The Forgotten Meaning of Jesus' Resurrection

[@briansimons9472]

Absolutely spot on. The first Christians believed they were in the midst of the "Apocalypse". Along with the acceptance of resurrection, Charismata also assured believers that the kingdom was arriving.

[@scambammer6102]

well you see all the things he predicted really happened, they just didn't change anything [sad trombone]

[@corwin32]

I like the term "evangelical industrial complex". Neat turn of phrase.

[@kamilgregor]

Someone has been watching Nathan Ormond

[@ritawing1064]

It's been a useful concept since Eisenhower talked about the "military industrial complex" in 1961. We do well to realise that capitalist systems are primarily interested in retaining power by fomenting created needs to which ever-expanding industries can pander. See Theoore Adorno, passim. This applies to state-sponsored religions, too.

[@aaronbarreguin.4211]

I don’t like it. It’s like saying skeptic academia.

[@chriswest8389]

Yes. I recently, independently, came up with the same term. Great minds think alike. Lol.

[@mattr.1887]

Former Christian here but I think it's kind of a lame term.

[@trina2100]

Lovely explanation. Densely packed but clear and to the point.

[@Skymannot6939]

I’m came across your channel from mythvision I’m glad I did, great content and well presented 👍

[@ben-theamateurexegete6747]

Well said! Another excellent video. Please keep at it!

[@TBrewer64]

The Second Coming never actually has to happen. The important thing is that the STORY that it's going to happen must continue, in order to motivate believers.

[@DeconvertedMan]

I do not know what they believed back then, nor do I personally care much - as its all just faith based, but why modern believers do not do the research is most likely because its hard and, if they did it - it would disprove some idea they hold to.

[@Ujasoncook9267]

Indoctrination in a religion is very real. Fortunately, as time marches on, people exposed to how to be more analytical regarding such things are becoming more common. The internet and availability of scholarly information is reducing the numbers of religious.

[@aaronbarreguin.4211]

We do. The hard thing about research is we just don’t know… 11:16 “with out 2000 years of Delay I think it is say to say they are wrong….what ever they experienced is a myth” How can he make claims without being there? so either you read books that affirm your faith or ones that deconstruct it. There isn’t a happy medium.

[@DeconvertedMan]

@@aaronbarreguin.4211 we dont know what they beleved. Doesn't matter if it happened yesterday we know its a myth because supernatural events are not a thing that has been ever shown to BE a thing. Why bother with faith - facts are much better. You can have faith about anything, but you can only have facts about true things.

[@AdrienMelody]

Your mention of Paul’s advice to the church against trying to change their living situations made me stop and think 😆 Looking back, I remember listening to my parents read Paul’s epistles. My mother explained to me that the early church mistakenly believed Jesus was returning right away. In retrospect, I wonder how that didn’t cause me to doubt the authority of the entire book! 😂 It really starts to seem like the Bible is outdated and not as special as we’ve always made it out to be.

[@davidkemball-cook559]

Yes, and Jesus also believed it (according to Mark 9 and 13 etc). Like you, I wonder why it did not make me doubt immediately the truthfulness of the Bible.

[@davidlopez-flores1147]

I’m a Christian, and tbh you’re my favorite non-Christian on this platform. Very well read and informed.

[@clouds-rb9xt]

Do NOT be tricked.

[@davidminor1483]

Well why not dawg?

[@CandyThePuppy]

I like seeing the other POV too, man. 👍

[@Richard_Nickerson]

​@@clouds-rb9xt Oh?

[@Richard_Nickerson]

You consume content that proves your religion is nothing as intended and has been disproved many times over millennia, yet you continue to practice that religion? This isn't a flex, this is an admission of mental illness.

[@RandyAndy7373]

Great explanations. Thx😊

[@hypergraphic]

Great video, you make so many cogent points here.

[@kingofsalem]

Thank you Matt. Very cool

[@fernandoperegringutierrez4254]

I believe that to understand the meaning of the need to create the legend of the resurrection of Jesus, it had a lot to do with two essential characteristics of the new Jewish movement: its Messianic character and its reliance on prophecies to prove its truth. As a consequence, we see again and again how in the NT Jesus is identified with the Messiah. Where it is absolutely clear is in Matthew 16:13-17, where Jesus confirms what Peter thought of him: "Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” When Jesus confirms it, he does so in a way that leaves no doubt: "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven." A divine Revelation cannot be questioned. When does atonement enter Christianity to replace messianism? Through the Hellenized Paul. For example: "Because first of all I transmitted to you what I myself received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he rose again the third day according to the Scriptures." Because first of all I transmitted to you what I myself received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he rose again on the third day according to the Scriptures. We see in this paragraph from 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 the enormous importance that the prophecies of the Scriptures had for the early Christian. Therefore, to continue maintaining the messianic-prophetic movement, the resurrection of Jesus on the third day was essential. Note the important change that occurred among the early Christians between messianism and the vicarious death of Jesus. In the Hebrew tradition the possibility of substitutionary atonement is hardly considered; instead, it was much more accepted and well known in Greco-Roman culture. Hence the radical change of direction of the meaning of Jesus, was little by little accepted. It is also possible that Paul's pragmatism soon led him to discard the Jewish metaphysics of the earthly messiah as unfeasible and he decided to create his own worldview from which to give meaning to the life of Jesus. I think we'll never know

