Tom Holland: Jesus' Disciples Saw SOMETHING. (Clip)

[@duncant63]

Tom Holland is so well read in the history of antiquity he can't help but testify to Jesus as the most amazong and central person in human history I have listened to so many of his interviews and they are always so satisfying to the intellect while also uplifting the spirit within to say JESUS IS LORD, JESUS IS GOD!!

[@beachcomber1able]

Nobody actually mentions this jesus character at his supposed time of existence. So not actually a historical person.

[@duncant63]

Just saying what you say with no evidence is a sign of your wilful ignornance. I suggext that you research the following names and their historic documents - Pliny, Tacitus, Josephus. @@beachcomber1able

[@TTellKey]

​@@beachcomber1able😂😂😂

[@TTellKey]

​@@beachcomber1ableare you real?

[@beachcomber1able]

​@@TTellKey More real than Cheebus ever was. 😉

[@markjd4]

Tom Holland is a brilliant historian. He’s honest.

[@mikep1556]

He's just another Christian apologist.

[@edh.9584]

Tom Holland makes a good argument about the reach and effect of Jesus ... which one would expect if he were who he said he was.

[@b.alexanderjohnstone9774]

I have trouble truly believing in the resurrection but was astonished how sound are the arguments. Above all, how was it that so many believed it so strongly as to suffer extreme hardships?

[@SpeakLifeMedia]

Life has certainly come from the dead at Easter. The greatest movement on earth erupted from the crucifixion of its leader. It seems to me that resurrection doesn't add to the absurdity of your beliefs, it explains what would otherwise be absurd: How did a crucified man become the world's most influential Figure?

[@beachcomber1able]

@@SpeakLifeMedia That's not hard to answer. 😄 The whole Christian spiel is a convoluted mix of stuff that went on from a whacky Jewish breakaway movement after the Romans had obliterated their capital city in 70 New Era. No supernatural strangely looking Anglo Saxon dudes with narrow noses and blond Baby Breck hair involved. 😆

[@sacamedeaca]

Don´t worry also his disciple and apostol St. Thomas did not believed to his mates till he saw Jesus Himself with the wounds. And every thing that was kept in scriptures to this days is for a good reason.

[@rogeralsop3479]

Tom Holland is so interesting and thoughtful.

[@edh.9584]

Paul had met Jesus, on the road to Damascus.

[@mikep1556]

No, he didn't. He met some blinding light...

[@edh.9584]

@@mikep1556 And he heard a voice. His companions saw the light but didn't hear the voice (if I have it right). But Paul spent the rest of his life preaching Christ (after getting things put together), and he said he had met Christ.

[@mikep1556]

@@edh.9584 I don't think he ever met Christ. We have no record of anyone who met Christ.

[@sjoerdpasterkamp9826]

huqoq elephant mosaic

[@markloughran4827]

And this is why we give thanks for Thomas. Who, let’s be honest, hears what his fellow apostles have to say about Jesus’s resurrection and says, yeah right, sure he did. Show me. His response to the good news of the resurrection is a completely rational one. Because he just saw Jesus nailed to a cross and killed in the most brutal and public way imaginable by the Roman Empire and Thomas is understandably not in any mood to keep going any more than any of the other apostles were until they saw Jesus alive. They’re in hiding for fear that they’ll be next for the chop. One isn’t prepared to go out and proclaim the good news, having just witnessed the utter destruction of your Messiah, the utter destruction of all your dreams and hopes for the last three years, your life turned upside down, your total investment apparently wiped out and you feeling probably like you’ve been taken for a fool, and under the threat of death, unless you have seen something utterly extraordinary and that can only be that Jesus actually did rise from the dead.

[@edh.9584]

The Apostles saw it the way they did ... because the risen Jesus had made this clear to them.

[@heatfield4243]

The disciples must have noticed all the ex-lepers and the newly-sighted blind, but the amputees? Of course its all true because they saw something!

[@paullewis2413]

I’m not religious at all, don’t believe in the resurrection etc. Having said that, however, there’s no denying that Western civilization post the Ancient Greco-Roman World has its foundation in Christianity and has shaped our World for 2,000 years.

[@Exodus26.13Pi]

Wait till they discover that Hebrew Cosmology is true too. It was good enough for Moses.

[@davidwright8432]

... but not for me.

[@HearGodsWord]

You keep saying that, but it won't save you!

[@edh.9584]

That's nice, two thousand years trying to answer: "Who is Jesus?"

