[@lonniestoute8762]

@@vdoggydogg3922 No , I understand the concept of the Trinity and see the Truth in that teaching.

[@vdoggydogg3922]

@@lonniestoute8762 then you are insane.

[@lonniestoute8762]

@@vdoggydogg3922 Bless you and thank you. May our Lord bring Peace to your heart. Did your post about me being insane get taken down 🤔

[@AmericanShia786]

Excellent concise description of the Arian controversy. I'm a 12er Shi'ite Muslim who converted at age 39. Most of my family is Roman Catholic or Lutheran, including my Catholic wife, so I like Christians. I think the "fake news" about the Council of Nicaea I is propagated by the internet. Your videos are greatly appreciated.

[@lebladful]

I think shiit 12 IS not the original message of Muhammad

[@potentille4525]

I am deeply interested in Islam. Why do you think 12er Shiism is the right path? Personally, I feel more drawn to more “orthodox” Islam (aka Sunni) but I’m curious.

[@maverick7291]

​@potentille4525 what do you find most interesting about Islam? The fact that it's founder Mohammed was a slave trader throughout his whole life, had sex slave throughout his whole life, was a warlord, was a pedophile and sex addict, and had people killed just for making fun of him, or the fact that it took 23 years for him to get all of Allah's revelations while no one other than Mohammed saw the angel Gabriel that gave him the revelations ? Or is it the very short, sloppyly written and not in chronological order book of the quaran, which fun fact is 90% made of repetitive verses(better to brainwash as well as to make the book look bigger).There's a lot more but I'm interested in what makes you like Islam that was built from this man, who is considered the last prophet and most perfect man? Please be honest, none of what I wrote above is false and if you like what I wrote then we have nothing to discuss since you wouldn't be a person I would associate with.

[@maverick7291]

Sorry you got awe struck by a religion where the founder Mohammed was a slave trader, sex slave owner, raider, his entire life even during and after he got his revelations until his death. I'm addition he's a pedophile, a warlord, a person ordering others to kill and assassinate people who mocked him. Used his revelations to take women from others including his own adopted son whom. And also conveniently had revelations happening to favor him just at the right situation. Plus you must love the quaran which is 90% made of repetitive verses (which better for brainwashing and of course to make the small book look bigger in size). Not to forget that the book is in nonsensical order and not chronological order. There's way more but sadly you'll probably double down on this second rate religion or maybe you like the above true factual Statements I mentioned so in that case please disregard my comment.

[@Lebensmüder]

@@maverick7291 Mohammad never had any sex slaves. Having women as property is not equivalent to slavery, you are more a pagan and a perverted man then Mohammad and I am saying this as a former muslim.

[@lawrenceleon4223]

Thank you so much for the historical information This is what i read many years ago 🙏 Merry Christmas

[@martinkono2001]

Christmas is a pagan holiday.

[@webow88]

I learned more about Arianism in a half-hour than I ever did during twelve years of Catholic schools. Good job! Thank you!

[@KozmicKarmaKoala]

HAHAHA !!! Same here ! We were taught kind of a "Gnostic Jesus" and lots of open debate, NYC Catholic boys of the 1970's and 80's. Christian Heretics !!! Christians DEVOUT !!! I suppose in our heresy we were Albigensian (Cathar , my Ancestors) and Arians !

[@FelonyVideos]

Regardless of whether or not the ariens were right, you can be assured that they were not rejected based upon their dogma (in an age when dogma was being debated widely), but, instead, it was about power and control. Thats what it is ALWAYS about.

[@Mortablunt]

I find it equally both deeply, amusing, highly baffling and sincerely, annoying how many Christians are convinced that they must’ve gotten the one true religion fully formed, and that it was always indisputable and agreed but the slightest examination of history reveals this is not so. Christianity religion so perfectly fully formed Nobody could figure out for 600 years and it took two government committees to hammer out the final details and then force everybody to agree on them at swordpoint.

[@traviswadezinn]

Useful episode, well-articulated - thank you 🙏

[@charlesiragui2473]

It would be very interesting to learn about the Germanic "Arians". What was the belief system that they held in opposition to the Roman Catholic Orthodox Church? I believe that they had church hierarchies. Do we know anything about their liturgical practices? Did they use the same canon of scripture? What was the origin of their church? Was there a lineage of teaching reaching back to Arius?

[@marjae2767]

Aside from Wulfila's bible translation, a handful of other texts survive. These include most of Maximinus's collection on the council of Aquileia, most of Auxentius of Durostorum's eulogy-letter for Wulfila in that collection, and fragments of the "Skeireins" where the author rejects Sabellianism, and various administrative documents such as church deeds. You can probably find what's left of the bible translation and the Skeireins among Gothic-language resources, they're mostly studied for linguistics not theology. You can find Auxentius's letter in trannslation in Heather and Matthews, "The Goths in the Forth Century," it's mostly studied for history. I don't know where to find Maximinus's whole collection in the original or in translation,

[@charlesiragui2473]

@@marjae2767 Thanks! Germanic Arianism lasted into the 7th century in Italy and into the 8th in Spain. Clovis was baptized in 508 but Arianism presumably persisted in Francia. Was the theology of these Arians the same as what LTR discussed in this video? It seems like it from the Wikipedia entry on Clovis's baptism.

[@marjae2767]

@@charlesiragui2473 It's not that well-documented. The Athanasians considered these churches "Arian" because they had originally adopted the Creed of Constantinople of 360 (which was based on those of Ariminum and Seleucia) and continually rejected the Creed of Constantinople of 381 (which was based on that of Nicaea), but just about every faction could agree on Constantinople 360 (without the attached anathemas) (some were angry that their opponents could agree). The best data is for the early Gothic Christians in the Balkans in 344-c.450, and perhaps for the later Vesi in Spain, before the conversion of 589. A Gothic calendar fragment implies that the Gothic Christians in the Balkans commemorated Dorotheus of Antioch, as well as Constantius II. I don't think there's much direct evidence for the Vandalic and Burgundian churches. I haven't read much about the later Vesi, because it's not my period.