[@davidminor1483]

I left my religion at the end of 200neverteen and I have seen way too much not to believe in God. But I got mad respect fo yo carful thinking

[@kamilgregor]

I'd offer a small correction - I'd say Paul is advising his congregation to stay as they are not because doing things like getting married or seeking release from slavery are a waste of time. Rather, he instructs them not to do these things to avoid getting into situations when one falls into sin - for example, it's possible to live start a new relationship without slipping into sexual sin, but why risk it in the first place? It's better to "sit out" the remainder of the (short) time and not even seek a partner. I think this is also key to understanding various Gospel passages which seem extreme at a first glace: "If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away; it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to be thrown into hell." This is of course not meant to be taken literally, but not how this is usually interpreted today - it's not only about making an effort to deny oneself but also about being willing to suffer harm (or even inflict harm on oneself) to avoid the risk of sinning because the remainder of the time is short. "Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also." Really, not even in self-defense? Well, no - it's better to suffer harm (even extreme harn to a point of death) than fight back and risk it will get out of hand and lead to sinful behaviour. Also, providing an apologetic for the unfulfilled expectation of the imminent end of the age is the entire reason why 2 Peter was written - "Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since our ancestors died, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation!" People wouldn't complain about the end of the age not coming already if they were not expecting it in the first place. In a typical manner of rhetorical subversion, the letter turns this right back at the scoffers by claiming that (1) the existence of the scoffers is itself one of the signs of the immidiate end of the age, (2) God is actually postponing the end precisely because in his mercy, he's giving these scoffers extra time to repent. * chef's kiss *

[@chillydoritos7304]

@Kamil Gregor yes, exactly! It's all about self-control. Hartke is looking to deep into things, and taking the words to literally. And another thing. He's absolutely right about 1st Century Christians feeling like the end is immanent. EVERYONE from EVERY generation feels like they're living in the end times, right? And, in a way, they are. But the 1st Century Christians feeling that way doesn't disprove Christianity. Christians are not perfect. No human is. EVERY one of us is restricted by our imperfections, our ignorance, our limited human perspectives. None of that is God's fault, and none of this is inherently bad or wrong. We're all victims of our own imperfections and ignorances, and becoming a Christian doesn't magically fix all that, not even for the most inspired Bible writer(for example, Paul).

[@Ujasoncook9267]

When you consider some of the letters addressing the lack of an apocalypse may have been "edited" by Polycarp or somebody else add a high five to the chef's kiss.

[@chillydoritos7304]

@@Ujasoncook9267 Huh? Can you explain what you mean by that, if you would?

[@Ujasoncook9267]

@@chillydoritos7304 There are some scholars that think Polycarp may have done some creative writing in regards to some of the Gospels and epistles. I don't think there is any definite proof of it, but they note it is odd how his theology is confirmed by different authors.

[@chillydoritos7304]

@@Ujasoncook9267 So what would be the implications of such a notion happens to be true? Of you don't mind relating.

[@DavidLaFerney]

I had always assumed (because It has kinda been implied) that the gospels were the first New Testament texts that were written. The falsity of that is really significant to me.

[@scienceexplains302]

That means you’re paying attention 😊. In probably the oldest surviving Christian document, 1 Thessalonians, Paul is trying to explain why Jesus hasn’t come back yet - because apparently people were expecting him to have already returned

[@mikeq5807]

Former Catholic and Assembly of God member, I left religion in 1980. We each go through suffering, death, resurrection and ascension. Death and birth are two sides of one coin. I go through less suffering as I grow in wisdom. Life constantly is changing, and change is how death of one and birth of the other is expressed. I rise into a new dynamic, leaving behind the old, what has passed away. I ascend as I go from the coarser paradigms to the more subtle paradigms, which is the essence of spiritual evolution, transcendence. And to where? To heaven, the state of being or consciousness of perfect oneness, from which flows love, compassion, peace.

[@DutchJoan]

There is only one place where heaven can be found i m o, and that is within oneself, within the individual. There is no place outside, no realm or circumstance that harbours it.

[@mikeq5807]

@@DutchJoan You are the portal into the depths of consciousness. The whole process I described plays out within oneself.

[@Ujasoncook9267]

I looked at some research regarding experiences of people on dmt. The people involved had some interesting insights, and most seem to think there is something or some place else, and they generally described it in the same way. Kind of weird.

[@mikeq5807]

@@Ujasoncook9267 Well, drugs are not what I am talking about. Those people are on a trip. I am speaking of insights by way of earnest, thoughtful introspection.

[@chillydoritos7304]

@@mikeq5807 Ha, psychedelics. I also don't believe those bring you closer to the transcendent.