[@kaykwanu]

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 🌌 *The first century witnessed a seismic event akin to the Big Bang, with reverberations still felt today, shaping the course of history.* 01:09 📜 *Paul's letters serve as the first indication of a seismic event in early Christianity, signaling a profound shift in belief, likely triggered by something extraordinary.* 02:05 🌟 *Early Christian texts, like Paul's letters and Mark's gospel, depict Jesus in exalted terms, indicating a rapid and elevated view of Jesus from the outset.* 03:27 ⚖️ *Tom Holland highlights three factors contributing to the exalted view of Jesus: his resurrection, his embrace of death, and the stickability of his teachings, suggesting a multifaceted understanding of his significance.* 05:02 🤔 *Exploring the question of who Jesus was has been central to Western history, with his teachings and impact prompting profound philosophical and religious inquiries.* Made with HARPA AI

[@FLVCTVAT_NEC_MERGITVR]

The big bang theory was put forward by Georges Lemaitre, a catholic priest from Belgium.

[@i_am_nature919]

Jesus was a full-blown Jew. He did not invent kindness, compassion, humility, or caring for the poor, but he did make Judaism accessible to gentiles. Or more accurately, it was Saul/Paul.

[@tatie7604]

Saul, renamed Paul-- was killing Christians so Paul wasnt the first jack! Paul's epistles are the oldest extant documents, but the crucifixion and ressurection of Jesus had already been widely known.

[@sjoerdpasterkamp9826]

N I C O L A I T A N S ?

[@davidwright8432]

If this 'event' was a single thing, and so impressive, why isn't it explicitly discussed? His teachings at a moral level were those of Pharisaic Judaism of the time. As for 'people believed because of '- sorry, but most didn't. The Jewish community still doesn't!

[@bm2818]

Forgive this long response but I don’t think one has to be a Christian to accept what is stated in this video. This “thing” that Paul of Tarsus, Peter, etc, seemingly saw was enough for them to give years of their life, and even their lives to it’s cause. Even if one doesn’t accept Paul of Tarsus' death by execution (which I see little reason to doubt), the change of one’s life’s trajectory for a first century Jew with no earthly reward and only persecution is enough to warrant the assumption that he/they had some manner of experience which propelled them onto a radical new trajectory. People have all manner of religious experiences which cause them to change, do new things, start radical movements. And by “most didn’t” (believe) you seriously underestimate the number of people who did follow the Jesus movement, increasingly decade by decade. How on earth would Constantine have known of the Christian religion had it not become absolutely enormous within three centuries? And at that - a cult to a Jewish man murdered so pitifully? Fundamentally as to the point of what movement/cult the likes of Peter or Paul grew, the difference with Jesus of Nazareth seems to be that these aren’t crackpot teachings, they are full of profound paradoxes. They appear to speak from outside of time. Why no presumptions for the seemingly natural virtues of slavery in Jesus' philosophy? It’s very visible in Aristotle. One can argue the same about the depth of some of Buddha’s words if one cares to. The point is no less valid. And whilst both parties are obviously heavily informed by Hebrew scripture, I’m afraid Pharisaic Judaism is not Jesus of Nazareth. The servant element to reach "purity" is simply not there, nor are the paradoxes to illuminate deeper truths. The Pharisees (though not all) often deride “sinners”, whilst Jesus seems to seek them out. Quite simply, the emphasis on the "agape" element appears to be the unique signature of Jesus of Nazareth.

[@RocketKirchner]

the jewish community doesnt ...... YET.

[@chrismaloney7562]

The majority of first century Christians were Jews. The descendants of Jews that did not believe in Christ does not constitute the whole of Judaism and so the very concept that Jews existing today discredit Christ is preposterous.

[@auragonzalez976]

Well I'm so glad to add that while in the 1970s or even 1980s there were only @ 25 -30 Messianic (Jesus believing) congregations in Israel alone that number has grown to @ 300 if not more by now. Thousands in U.S. and growing. Those called Christians need to pray for their Jewish brethren and take a stand against anti semitism and all religious oppression.

[@tatie7604]

The first Christians were Jews and Gentiles. The event was Jesus's bodily ressurection. And, all accounts we have are not remotely like Horus and the extant texts of the gospels pre-date the other myths of a dying and ressurected God. You need to know that because it is likely that pagans changed their texts to try and mimic Jrsus and not the other way round. Read the Bible and discuss it all you want.

[@edh.9584]

Of course they believed that Jesus had risen ... because they met the risen Jesus.

[@Abraham-uk4xy]

Paul is not the same as Jesus. St.Paul said and Jesus said are not on the same level theologically. Uk scholars are full of St.Paul said...what did Jesus say? What did Yahweh say? What is the Holy Spirit telling us today?

[@rdrift1879]

Paul: "For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ....Then after an interval of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also. It was because of a revelation that I went up; and I submitted to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but I did so in private to those who were of reputation, for fear that I might be running, or had run, in vain....seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised (for He who effectually worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised effectually worked for me also to the Gentiles), and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, so that we might go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. They only asked us to remember the poor-the very thing I also was eager to do."

[@RipRyness]

Tom, the stickyness wasn't the message. The stickyness is the Holy Spirit's work magnifying Jesus as Son of God, King of Kings, Lord or Lords, Lion of Judah, Creator, Lamb of God...