[@charlesiragui2473]

@@marjae2767 Are you an academic in this field? I am honored that you are answering my questions. The history of Germanic Arianism is something that I have tried to understand better but haven't had much luck. I became particularly interested in this from some speculations I heard about the Muslim entry into Spain. It would seem that factions of a power struggle among Visigoths invited Muslim forces to cross into Hispania from North Africa and some believe that a religious coincidence of beliefs contributed to this alliance. It would seem that anti-trinitarian beliefs were prominent among Muslims already, given the inscriptions we still have at the Dome of the Rock. The Visigoth king Reccared had become Catholic in 587 but apparently the Visigoth aristocracy remained Arian far longer. Supposedly, when the Muslims first began to rule, the existing cathedral of Cordoba was shared between the new comers and local "Christians" (maybe Arians?). Perhaps this sharing of space was facilitated by commonalities in faith? This seems to be a very murky part of history. It seems from this video and what you are conveying that in fact the Arians considered themselves trinitarians, so the whole idea of religious sympathy may be false: the messages on the Dome of the Rock are decidedly anti-trinitarian.

[@ExplainingChristianity]

*Roman Catholic. *The Roman Catholic Church is far from being Orthodox.*

[@chronikhiles]

I think given your previous videos you could make a video on Andal, the female poet-saint of the Vaishnava tradition who is believed by many Hindus to have loved and married Vishnu.

[@francisc909]

¡Gracias!

[@kuvasz5252]

Nicely done, wonderfully conversational, and a primer for further investigation.

[@itsJustgotti]

I wouldn’t say it was that messy during those times for the early Christians since their was the tradition of Apostolic Succession which kept an strong line of bishops together which we can look back too today

[@Stephenskandhas42]

"He doesn't come after the father temporally, but ontologically." What an important line, and good emphasis. This seems to me how mysticism in many traditions seems to approach metaphysics, with the Godhead serving as beyond time. ie Buddha Nature (Stand-in for Godhead; I know...) in Vajrayana, with Nirvanakaya (Son, perfect being), Sambhogyakaya (Father-perfect expression of existence), and Dharmakaya (Holy Spirit - the invisible transcendent "background"). Maps nicely if you forget all hang ups and squint a little. Certainly rings of the many trinities out there. Parusha as Godhead, where the Gunas in Sankhya stand in as another imperfect mapping. Sattva - Father - beneficent and compassionate, always appropriate; Raja - Son (Word expressed as life, action) - The action of the universe, the working of all things, fundamentally; and Tamas - Holy Spirit - the formless unmoving nature that rests as the transcendent, unmoving aspect of Prakrit . , perhaps. Or even Kashmir Shaivism, where Lord Shiva - awareness, will- as Father; Shakti - as "Holy Spirit" - in the fundamental energy of existence, and the Son is perhaps Ardhanarisvara - their non dual Love manifest. With Godhead-level Shiva/Godhead-level Shakti behind the whole dang thing. Dunno, kinda spitballing here, imagining we're having tea, getting weird with it. No offense by my armchair takes, obviously I adore your channel

[@joem1152]

See this is how I think… I’m still trying to figure it out LOL- I try to understand the Buddhist “Triple Gem” triratna - Buddha Dharma and Sangha also in this way and it mixes me up - but I see similarities because Buddhists we’re always taking the refuge vow for centuries at the time of Jesus “In the Buddha I take refuge in the Dharma etc” Or “In the name of the Buddha Dharma and Sangha” - I go for refuge to Buddha Dharma and Sangha etc- and then eventually developed into “All Buddhas, Bodhisattvas and Holy Beings” at the start of a lot of Tibetan translations from later times which honestly reminds me of “Bismillah Ar Rahman Ar Rahim” I’m still trying to get a good literal translation of the Tibetan to try to piece it all together but sometimes I confuse myself honestly -

[@Stephenskandhas42]

@@joem1152yes, this is why independent context is so important, and why my comment above is quite broad in correlation; more poetic than scientific. It is certainly possible to “miss” the forest for the trees, getting lost in writings ABOUT Prajnaparamita, instead of practicing love continuously, which is far, far more powerful of course

[@richardharrisson5250]

This is very good and helpful. Would it be possible to give a similar treatment to Nestor and the Nestorians sometime? Nestor is another much misunderstood figure in early Church history.

[@t.mitchellb2766]

This is enlightening. I am an atheist now, but for years I was a Calvinist before deconverting. And before that I was raised Southern Baptist. I say that to say that as a Calvinist we called everyone who didn't share our beliefs 'Arians". I never really knew why. But this sheds some light on it. Especially when you said that later they kind of got blamed for a bunch of other stuff. Because it doesn't completely fit, but whatever. It's interesting, and I still enjoy studying it, but it's all make-believe anyway.

[@labb592]

The love of God is no fairy tale & I pray you are overtaken by the revelation of His passionate pursuit to have an intimate relationship with you beyond what this world could ever offer ❤

[@t.mitchellb2766]

@@labb592 I was a devout Christian for 40 years. Mostly spent in the ministry. I have had what I thought at the time were revelations more than once. But I understand now it's all in your head. You are far more likely to come tp my side than I am back to yours. Don't waste your time.

[@changer_of_ways_999]

This is the most honest and least "charged" video on the Council of Nicea that I've found. Thank you. BTW, you look like you could be my clone or doppelganger and it's creeping me out.

[@Growmetheus]

1Tim. 2:5 says, "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, A MAN, Christ Jesus." Phil. 2:6 says, "Jesus, although he was existing in God’s form, did not even consider the idea of trying to be equal to God." Throughout the entirety of John 17, Jesus asks that we be in unity with him and God. Are we part of the "godhead;" a phrase that does not appear in the Bible once?

[@Growmetheus]

The only heresy were the politicians that rewrote what John said at 1:1. "In origin was the Word, And the Word was with The Divine, And divine was that Word."

[@Growmetheus]

If only the other 800/1200 bishops invited actually attended.