[@ranilodicen4460]

Beautifuly explained..

[@Trex100]

Great work here.

[@drsHJ2]

An accurate interpretation of expectations in early Christianity, although I myself would not judge the changing interpretations through the ages too harshly. Thinking in terms of being either factually right or wrong, and expectations being either literally fulfilled or failing, seems rather literalistic to me. These stories are literature, not science books. Never mind what 'really' happened: if a story can inspire people, and give them meaning, purpose an direction in life and comfort in the face of death, it works for them. Since every generation will have its own unique questions and challenges, the meaning of the story will change constantly. So what? I can live with knowing that the first readers believed other things than I do. My real issue 😂 with this video is the way the German word 'Naherwartung' (=expectation that the end is near) is pronounced in it. It is a compound of the words 'nah' (=near) and 'Erwartung' (=expectation), so it has 4 syllables, with the main stress on 'nah': Náh-er-war-tung. Just thought I'd mention it. 😅

[@MatthewHartke]

Hey thanks for helping out on that pronunciation! I remember when making this I couldn’t find any audio of the word so I just gave it my best guess 😅

[@Dr_Wrong]

Except _"if a story can inspire people, and give them meaning, purpose an direction in life and comfort in the face of"_ themselves gleefully murdering everyone else and gRaping their littlest children, then, yay? Some of us aren't super thrilled by four thousand continuous years of this behavior.

[@drsHJ2]

@@Dr_Wrong Apart from the fact that i find it a bit of a stretch to define the entirety of Jews and Christians as a bunch of berzerkers, intent on killing everyone else, raping their children as a matter of habit and defending all this straight from Scripture, your point as such is well taken: Inspirational literature can of course be interpreted in any number of ways, including some pretty gruesome ones. This however does not disqualify all those millions of kind and decent people who find comfort, inspiration and an incentive to be kind and loving to others, in these scriptures. As for the question of how to tell the difference: We still need to judge our actions based on our own conscience and human common sense. The bible, imho, can be an inspiration for morality, it may present some moral food for thought, but is not morality's ultimate source. All I meant in my first post, is that finding new interpretations for biblical stories when these can no longer be interpreted in a literal, historical way, is not in itself fraudulent, deceitful or worthless. It is simply what happens with all works of literature that have meaning to people.

[@laserbera19]

Evangelical Industrial Complex... that's heavy

[@Cat_Woods]

Good video. I agree with you about the shift you describe in the meaning of the resurrection. One thing I don't understand is why you assume a sayings tradition. If there were a sayings tradition between 30s and 70s when gospels were written, Paul should know about it. Yet he never quotes Jesus except from his own visions and knows nothing at all about Jesus' supposed biography (mother, father, Pilate, disciples, teaching ministry, Judas). The alternate explanation -- that the author of Mark used the letters of Paul when writing his gospel -- should be given at least as much credence.

[@scambammer6102]

either way it is a "sayings tradition". Unless Paul just made it up, he was relying on a "sayings tradition".

[@Cat_Woods]

@@scambammer6102 Well, he flat out tells us he made it up. That is, his subconscious made it up. He says he got it directly from his vision of Jesus, not from a tradition handed down by other people.

[@scambammer6102]

@@Cat_Woods Obviously that's a lie. For one thing, Paul also says that he persecuted Christians before he even had that vision, so he obviously knew about Christians from other sources. Also, unless you think that Paul really had a supernatural visit from Jesus (he didn't), he could not have gained any new information from his vision. The reason Paul made the comment you reference was to claim independent authority from the other church leaders who he disagreed with. You have to approach ALL of Paul's writings with skepticism, not just the parts you disagree with.

[@Cat_Woods]

@@scambammer6102 He literally says he got this info from the Lord directly, not from other people. He knows nothing of Mary or Pontius Pilate or Lazarus or any of the miracle stories or the disciples (he only knows apostles, which includes himself, people who have had visions of the Lord). So nothing was in this supposed "sayings tradition" that he never mentions and specifically says was not the source of his info.

[@scambammer6102]

@@Cat_Woods I know what Paul said. He was lying, obviously. Since you didn't acknowledge or address the reasons I stated for drawing this inference, I assume that you will just continue to believe whatever you want, regardless of its validity. You are also making unwarranted assumptions about what Paul knew or didn't know. I have seen these cherry-picked arguments from mythicists before. You (supposedly) believe Paul when he says he received his info directly from Jesus (you don't really believe that), but you do not believe Paul when he says that he persecuted Christians before he had his alleged vision. You cherry-pick evidence and inferences to support your pre-conceived conclusion, just like theists do.

[@swolejeezy2603]

Amazing video

[@Greyz174]

Doesnt Jesus set the people up for a delay between his death and return when he talks about wars and rumors of wars and false teachers coming in his name?

[@scambammer6102]

sure, by the time Matthew was written it was obvious that the initial expectations wouldn't happen. That's part of the recharacterization he talks about.

[@Greyz174]

@@scambammer6102 if it's the case that people were recalibrating the message at that point, why leave in the part about how this generation will see everything, of it actually does mean "the people living in 30 AD?"

[@scambammer6102]

@@Greyz174 lots of possibilities: (1) they still thought it would happen soon; (2) it's in a prior text and they didn't want to delete it, either because they thought it was sacred, they didn't notice the contradiction, or they were just lazy. The reasons are speculation. What isn't speculation is that the earliest texts speak of an imminent return and resurrection, which gradually becomes more remote as it didn't occur. Just like it says in the video.

[@Greyz174]

@@scambammer6102 so they intentionally added a later reinterpretation to delay the return, but in that same speech left in the end part about "this is all going to happen and be done within the next 20-30 maybe 40 years"?

[@donnievance1942]

@@Greyz174 They didn't "leave in" the earlier texts foretelling an imminent return-- those texts were already established and disseminated. The people who wrote those texts were not the same people who wrote the later re-interpretations.

[@maghercushag1902]

What about all those resurrected in Matthew 32:52? Nothing recorded by the Romans or Hebrews about these people and their new lives.

[@billytalty]

What do you make of Matthew 27:53? I assume Matthew is post-pauline and post mark sources. So, how did this little guy slip through?

[@scambammer6102]

slip through? "Mark" did exactly what the video described. Recharacterizing the resurrection as a future event. By then it was obvious that the prediction of imminent resurrection was wrong.

[@awdat]

3:21 Completely wrong, they had already entered the kingdom of heaven. Check out *Colossians 1:13* _"He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son"_ and *Matthew 23:13* _"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men’s faces. You yourselves do not _*_enter_*_ , nor will you let in those who wish to _*_enter._* and *John 3:5* _"no one can _*_enter_*_ the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit"_ and *Ephesians 2:6* _God raised us up with Christ and seated us with Him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus_

[@scambammer6102]

none of that contradicts what he said

[@kostpap3554]

I have some issues with the quotations used. First, let's go with The passage from Corinthians. "But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the beggining of those who have fallen asleep." The following two verses go "For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive" It is clear Adam's death caused the death of all, and Christ antithesised as the one to reverse the situation. Paul is indeed linking the ressurection of Jesus with the general ressurection, but not in terms of a time series. Rather, he is linking the two events by a cause and effect relationship. So if we apply the logic of 1st Corinthians to 1st Thessalonicans, the same argument may be made. I too think that Paul probably thought the end was imminant, but he makes a different argument, in fact making the ressurection not just the herald of the general ressurection, but the catalyst that turns death into life, essencially. Second, lets see Mark 9:1 "And He said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you that there are some standing here who will not taste death till they see the kingdom of God having come with power.” Whats the immediate context? We see it in the next verse "And after six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John, and led them up on a high mountain apart by themselves; and He was transfigured before them." So the immediate context of the phrase is the transfiguration, not the parousia. Now regardless of what exactly the phrase "kingdom of God" means, it certainly has something to do with Jesus appearing in Divine glory. Well that's exactly what happens at the transfiguration. I am not saying the text can't be read otherwise, but that's the primary focus. The only passage that has a primary focus on escatology is indeed mark 13: "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place." But even there there are two issues. the first is that the "this generation" can be either the listeners of Jesus, or the ones witnessing the events (the grammar allows for both). The second is the "desolation of the desert" thing, which is a quotation (which the reader is expected to know, hence the -let the reader understand-) from daniel 9: 25-27 "Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the command. To restore and build Jerusalem, until Messiah the Prince. There shall be seven ‘sevens‘ and sixty-two ‘sevens‘; and the street and the wall shall be built again, and there shall be times of trouble. And after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah shall be cut off, and there shall be no blame in Him; And the people of the prince who is to come the city and the temple shall be destroyed. The end of it shall be with a flood, And till the end of the war desolations are determined. He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up the abomination of desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him." Now that text is a mess, but there are some interesing aspects of it. First, before the "prince that is to come" arrives, the temple is destroyed along with the city. Then after this prince comes "he will put an end to my sacrifices and offerings" and then place the desolation inside the temple (probably some idol or cultic image). Gegardless of who this prince might be, the texts seems to suggest that the temple is destroyed before he enters the scene, then it is rebuilt and used to God (the "my" in the text) with a fuzzy time space between the two events, and then the desolation is set on the temple, and all else being speculation. I don't know what the early christians thought regarding the eschaton, but I don't think we can safely infer their belief from this specific passage+quotation/hyperlink thing done in Mark.

[@scambammer6102]

You don't need that many words to explain a short quote from Paul. I can read it as well as you can, at least.

[@kostpap3554]

@@scambammer6102 Context matters, and its more often than not the missing element in such discussions.

[@scambammer6102]

@@kostpap3554 you aren’ giving context you just typed a wall of BS to try and change the obvious meaning of the words AND context.

[@kostpap3554]

@@scambammer6102 If a text is giving you referrence notes, you are expected to follow them. When a piece of writing is extracted from a text, the surrounding phrases are needed to give context. When the original text is in another language, it has to be examined as well. That's what I did, essencially. If you don't like that, fine. But that's what correct epistemology requires.