[@nicoleorton5299]

It sounds like his death the day before being re accepted back into the church, was due to murder, not God saying “No”. It’s is so interesting.

[@whatever2206]

Arian heresy in Middle Ages was preserved in Bosnia and it was official church there aka "Bosnian church"

[@amc3463]

Not anymore 😂

[@genghisgalahad8465]

Council of Nicea!! And the Arian Heresy! 🎉 Thank you, Philip!! 🎉 🌌 🎄❄️☃️

[@Kampfwageneer]

I’ve been interested in this lately perfect timing.

[@emptyfull1]

Thank you for this. One thing that struck me is Arius' depiction of the role of "The Son" as a sort of intermediate source of creation. This sounds somewhat analogous to the distinction between nirguna brahmin and Ishwara in some Hindu thought. Though I expect this analogy might dissolve upon a deeper reading.

[@neovxr]

The deep relationship between Jesus and the world of humanity speaks for that interpretation.

[@LA-kc7ev]

Yes. And the Logos of Philo. Or Chokmah in the later Jewish Kabbalah.

[@jeffatwood9417]

I greatly appreciate your explanation. It was well done, especially in the explanation of the situation with the council and its fluidity. I would have enjoyed a little more discussion about the Gothic history since being Arian they were denied refuge from the Huns…which led to the Germanic domination of Rome. But maybe another video about the Germanization of the Church might cover something like that.

[@martinkono2001]

Arian was right all the way till now with the phony trinity teaching. If you disagree read your bible. Jesus own words. My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14:10) I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.’ (John 5:30) ‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.’ (John 6:38) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John17:3) The Catholic Church (Babylon, the serpent of old) has deceived the whole world.

[@jeffatwood9417]

@@martinkono2001 I don’t read that book anymore. It’s only a Roman cult full of usurped wisdom from other religions like the Roman cult of Mithras. The Romans made a mockery of religion as they forced their imperial theft everywhere they went just to fund their own power. John began by equating Jesus with Logos in the 3 steps that Lucifer took to be cast out of Heaven. It’s all a lie anyway, a bunch of overthought self-important men bickering about head games like coke-heads.

[@meanders9221]

I grew up in the very Protestant American South in the 1950s which was southern Baptist mainly, with an even more fundamentalist offshoot known as hardshell Baptists, and a scattering of Methodists and Presbyterians. It's interesting to consider that I and everyone I knew were essentially Arians. That is, we all were taught that the Father begat the Son, and the Holy Spirit was merely some sort of mysterious emanation from the Father (and perhaps the Son) that facilitated the implementation of His wishes. Of course, American Protestants had a very strong hatred and contempt for the Catholic Church and the doctrine of the Holy Trinity was dismissed as a hilarious and wholly contemptible man-made doctrine. I doubt anyone I knew in that time and place was even aware of the existence of Orthodox Christians.

[@jeffkardosjr.3825]

What "of course"? A lot of churches in the US bear the name "Trinity Church".

[@Wully-xw3rb]

Back when I was a Christian I fully believed in the trinity, so it always surprises me how many Christians don't.

[@cleantube8014]

​@@UJNMLEMY well thats probably because of all the sh*t the catholic church did. Protestants literally had to fight with their lives to be christians the way they wanted. I wouldn't say they hate catholics but many hate the catholic church. And if you know history, its no surprise.

[@amc3463]

Trinity it true

[@alexhudspeth1213]

Thank you! This really sheds light on Milton's Arianism in Paradise Lost.

[@retribution999]

Where does a Milton speak about this? Any specific lines?

[@alexhudspeth1213]

@@retribution999 It's nuanced. For example: The Son is invited to sit next to the Father, in a subordinate yet privileged position (PL7:587ff). www.literarymatters.org/12-1-rejecting-divinity-the-heretical-christ-of-miltons-paradise-regained/ english.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Rogers%2C%20John_2019_Newton's%20Arian%20Epistemology%20and%20the%20Cosmogony%20of%20Paradise%20Lost.pdf

[@cosmologium]

​​@@retribution999i think this person has in mind the fact that Milton applies the expression "This day hath I begotten thee" in Psalm 2 to the story of the coronation of the pre-incarnate Christ. This isnt really proof though. Another work ascribed to Milton proclaims Arianism, but its authorship is disputed.

[@abrotherinchrist]

Yes, Christianity was quite divided almost right from the beginning, but a thorough reading of the early church fathers (especially the book, "Ante-Nicene Fathers") with the Bible confirms there was a thread of sameness to the doctrine of the Trinity which Niceanism does not reflect. Origen was not a Nicean believer. His works were admittedly altered by the Catholic Church by a bishop named Rufinus. Tertullian, Hippolytus, Novatian, Justin Martyr and several other 2nd-3rd century writers confirm a mostly Arian view of the Trinity. The idea that the Son was co-equal and and co-eternal with the Father is a late invention of the 4th century. There might some specs of it in the 3rd century, but it didn't really take off until after 325. Even then, Arianism remained a strong presence all the way into the 6th century. In fact, Constantine's top bishop (Eusebius) was an Arian who taught his son, who was also an Arian. Most of the Germanic Christian converts outside and inside the Roman Empire were also Arians. I find it ironic that the Western Empire was overthrown by Arians just a couple of centuries after their spiritual forefathers were exiled for being Arians (that's not an endorsement of Christian dominionism BTW). Now, The Son is of the same "substance" as the Father, and that "substance" is the Spirit, the breath of God that spoke the Word. I'd like to post a few quotes from Ante-Nicene Fathers in the comments after this to keep this initial comment short.