[@scambammer6102]

@@kostpap3554 I can read the surrounding phrases as well as you can. You didn’t provide any useful information. All you did is give your “interpretation” of biblical verses that is inconsistent with the obvious meaning of the words. Theists do this all the time when you don’t like the language in your sacred text. You can fool yourself but you can’t fool me. Also you apparently don’t know what “epistemology” means because you misuse it in your comment.

[@awdat]

8:47 No, it was the already experienced resurrection (transformation of their spirit) that guaranteed the next resurrection (transformation of their body) Check out *Romans 8:11* _"If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you."_

[@scambammer6102]

lol obviously you don't understand what you typed. "will also give life to your mortal bodies"

[@mrlearningscholar4078]

In Catholicism we believe we go to the afterlife but when Jesus returns we are thrust from heaven down to earth to our old bodies and are resurrected in the body. To be in Christ's kingdom on earth.

[@johnramirez3247]

I've seen a video that says "going to heaven" after death isn't biblical at all and only the early church (medieval era) developed this theology. The video says that when you die, you would just be dead (asleep) and you would be resurrected in his second coming (that's the first resurrection), of course if you believed and had accepted him before you died. This is the link btw: kzbin.info/www/bejne/amPKh36wrdKtf7c

[@danielmalinen6337]

But many secular scholars, such as Bart Ehrman, say that the early Jwish-Christians first believed in spiritual resurrection and the bodily resurrection is just a later developed fiction and literary production that originates from the influence of the surrounding cultures and people’s imagination.

[@scambammer6102]

That's not close to what Bart Ehrman says. Ehrman basically agrees with this video. It is very obvious that Paul envisioned a bodily resurrection.

[@timd3895]

10:20 The earliest Gospel of Mark already said all the disciples would die. Mark 9:1 ESV And he said to them, "Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death *_until_* they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power." Peter himself interprets this as fulfilled in the transfiguration 👇 and likewise all 3 Gospels place it immediately before the transfiguration. 2 Peter 1:16-18 ESV For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. [17] For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased," [18] we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. Which means it was very clear to the disciples that they *_would_* taste death *_after_* the transfiguration. And Peter's letter is 64-67 AD so it's not "late" don't group it with John.

[@JR-lz4bz]

What is your source for dating 2 Peter so early? Critical scholars tend to date it much later than the 60s and believe it is pseudiepigrapha to boot.

[@timd3895]

@@JR-lz4bz Peter died 64 - 68 AD so that's the latest possible date

[@timd3895]

@@JR-lz4bz Source is ESV Study Bible 👇 Date Peter probably wrote this letter from Rome not too long before his martyrdom, sometime during A.D. 64-67. Elements within the letter lead many scholars to conclude that Peter wrote during a time of persecution by Rome (perhaps during the persecution by Nero, who died in A.D. 68), *_while Peter himself was in a Roman prison awaiting imminent execution (cf. _**_1:12_**_-15). The dating of the letter, then, depends largely on the dating of Peter’s death._*

[@JR-lz4bz]

@@timd3895 like i said though, critical scholars tend to think it's pseudiepigraphic i.e essentially a forgery, likely composed around 125 AD.

[@JR-lz4bz]

@@timd3895 2 Peter is widely considered to be pseudiepigraphic by critical scholars though. They date it to the early second century AD

[@mr.t957]

Interesting and informative video. Yes the disciples didn't fully understand the immediate message of Jesus. But through a language they understood translated an experience of; awaking, onesness, non-duality and heaven on earth to all nations. The New Testament is not a history text book but writings of real people who experienced a man name Jesus and his amazing teaching and events while living on earth. Peace be with you all. 🙏

[@LakeWebb]

Wholes truth won Observances perfection One's rut own An other's doubt End lessly holes Mourn ever last Now'n ever more

[@briansimons9472]

It is interesting that in Islamic tradition Muhammad talks about the coming of "the hour" (cf John's Gospel) and speaks of this hour when the end would come and the Last Judgement take place. He was wrong too, which shows he was not a prophet.

[@scambammer6102]

prophet = con man

[@valeried7210]

How could we even come up with the idea of inaugurated eschatology if they didn't write that way? We are supposed to live in the "already, not yet" even in terms of the kingdom and the eschaton and always be ready for the bridegroom even if he delays...I bet John wrote that, right? I just think this line of reasoning is meh.

[@ChildofGod98765]

Thank you for this video. I needed this. Please pray for me. I’m suffering with my two autistic children I’m desperately trying to provide I lost my job due to not wanting the vaccine and because of my failing health I recently had a heart attack I have been struggling since.

[@DeconvertedMan]

Prayer will not change things - only you can. Get the vax. Get a job. Take care of your health. If you can not take care of the kids, find someone who will. Its not going to be emotionally easy to do but if its the right thing to do - then do it.