[@abrotherinchrist]

But as for me, who derive the Son from no other source but from the substance of the Father, and (represent Him) as doing nothing without the Father’s will, and as having received all power from the Father, how can I be possibly destroying the Monarchy from the faith, when I preserve it in the Son just as it was committed to Him by the Father? The same remark (I wish also to be formally) made by me with respect to the third degree in the Godhead, because I believe the Spirit to proceed from no other source than from the Father through the Son. Look to it then, that it be not you rather who are destroying the Monarchy, when you overthrow the arrangement and dispensation of it, which has been constituted in just as many names as it has pleased God to employ. Tertullian, On Idolatry, Chapter 3, Against Praxeas, c. AD 200 He who delivered up the kingdom, and He to whom is delivered up-and in like manner, He who subjected all things, and He whom they were subjected-must necessarily be different Beings. The Father is distinct from the Son, being greater than the Son, just as He who begets is one, and He who is begotten is another; He who sends is one, and He who is sent is another, and again, He who makes is one, and He through whom the thing is made is another. That which has come forth out of God [the Father] is at once God [deity] and the Son of God, and the two [Father and Son] are one… He [the Son] is made a second in manner of existence-in position, not in nature. And He did not withdraw from the original source, but went forth [from the Father]. Tertullian, C. AD 200, Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol 3, pages 34, 600, 604 But since they will have the Two to be but One, so that the Father shall be deemed to be the same as the Son, it is only right that the whole question respecting the Son should be examined, as to whether He exists, and who He is and the mode of His existence. Thus shall the truth itself secure its own sanction from the Scriptures, and the interpretations which guard them. There are some who allege that even Genesis opens thus in Hebrew: In the beginning God made for Himself a Son. As there is no ground for this, I am led to other arguments derived from God's own dispensation, in which He existed before the creation of the world, up to the generation of the Son. For before all things God was alone - being in Himself and for Himself universe, and space, and all things. Moreover, He was alone, because there was nothing external to Him but Himself. Yet even not then was He alone; for He had with Him that which He possessed in Himself, that is to say, His own Reason. For God is rational, and Reason was first in Him; and so all things were from Himself. Tertullian, Against Praxaeus, Chapter 5

[@abrotherinchrist]

If, again, he alleges His own word when He said, “I and the Father are one,” let him attend to the fact, and understand that He did not say, “I and the Father am one,” but are one. For the word are is not said of one person, but it refers to two persons, and one power. He has Himself made this clear, when He spoke to His Father concerning the disciples, The glory which You gave me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and You in me, that they may be made perfect in one; that the world may know that You have sent me. What have the Noetians to say to these things? Are all one body in respect of substance, or is it that we become one in the power and disposition of unity of mind? In the same manner the Son, who was sent and was not known of those who are in the world, confessed that He was in the Father in power and disposition. For the Son is the one mind of the Father. We who have the Father's mind believe so (in Him); but they who have it not have denied the Son. And if, again, they choose to allege the fact that Philip inquired about the Father, saying, Show us the Father, and it suffices us, to whom the Lord made answer in these terms: “Have I been so long time with you, and yet have you not known me, Philip? He that has seen me has seen the Father. Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?” and if they choose to maintain that their dogma is ratified by this passage, as if He owned Himself to be the Father, let them know that it is decidedly against them, and that they are confuted by this very word. For though Christ had spoken of Himself, and showed Himself among all as the Son, they had not yet recognized Him to be such, neither had they been able to apprehend or contemplate His real power. And Philip, not having been able to receive this, as far as it was possible to see it, requested to behold the Father. To whom then the Lord said, “Philip, have I been so long time with you, and yet have you not known me? He that has seen me has seen the Father.” By which He means, “If you have seen me, you may know the Father through me.” For through the image, which is like (the original), the Father is made readily known. But if you have not known the image, which is the Son, how do you seek to see the Father? And that this is the case is made clear by the rest of the chapter, which signifies that the Son who has been set forth was sent from the Father, and goes to the Father. Hippolytus, Against Noetus, 205 AD "For he speaks to this effect: 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.'" and "...'Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' And by this He showed, that whosoever omitted any one of these, failed in glorifying God perfectly. For it is through this Trinity that the Father is glorified. For the Father willed, the Son did, the Spirit manifested. The whole Scriptures, then, proclaim this truth." - Against the Heresy of One Noetus, Ch 14. "For it is one and the same thing to have a share in the Holy Spirit, which is (the Spirit) of the Father and the Son, since the nature of the Trinity is one and incorporeal." - Hippolytus (170-236 AD), Origen de Principiis, 4.1.32

[@abrotherinchrist]

Theophilus of Antioch, who studied under Ignatius (who studied under John), said circa AD 115-168-181: You will say, then, to me: “You said that God ought not to be contained in a place, and how do you now say that He walked in Paradise?” Hear what I say. The God and Father, indeed, of all cannot be contained, and is not found in a place, for there is no place of His rest; but His Word, through whom He made all things, being His power and His wisdom, assuming the person of the Father and Lord of all, went to the garden in the person of God, and conversed with Adam. For the divine writing itself teaches us that Adam said that he had heard the voice. But what else is this voice but the Word of God, who is also His Son? Not as the poets and writers of myths talk of the sons of gods begotten from intercourse [with women], but as truth expounds, the Word, that always exists, residing within the heart of God. For before anything came into being He had Him as a counsellor, being His own mind and thought. But when God wished to make all that He determined on, He begot this Word, uttered, the first-born of all creation, not Himself being emptied of the Word [Reason], but having begotten Reason, and always conversing with His Reason. And hence the holy writings teach us, and all the spirit-bearing [inspired] men, one of whom, John, says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,” showing that at first God was alone, and the Word in Him. Then he says, “The Word was God; all things came into existence through Him; and apart from Him not one thing came into existence.” The Word, then, being God, and being naturally produced from God, whenever the Father of the universe wills, He sends Him to any place; and He, coming, is both heard and seen, being sent by Him, and is found in a place. Theophilus to Autolycus. Book II. Chapter XXII.-Why God is Said to Have Walked. (See Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 2)

[@RobertJones-et7gh]