[@JM-ot8ux]

@@DeconvertedMan I think it's a disguised money beg.

[@scambammer6102]

@@JM-ot8ux disguised?

[@JM-ot8ux]

@@scambammer6102 Point taken.

[@CandyThePuppy]

🙏

[@shecklesmack9563]

I mean this whole notion that there was all kinds of magic and exciting events happening and then God would be completely silent for *thousands of years* until he randomly decided to start all the fun again is silly. It all does read like events that should’ve occurred long ago if they were ever going to.

[@GAZDAGP]

How come this was recorded in 1952 though?

[@awdat]

11:34 Not the end of history but the end of the Jewish age, that really took place in their generation. There was no delay, they really experienced the last days of the Jewish age.

[@scambammer6102]

there never was a "Jewish age" and there are still Jews alive today, so your reinterpretation is nonsense.

[@awdat]

​@@scambammer6102 The destruction of Judea, Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple was the end of the Jewish age.

[@scambammer6102]

@@awdat Well it wasn't much of a "Jewish Age". At their height, the Jews controlled a small section of the Levant. The Romans sure didn't call it the "Jewish Age".

[@awdat]

@@scambammer6102 Who cares what it was for the Romans. For the Jews it was the grand final.

[@scambammer6102]

@@awdat so now you are changing the words "grand final" lol

[@awdat]

3:51 Completely wrong, they had already experienced one resurrection (transformation of the spirit) and awaited the next resurrection (transformation of the body) Check out *Philippians 3:21* _"Jesus Christ who will _*_transform our lowly body_*_ to be like his glorious body"_ and *Romans 8:23* _"we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, _*_the redemption of our bodies"_*

[@scambammer6102]

the quote does not support your assertion. nothing in there says "they had already experienced one resurrection"

[@awdat]

​@@scambammer6102 Check out *Ephesians 2:6* _"God raised us up with Christ and seated us with Him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus"_

[@scambammer6102]

@@awdat the realms are heavenly the bodies aren't. Read. Better.

[@awdat]

@@scambammer6102 _"God raised us up with Christ"_ = We were resurrected with Christ. Check out *Romans 6:5* _For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his_ *The picture is completely clear, the awaited resurrection has begun and they are a part of it.*

[@scambammer6102]

@@awdat you keep quoting verses that don't support your argument "raised us up with Christ" =/= spiritual resurrection. Quite the opposite. Jesus was resurrected BODILY, according to Paul. That's the part you're not getting.

[@KLRyogaprivate]

Jerusalem fell did it not?

[@AdamRTNewman]

I believe you’re muddling the *fundamental meaning/purpose* of the resurrection with *natural ways of interpreting things* that may have accompanied the resurrection. It’s possible for scripture to be infallible, while some instinctive interpretations of scripture may be fallible. Christians should rightly have this sense that since the time of Jesus’ coming, the world is in its last age, but this isn’t a promise of a certain numerical upper bound on the number of years from Jesus’ resurrection to His second coming. I know you did briefly bring up part of 1 Peter 3, but perhaps you should start considering the possible truth of that chapter more seriously.

[@clarktaylor8729]

Have you read Richard Rohr’s Universal Christ. Your thesis in the video is in the bounds of his book.

[@thschear]

It doesn't matter. There is no evidence that this jesus-person raised from the dead. If he did, didn't a whole bunch of people resurrect from the dead at the same time? Why is there no mention of it anywhere other than in the one gospel? When faced with a miracle claim it is best to start with mundane explanations first.

[@scienceexplains302]

@11:02 *Reinterpretation* is older than the Christian Bible. Daniel comes to mind first.

[@scambammer6102]

there are 2 distinct creation stories in Genesis

[@scienceexplains302]

@@scambammer6102 Genesis 1-2:3b could be considered a partial reinterpretation of Enuma Elish

[@martinecheverria5968]

Doesn't the expectation of Jesus coming back within that generation mean that the gospels were written early?

[@DutchJoan]

Not necessarily. I think that the Torah sufficed in the beginning. The story of Jesus was based on references to the existing expectation of the Messiah.

[@scambammer6102]

No it means they were copying Paul. And as the video pointed out, as time passed, the gospels recharacterized the resurrection as a more distant event. By 80 AD the Jews had lost another war and Rome wasn't going anywhere.

[@scienceexplains302]

Martin Echeverria, One might think so, but “Matthew” wrote about Jesus’ prophecy to Caiaphas, which failed in 36 CE when Caiaphas died. I don’t know why Matthew would write a prophecy that had already failed, but it shows that he was not always taking history into account. Maybe the point was to promote faith in the face of contrary evidence.

[@GodlessGubment]

castles of sand

[@protestanttoorthodox3625]

I have a feeling you haven’t heard of Jonathan Pageau on ‘The Symbolic World’ yet lol. Or maybe you don’t know much about Eastern Orthodox Christianity.