Excellent video! Very well presented! Historically very accurate! As you said, It’s a fact that Arius represented the beliefs of a large number of Christians during that period of time, and not just some wild views promoted by only Arius himself. Those Christians who believed the same beliefs as Arius weren’t followers of Arius. He just represented the beliefs of those Christians. And the beliefs of Arians were very well supported by countless biblical scriptures that indicate how Jesus, although Devine, was subordinate to the father, and therefore less than the father. Jesus referred to the father as his God and that the father is greater than Jesus. Very clear, simple and direct language. Unfortunately, pagan Greco-Roman influences were taking root among those who debated against Arius and the so called “Arians.” These Greco-Roman influenced Christians, (also known as as Nicean Christians), eventually gained the approval and support of the Roman Emperors (who ironically used to be the persecutors of Christians). Eventually, over time, Nicean Christian’s snuffed out Arian orthodoxy, and demonized it in their writings. It is commonly acknowledged that history is rewritten by whoever wins. And that’s exactly what Nicean Christian’s did to Arian Christian’s, once nicean Christians got the upper hand by essentially getting in bed with the Roman emperors. Nicean Christians then appointed themselves as orthodoxy which became the Catholic denomination (with a capital “C” as opposed to catholic with a lowercase “c”), and then Eastern Orthodoxy, and then Protestantism. And it’s been that way for the past 17 hundred years, until recently when several smaller groups have come into existence who are non-trinitarian after doing a careful examination of scripture.

[@cunjoz]

what is interesting is it that if you follow eastern orthodox triadology to its logical conclusions, you can see that it still is subordinationist. only the Father is the unoriginated origin and he causes the Son and the Spirit

[@kuafer3687]

Having two divine beings that are not one is far more Greco-Roman than the Orthodox Trinity

[@Behemot_]

In Spain visigoths were arrians until 589 AD.

[@NoQuestionsAskedd]

They became Muslims later

[@aprendiz4]

​@@NoQuestionsAskedd Not many of them. At least not enough of them to resist being expelled from the Peninsula in the 1600s or 1700s

[@TrueBasque]

@@NoQuestionsAskedd First catholic, then the muslims came and the the catlholics again

[@mattjohnson9753]

An interesting consideration….when God manifested himself on earth as a burning plant, was the essence of God within the burning plant, and the plant just a vessel for God’s message to mankind? God, being all powerful, can clearly manifest Himself on earth in any manner He chooses, the vessel being a burning plant or the corpus of a human.

[@darealdovahkiin3652]

Arius was cooking

[@dmam412]

Arius was a spiritual bastard

[@bradonchristian6017]

He was right and the Romans hated it.

[@slartibartfast7921]

Love how many subscribers this chanel has.

[@jmpht854]

Maybe I missed a mention, but Nicaea being one of many regional councils called to discuss controversies of belief and/or praxis is also of note. It was the first imperially-convened/supervised council, but it was part of an existing practice to resolve conflicts.

[@whangadude]

I was raised as a Jehovahs Witness, and once when we were going door to door preaching someone said we were following the Arian heresy, I see now that yes, what the JWs believe about Jesus seems to match up perfectly.

[@cygnustsp]

Same here. If I were ever hit on the head really hard and believed in Jesus again I'd probably be a trinitarian. It resolves all of the inconsistent statements about Jesus and the holy Spirit. But I'm pretty sure the Christadelphians got the original christology right.

[@amc3463]

@@cygnustspcome back to Christ

[@amc3463]

JW false religion 😂

[@luisferreira7194]

Interesting to see a scholar meet theology with judgemental words such as "simply", or "just".

[@mattlisch8952]

From my non-Christian viewpoint, I find the arguments of Arianism far more compelling than those that would be considered orthodox after Nicea.

[@Robespierre-lI]

This is a fairly common response I've noticed amongst secular people who learn about this history. (I'm also secular.) It simply seems to fit Christians' own narratives and that of the Gospels better, right? It's already difficult to square the 3=1 concept of a monotheistic God. Then the gospels say God sent his son, which suggests that the son comes from the father. I'm guessing this is your thinking too? For me, what I see in this history is the Niceans having cognitive dissonance about the inherent contradictions between monotheism and the Trinity. To try to resolve that dissonance, they bear down hard on the "unity of the Trinity".

[@Urfavigbo]

​@@Robespierre-lIit's a fairly common response because many secular or non Christian people really love the idea that orthodoxy = bad. They're never gonna convert to the heterodox ideas of Christianity they agree with. They just really don't like Christianity.

[@aryaunderfoot2007]

Thank you! I'm Christian and I've always had a problem with the theology and politics around denouncing Arianism, yet the beliefs of "Arians" seem deliberately obscured by Christian Theology. I've even heard of his readmittance to the Orthodoxy as a result of him recanting his beliefs!

[@maverick7291]

Arius in making Jesus Christ less than what he is(aka God) removes the whole point of salvation through him. God is composed of these aspects and are not independent of it. Much like water can be steam, ice, and liquid . In the end it's still water. Now if you don't believe I'm a God with god like powers who is limitless in power and eternal then I can see how you would want God to act with the limits of our human imagination.

[@stantorren4400]

@@maverick7291God chose Moses for the 10 commandments and the Torah. Doesn’t make Moses a God.

[@angel19angel19]

Thanks!

[@LukeTheGreat1]

Its very hard to find unbiased explanations of Arianism, Thanks

[@Robespierre-lI]

Is it? Gosh. I learned about it from a simple encyclopedia.

[@lipingrahman6648]

I've always wondered that if there wasn't a proper clamp down on doctrine by the churches, Christianity might have simply formed a heterodoxy of loosely connected sects. Much like Hinduism or Buddhism is today. It makes Constantine's conversion probably the most important event in Christian and thus world history.

[@youknowitstrue3826]

@lipingraham6648 Definitely, that was how orthodoxy was achieved. But the real clamping down of heterodox sects was by Theodosius and the Edict of Thessalonica 381 AD.

[@chronikhiles]

I'd disagree that the traditions of Hinduism are loosely connected. Shiva and Shakti factor into Vaishnavism and Vishnu factors into Shaivism-Shaktism a good deal in literature and practice.

[@jeffreya.greene6999]

Constantine was NEVER Converted to Anything but Satanic Worship MURDERING Thousands of TRUE BELIEVERS to Establish his Religion of Both Old & New Covenants MIXED!!! WAKE UP!!!

[@Urfavigbo]

A lot of people would argue that Jesus's death and resurrection was the most important event in Christian history.

[@Urfavigbo]

It's also important to note that arianism was not the very first heresy the church had to root out. Even since the time of the Apostles. Paul had been condemning teachings. We know Iranaeus also spent his days condemning heresy. The point is, orthodoxy always triumphed

[@AtlantisWisdom]

Could you do a video about the Fathers of the Church?

[@martinkono2001]

Arian was right all the way till now with the phony trinity teaching. If you disagree read your bible. Jesus own words. My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14:10) I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.’ (John 5:30) ‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.’ (John 6:38) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John17:3) The Catholic Church (Babylon, the serpent of old) has deceived the whole world.

[@billhaddad6190]

Very informative and analysis of the subject. Thank you for the clarification.

[@CarlDalach-px4cj]

I'm new. Your work is fascinating. Thank you. You certainly cleared some misconceptions I had.

[@willbass2869]

Definitely a topic often too lightly discussed. Maybe a future video on how the pro & anti Arian factions struggled for position 👍

[@martinkono2001]

Arian was right all the way till now with the phony trinity teaching. If you disagree read your bible. Jesus own words. My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14:10) I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.’ (John 5:30) ‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.’ (John 6:38) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John17:3) The Catholic Church (Babylon, the serpent of old) has deceived the whole world.

[@Bruce-itsbruce]

I first heard about this controversy from Gore Vidal's book "Julian", set in a time when argument about homoousios vs homoiousios was still raging. Not that I'd recommend the book as a historical or theological reference ;-)

[@angela_merkeI]

Thank you for the video. Even back when I was officially Lutheran, Arianism always made the most sense to me. If I were held at gunpoint and forced to join/found a Christian denomiation, it would be Arianism (or Sethianism to be extra contrarian).

[@martinkono2001]

Arian was right all the way till now with the phony trinity teaching. If you disagree read your bible. Jesus own words. My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14:10) I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.’ (John 5:30) ‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.’ (John 6:38) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John17:3) The Catholic Church (Babylon, the serpent of old) has deceived the whole world.

[@chronic_daydreamer]

Fantastic job. Nice to see the history and context surrounding the situation explained a bit more and as you say, without the same polemic attitude that plagued the church at the time.

[@martinkono2001]

Arian was right all the way till now with the phony trinity teaching. If you disagree read your bible. Jesus own words. My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14:10) I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.’ (John 5:30) ‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.’ (John 6:38) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John17:3) The Catholic Church (Babylon, the serpent of old) has deceived the whole world.

[@chronic_daydreamer]

@@martinkono2001 I agree! The mental gymnastics required to twist Jesus’ words out of context in order to support it make it clear that the Trinity concept has no basis in reality. Instead it has everything to do with its roots in Babel as well as “traditions of men” where they put their traditions of apostate church councils above the authority of the Word of God.

[@MonkeyManJams165]

The most insane part to me is how this helps explain blue archive’s main story

[@jkbugout]

Arius actually held to the same kind of preexistence of Jesus as Paul of Samosata. Homoousios was used by Paul of Samosata to describe Jesus’ preexistence 50 years before Nicaea. It originally meant that Jesus was not outside of God before his birth, but only existed inside God, as in within the mind or plan of God. Homoousios was rejected around 275 AD by the bishops of Alexandria and Rome. Constantine was the first to recommend the term be added to the Nicene Creed. This was, contrary to popular opinion, in favor of Arius. However, this addition of homoousios prompted several other additions at Nicaea to the Creed which blatantly contradicted Arius’ beliefs. This is all thoroughly documented in the book Restoring the Biblical Christ: Is Jesus God?

[@forgetful9845]

Thanks for this, reading up on it seems that the "Party of Alexander" simply interpreted the term quite differently? Very interesting

[@Empiricist14]

Thank you so much for this great video, I only knew what catholic priests depict Arius as, a denier of the divinity of Christ. Thanks for the debunking

[@jerryshunk7152]

JEHOVAH 'S Witnesses have the Truth regarding the Nature of GOD !!! John 17:3 / Exodus 6: 2 & 3 KJV ~~`.

[@cahallo5964]

​@@jerryshunk7152yeah no you don't

[@jerryshunk7152]

@@cahallo5964 You got the scripts, time will tell ~ won't it !

[@fusion9619]

I'd like to know more about what crimes the church/empire committed against followers of Arianism. I'm new to this part of history, but in my recent studies of Orthodoxy I've noticed that they are vehemently anti-Arian, and I haven't heard a good explanation for why... What is clear to me is that there's bad blood between them, and that indicates that the Orthodox committed crimes against them. I could be wrong... Its a hunch... but it stinks of guilt.

[@Urfavigbo]

You can't possibly tell me that you don't understand why the orthodox did not like the Arians. The arians denied that the Son was consubstantial with the Father and that the Son was a created being. I'm sure you can see why the church would see this as heresy.

[@Urfavigbo]

Guilt? What could they possibly feel guilty for.

[@fusion9619]

@@Urfavigbo aaaaand that, that right there, is how I know the Orthodox church is NOT the true church. Pride... Hate in your speech. Willful ignorance - you could simply watch the video and see where you're wrong, or simply not assume the worst and be humble enough to think and respond thoughtfully. Always the same.

[@Urfavigbo]

@@fusion9619 did I tell you I was orthodox? Did someone not learn the difference between orthodoxy and the orthodox church?

[@Urfavigbo]

@@fusion9619 if someone is to deny a fundamental truth it would be an insult to faith to just agree to disagree with them. Is it pride or hate to say that the sky is blue not green? You're living in a world where everyone is right and there is no objective truth. And don't tell me you consider this video an actual intellectual source. He tried don't get me wrong, but you seriously can not debate on the controversy based on this video. Even he would not advice that. And how am I wrong? Did the video not say the Arians denied that Christ was of the same substance with the Father? Did the video not say that the Arians believe that there was a time Jesus was not? Whenever videos come out about other sects of Christianity you all are always so quick to praise it cause according to you guys, orthodoxy bad, heterodoxy good. It's just very anti Christian at least mainstream Christianity.