[@scambammer6102]

Let me guess: it's another version of "the Bible doesn't mean what it says"

[@antonioj.castaneda7377]

IC XC NIKA ☦️

[@martinecheverria5968]

Hey Matthew, I think you misinterpreted 1 Corinthians 7... read that chapter again, it has little to do with the expectation of the imminent coming of Christ. Blessings from Argentina🇦🇷

[@Richard_Nickerson]

So, first Jesus was proved NOT to be the Messiah, so they moved the goalposts. Then it was proved that the apocalypse HADN'T actually started yet, so they moved the goalposts. Now we have a Chrisitanity that doesn't even resemble the original one, and they're still moving goalposts.

[@Sportliveonline]

how do you know what the writers wrote down at the time is true

[@0hSayCanYouSee]

The following is intended as response to the comment of Mike Q. below. How much teaching on physical, bodily resurrection did you hear at the Catholic and Assembly of God churches? As Matthew says, probably not much, which could be a reason you left them. The spiritual growth and understanding you mentioned are certainly very good things to aspire to, but doing so while denying Jesus and his resurrection seem like contradictory endeavors in our quest for real life. There is no one who ever lived that had as much character and understanding as Jesus did, which makes him a primary source for the learning of it. He said we should love not only our neighbor, but our enemy as well. But this greatest Source of wisdom was also killed, though innocent, buried, and then brought back to physical life again. This death, burial, and resurrection is part of the package of who Jesus was and is. He said this: “I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.” His follower Peter had spoken and eaten with Jesus after he died and then was brought back to physical life. He said, “And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” The man who was publicly executed by people who had no good reason to, who was buried, and then brought back to physical life again, turns out also to be the greatest go-to for spiritual growth and understanding of God’s peace. Like millions of Jesus’s followers, I highly recommend him. He came back physically alive from his grave, and at the appointed time will give this same gift of physical life again to everyone who loves him. And as he said, “Seek first the kingdom of God [Jesus’s kingdom] and all the necessary things in life, [which includes spiritual wisdom and understanding] will be given to you.”

[@DutchJoan]

@Charles Horton One can only love their enemy if there is the prospect of justice within reach and (the coming of) a just ruler who will provide protection. Now, 2000 years later, that just ruler still hasn't arrived. Everyone who loves their enemy is killed by that enemy, or will be upon meeting their enemy if they don't defend themselves. I m o that just ruler won't come at all, has transpired to be a fantasy dream. We have to create an environment of justice ourselves, and loving your enemy without a framework of rules that hold accountable and protect is the worst advice one can follow in that endeavour. The obligation to forgive without the prospect of justice or protection can destroy the possibility to thrive, lead to all kinds of mental illness, a destructive pattern that effects multiple generations and even suicide for the person who has been wronged. Jesus never preached a just distribution of wealth and resources. He only said not to pursue riches, to give up your comforts and follow him. Because the kingdom of God would come within the span of a generation. But it didn't. Now the poor cling to his words for comfort and hope while the rich don't change their ways. Being spiritual is for privileged people who can afford to do so.

[@paulallen7962]

Hello Charles, here is my problem with the Jesus worship you ascribe to. Yahweh himself has never existed. He was a mythological God from the beginning just like Baal, Asherah, Chemosh, Marduk and all the other gods the Bible mentions. In fact the patriarchs worshipped a God named El. He was the supreme deity of the canaanite pantheon. There are biblical passages and archeological evidence that clearly show this to be true. Dr. Christine Hayes, professor of religious studies at Yale has a series of lectures on the OT available on KZbin. She discusses this in detail in lecture 7 starting at 30 minutes in. Also in lecture 8 starting at about 12 min.

[@paulallen7962]

Lecture 7. Israel in Egypt: Moses and the Beginning of Yahwism (Genesis 37- Exodus 4

[@louisuniverse]

While this analysis is interesting, it mistakes something fundamental about christianity : the true meaning of the crucifixion is a revelation. a teaching of something fundamentally new. an idea sooo different from any other before, that it is normal that early christians didn't quite understand it themselves. Even today, we are still struggling to understand and apply that revelation because it is so different from our world. That

[@billbrock8547]

This video is an example of Christian gibberish. Knowing that many people devote their lives to the study of nonsense like this, Christians as well as those of other religions who seek to justify their own fantastical beliefs, is a sad testament to humanity.

[@ericbess4477]

I'm afraid there is no evidence the ancient Christians were waiting around for an eschatological resurrection to occur prior to Jesus’s death. Matthew Hartke's entire viewpoint misunderstands the rhetorical situation of 1Corinthians 15, particularly the metaphor of the 'first fruits'. The idea of Jesus's resurrection was not a rationalization to help sustain some kind of belief in an imminent eschatological resurrection. It was certainly a rationalization, but a rationalization to help sustain the belief that Jesus was still the messiah, despite having died. An expectation of an eschatological resurrection had nothing to do with it.

[@JM-ot8ux]

That's a pretty big claim, how do you back that up with reliable evidence? Because, as you know, unsupported claims can be dismissed out of hand. Merely posting Bible passage won't do it, by the way.

[@snowdoll3778]

"I'm afraid there is no evidence the ancient Christians were waiting around for an eschatological resurrection to occur prior to Jesus’s death" Ok, but that's not what this video was claiming.

[@soonhietan3319]

There has been a gross misunderstanding of the nature of the resurrection and death (as defined in the Scriptures) among many Christians throughout the ages who hold on to their applicability in the physical space time realm. If you do thorough exegeses of the New Testament texts like Romans 8 and 1 Corinthians 15, you will see that death is actually sin death (not physical death) and resurrection is defined as the raising up of the spirit of man ( of Adam likeness) to be alive with God as a result of the indwelling of Christ Jesus ( the Spirit man) , the first born from the dead. Resurrection is not a physical bodily restoration from the grave but a restoration of the status of righteousness with God - justified, sanctified and glorified. Obviously resurrection is the process of being made alive with God in the spiritual realm. This explains why many say that the prophecy of the imminent return of Jesus in the first century (as given in all the New Testament texts ) was a failure when in fact it was a failure with their exegeses of the Scriptures. Jesus did return in the first century (70CE) to give resurrection to the dead and the living who were the people of God when the true Israel was restored as Mount Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem - the Kingdom of God in the spiritual realm, Hebrews 12:22-28.

[@umblapag]

So, by what principle do you choose which parts of the bible are _actually_ correct?

[@soonhietan3319]

@@umblapag There are of course inconsistencies and corruptions of some of the texts in the Scriptures, as Bart Ehrman has pointed out. But that does not mean that theologies cannot be reliably developed from thorough exegeses of all the available texts in order to better understand the Scriptures. On the questions of death and resurrection, there is nothing wrong with the relevant biblical texts. We need to think out of the box.

[@umblapag]

@@soonhietan3319 you do realize you didn't provide an answer?

[@soonhietan3319]

@@umblapag I would consider all texts in the Scriptures to be correct, uncorrupted and are inspired messages unless there are evidences otherwise such as inconsistencies in the texts. The narratives on the appearances of Jesus after his resurrection in the 4 gospels are notorious examples of unreliable texts. On the other hand, the doctrines on resurrection and death such as Romans 8 and 1 Corinthians 15 should be reliable as they are consistent with other texts in the New Testament in an appropriate eschatological theology.

[@umblapag]

@@soonhietan3319 If I understand you correctly, internal consistency is a necessary condition. Now, is it sufficient? After all, I could make up an internally consistent text with no connection to reality. So how can one confirm that a text is "correct, undisputed and inspired"?

[@hankgoodwin202]

Believe no one people do your own research and keep it simple jesus is the only way to God

[@mikeq5807]

Hank, it appears you haven't done your research. You are regurgitating Christian propaganda. The way to God is through YOU.

[@B.S._Lewis]

I don't believe you Hank because you told me not to believe you... Why should I believe any of the authors of the Bible if they are all someones?

[@jadonclifton]

@@mikeq5807 that works great. Ya it’s through myself. Tried that many times- most recently the past several weeks until like 4 days ago. Finding God through yourself is a lie from the Angel of Light in my opinion. It’s the biggest lie of all of humankind for all of history as far as I can tell

[@mikeq5807]

@@jadonclifton Without realizing it, you are professing your ignorance. It is impossible for you to know what you have not yet experienced. What is impossible for some is possible for others. You are the only portal into the depths of consciousness.

[@umblapag]

Bhagavad Gita says otherwise

[@ast453000]

Yup. The best way to lose your faith in Christianity is to read the Bible. Christianity's own books show that Jesus was wrong and Christianity is false. It's so funny. All you have to do is read the words and pay attention to what they say; not what you've been told they mean.

[@Iamwrongbut]

Where was he wrong?

[@mikeq5807]

You're partly right. Don't believe. Know from your experience. However, Jesus was quite correct in his teachings, which are love, compassion and oneness with source, referred to as the father. Daoism refers to this vital principle as the mother, or Dao, translated often as the Way. Jesus supported individual potential. It's everywhere in his teachings. There was a tampering of the texts to suggest he was savior, messiah. This is actually Paul's message. Christians are actually followers of Paul, quite little do they realize.

[@martinecheverria5968]

@@mikeq5807 read the Bible

[@mikeq5807]

@@martinecheverria5968 I have, many times over, in meditation. I suggest you read it, thoughtfully and objectively.

[@martinecheverria5968]

@@mikeq5807 read the Bible with the eyes of a first century jew

[@simonsbd]

The Forgotten Meaning of Jesus' Resurrection - the meaning of the resurrection is you can fool some of the people some of the time - but religion can fool everybody all of the time - thank GOD some one invented banks so religions have somewhere safe to keep their money - . God ? he is a good guy ; but just can't handle money , so he alwaYS NEEDS MONEY ..

[@gowdsake7103]

2 major problems here No 1 assuming WLC knows anything about any truth No 2 There are HUNDREDS of resurrection myths( including 500 zombies in the bible) so why is the christian myth of resurrection ay different