[@ahmedchaudhry4677]

Filip rules!!!! Love learning from you

[@marjae2767]

In the later 4th century, Basil of Ancyra and others were subordinationists in the pro-Nicaea camp, and based on Photius's epitome of Philostorgius I think Aetius may have been an anti-subordinationist in the anti-Nicaea camp. It would explain the "unlike" and "exactly alike" in Philostorgius 4:11-4:12.

[@عبدالله-ن6ه2ص]

I believe that Ibn Taymiyyah’s book criticizing Christianity, and Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah’s poem on asking the Christians are among the most famous criticisms of medieval Muslim scholars of the idea of ​​the Trinity doctrine among Christians.

[@Al-Azdi]

Fakhr Aldin Alrazi criticized it word by word doctrine by doctrine before them by more than 100 years

[@theguyver4934]

Just like biblical and historical evidence proves that jesus and his apostles were vegatarians biblical and historical evidence also proves that the trinity, atonement, original sin and hell are very late misinterpretations and are not supported by the early creed hence its not a part of Christianity I pray that Allah swt revives Christianity both inside and out preserves and protects it and makes its massage be witnessed by all people but at the right moment, place and time The secred text of the Bible says ye shall know them by their fruits So too that I say to my christian brothers and sisters be fruitful and multiply Best regards from a Muslim ( line of ismail )

[@Al-Azdi]

Also Albosiri critiqued the Christian theology in a longer, better poem then of Ibn alqayim, and before him by 100 years also.

[@sohrabroozbahani4700]

A huge misunderstanding i had about early Christianity just resolved by this video, thank you... On a lighter note... whoever is in charge of Christianity's intellectual rights should go to the court and sue Games Workshop for copyright infringement over the "Council of Nicea"...

[@martinkono2001]

Arian was right all the way till now with the phony trinity teaching. If you disagree read your bible. Jesus own words. My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28) Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. (John 14:10) I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me.’ (John 5:30) ‘For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.’ (John 6:38) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John17:3) The Catholic Church (Babylon, the serpent of old) has deceived the whole world.

[@sohrabroozbahani4700]

@@martinkono2001 oh... well, how to put it politely... I am an atheist, not an antitheist, no, I believe there is a god, with will power and effects on our lives, and laws to be upheld, and punishment to be handed out when disobeyed... BUT, a really big but to be honest, WE made him, and then we also made religion on top of that, and then the religion did what it was made to do, it focused and directed the collective will power of it subordinate people into a political force, and A Church ( for lack of a better term, may say temple, the central house and headquarters of an organised religion) does and says all required to take as much as possible and give back as little as possible... the best win for the RELIGION is the case when a devotee pitches in their dear life and receives nothing ( except the eternal blessing in his afterlife which is a very nontangible and questionable reward, we basically have no proof of it ) That particular matter is a distinctive tangent and I digress... My misunderstanding was, i thought Arian Christianity has something to do with Iranians/aryans for the while it was illegal to be Christian in Rome, but i was wrong...

[@Confessingjesuschrist]

I am going to be doing a pretty basic video of the Arian roots of Islam. It's so interesting how a heresy can give birth to such big problems. Apparently Muhammad met a Christian monk named Bahira, in Bosra who was an Arian that had doctrine of a future prophet. I think Islam is just an evolution of Arianism. Thank you!

[@themasterryu]

That story lacks credibility itself. This video very clearly states that the doctrine of the Trinity was developed over time, and shows some bits of evidence too. You know what that means, right? That means your doctrine (In the Nicene sense at least) is absolutely not scriptural and had to be developed over time through trial and error, and different levels of understandings. Islam is not Arianism, because Islam views Jesus as a preacher messiah which is much closer to what a historical Jesus would have been rather than these made up fairy tales about Jesus that you can't even trace back to Jesus with verification. Trinity developed, people didn't perceive the Trinity after reading the Bible from the very get go. Arian was doing a 1vsAll, damn Trinitarians.

[@partqfavor]

i think it's odd to call islam a "problem" islam has a much deeper history than that one interaction and islam already accepts a lot of stuff that could be considered christian doctrine. muhammad was neither christian or jewish, there seems to have been several other forms of monotheism present in his time and he had lots of other religious inspiration as well as his own thoughts. islam is just as interesting especially for its expansion on earlier concepts, and should be respected

[@maikilreategui1271]

​@viv4736 Nope they are a huge problem

[@noshtshrlk]

Also that theory has been debunked

[@TheRealThomasPaine1776]

​@@partqfavor it's been well documented that Muhammad desperately wanted to be accepted as a prophet by the Jews end the Christians but they both refused him, because they knew that he was false. His so-called visions came from someone who claimed to be Gabriel but was really just Satan, deceiving him. And of course Islam has down through the ages been a thorn in the side of man just like God said they would be, always murdering and torturing and enslaving people, subjugating women and involving in pedophilia in child sex trafficking. Definitely not anything related to Arianism.

[@94Maximos]

Arius believed in polytheism because he argued that if the son is not of the same substance as the father, but is somehow divine, then this would imply the existence of a second God. Therefore, Arius can be considered a polytheist.

[@mango2005]

Unless its a human created by God but Im not sure that was exactly Arius view. Does a Father who is a God with a demi-god for a son count as Polytheism?

[@Danielqu976]

​@@mango2005aruis doesn't believe Jesus is purely human. What are you talking about?

[@zombyninja2576]

I love this. As a protestant, i learned very little of early church history growing up or even as an adult in church

[@asliketheson]

That’s on you !

[@BruceWSims]

As a Muslim examining the first millennia of the Christian Church, I have, so far, discerned that much of the Church doctrine has less to do with who was right or who was wrong. The sense I get is that the "last doctrine standing".....as it were......was what Christians were left to believe. FWIW.

[@faustusliviuspraetextatus6773]

Well this basically is how all religion is formed if we look at them from a historical perspective.

[@geo-mj4gb]

last doctrine standing is the right one. For these are the words Matthew 16:18 "And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it." The church will always survive like she always have, not because man, but he, who is above all, protects her.

[@phil669]

This video hits to the heart of my own faith . Arius"s view seems to be what I feel is true and makes most sense to me . Thanks for covering this topic .

[@nomnombr]

Either what he says is true or false. And what he says is, commonly agreed and verifiably, false.

[@arbitrarium7336]

Why should God make sense if he is beyond our understanding ?

[@jagpro91]

​@@nomnombrEither your comment is true or false. And what your comment says is false.

[@jagpro91]

​@@arbitrarium7336If God is so far beyond understanding that he's not supposed to make sense, then Christianity should be completely abandoned as a religion because the Church and the Bible make explicit and exclusive truth claims that God does make sense and told us how we're supposed to live. Christianity as a religion is literally based on God making enough sense that he can guide our lives and afterlives. If you're arguing against the validity of Christianity as a whole then your comment makes sense, but if you're arguing for Trinitarian Christianity against Arianism then you need to actually think before posting comments that were poorly thought through.

[@nomnombr]

@@jagpro91 Reread my comment, edited for clarification sake

[@AbbyWulf-bw1kg]

I love your video's! The designation Arryan has me somewhat confused, one tends to think of the nazi party as Arryan's, but now we learn there was a cleric named Arrius that started an Arryan movement and then there are theories about a civilization that started north of Iran and did not come out of Africa changing the idea all humans began there. Can you help me understand this? Thanks!

[@decoboco222]

Arianism (with an 'i') and Aryanism (with a 'y') are different things that have unfortunately similar names. Arianism, named after Arius, is the theological position that the Son is subordinate to the Father and is what this video is about. Aryanism, named after the Aryan people of northern India, is a pseudoscientific belief in the genetic superiority (whatever that means) of people with blond hair.

[@chronikhiles]

These are two coincidentally similar sounding concepts that have nothing to do with each other. Arianism is the Christian heresy mentioned in this video. Aryanism is the European racist philosophy that appropriated its name from the Indo-Aryan ethnic peoples of Iran and northern India, who themselves did not profess racial superiority in any way.

[@SerdarGrube]

Thanks for clearing that up.

[@Wully-xw3rb]

Arian is a pejorative term for someone who believes that the Son is subordinate to the Father, and comes from a historical priest named Arius who believed just that. Aryan is an archaic synonym for Indo-European and comes from a group that lived just north of modern day Afghanistan and who invaded India.

[@bobbykiefer4306]

Aryans are an Indo-European people, Arians are a religious group. There might be some ethnoreligious link, since Europeans did know of the Aryan tribe.

[@aaradhakananda]

Very good episode. Please also do one on the life of St Nicholas, who was said to be at this council. Also about the discussians they had in there on the spiritual nature of Mother Mary. And...do more on Sanatan Dharma philosophy and forms of Vedanta😊

[@stephenolan5539]

It is also said that Santa Claus (as he is now known) punched out someone.

[@aaradhakananda]

Because they offended Mary. Then she appeared to him in jail and gave Him back the bishop garments that were taken from him

[@Urfavigbo]

Did they talk about Mary at Nicea or was it at Ephesus?

[@Alejandro-te2nt]

Which version of historical christianity would Muslims say is the most correct at least for the time before Islam's revelation as such? Is there a historiography of the correct teaching of Sayyidina Issa (as) being carried on and eventually suppressed by deviants from Tawhīd?

[@LetsTalkReligion]

There isn't really any evidence for an early Christian group that looked at Jesus the way Muslims do. The closest I guess would be the Ebionites, but there are signigicant differences there too.

[@zonehd3433]

From my knowledge Arius way of thinking/the Anti-Nicean way, is the closest to Muslim way of thinking about Jesus and God. Atleast Arius thinking in 18:43 is closest to the Islamic view. He even said the Sura Al-Ikhlas of the Quran in that extract (at a time before the Quran was revealed I might add). But I am open for different opinions. 😊

[@zonehd3433]

Many Muslims even say: „Say, He is Allah, The One, (Surah 112 Al-Ikhlas) equals a third of the Qur'an“ so with that Sura alone you are already very close to what Muslims believe.

[@nazwannazrun7579]

arianism is the closest to what muslim believe, but since in the video it came to light that arius still consider jesus divine although not to the level of the father, i believe among muslim, perhaps those of gnostic tradition in sufi tarekat has that exact same definition. my thought is in old, new & last testament, all the prophets of god from Adam a.s to Muhammad s.a.w preach monotheistic version of the father, not son nor holy spirit that share that same divineness as per nicean creed, something must have went bad at the nicean council since logically speaking their conclusion of what god is differ so much from what jesus taught. It cant be that all the prophets (jesus included) taught one thing, i.e monotheistic, and then a group of learned scholars/'saints'/non-prophets came up with non-monotheistic concept in the form of trinity. Surely, something sinister is happening back then. Or adapting to how the roman pagan religion works is the easiest way to convert the whole empire to trinity form of christianity without much backlash

[@AveChristusRex789]

The Arian view is absolutely anti-Islam, in fact there is no Christian view pre-Muhammed that really resembled the Islamic view of Jesus at all! According to Arius, God created the entirety of the heavens and the earth and all that exists within them by the agency of Christ, Christ was the begotten Son of God, Christ was crucified, Christ was resurrected, etc,. Arius was a heretic for sure, but nothing that he claimed was Islamic by any stretch

[@HerveyShmervy]

​let me guess, the reason why this is being posted now is because Santa Claus punched him 🤣

[@SirBoggins]

BASED ST. NICHOLAS?!!!!

[@PUARockstar]

​@@SirBoggins exactly

[@SirBoggins]

@@PUARockstar Merry Xmas BTW!

[@TheOneCalledSloth]

Well, that's the story anyway, but Arius wasn't at the council where he was supposedly punched.

[@PUARockstar]

@@SirBoggins to you as well!