How Christianity Conquered Rome (and How We Can Do it Again)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ม.ค. 2025
- Joe Heschmeyer explores the historical factors that enabled Christianity to conquer the Roman Empire (and how we can do it again.)
Get more Shameless Popery on Patreon!
/ shamelesspopery
Listen to Shameless Popery on Catholic.com:
www.catholic.c...
My favorite Thanksgiving tradition is when we all sit down to think about the Roman empire.
And how it was the state religion of the Roman empire that led the Catholic native American to help some Calvanists out?
My ancestors fought at Alesia, so, no.
@RusynGreekCatholicAnd how the Orthodox empire was conquered by the Moslems, while the Catholic West defeated them.😊
@RusynGreekCatholic TH-cam won't let me open your reply. Tead about the Battle of Lepanto. The attack in the Jews last year took place on its anniversary. Prince John Sobieski defeated Islam outside the gates of Vienna on 9-11 in the 16th century. So, yes, these new attacks are a continuation of the jihad that ended 500 years ago in the West. Islam has ruled Constantinople for those 500 years . Yes, the West had to mount Crusades to regain access to the Holy Land because the Byzantine emperors lost it to Islam. If you want to argue agsinst these facts, you're delusional and I am done with you. Not replying to your nonsense.
@RusynGreekCatholic ,
I wish I had your kind of vivid imagination.
We can dream....
The final crusade is on the inside
Maybe the real crusade was the friends we made along the way.
St. Ignatius of Loyola tried to tell us this.
Exactly.
Fascism in a nutshell
@@11kravitzn let’s see a citation.
Happy Thanksgiving, everybody!
Happy Thanksgiving Joe
Happy Thanksgiving!
Hey Joe, roughly at 39:00 you repeat yourself (watch the whole minute). Probably a mistake in editing, but you can still fix that in the TH-cam interface. Happy Thanksgiving!
Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours!
And to you and yours, Joe. Grateful to be able to listen to you whether it's a video, or in audiobook form.
A big part of the reason people converted, was that Christians would minister to the sick, the homeless, the poor, etc., as part of their religion. There was no social welfare system, and remember how a person could be laying bleeding in the road and no one would help them ... kind of like our homeless now.
Correct, and additionally Christianity offered the certainty of a defined afterlife for people whose lives were otherwise brutally short.
This is a very good point and something to consider when it comes to how we can minister and wins souls today
@@Jrce11 It's not easy to be Catholic in these times ... so many of the afflicted are under demonic influence, and dangerous.
That is incorrect. If the message of salvation is not understood, you can break the finances of every Catholic and convert no one.
@@eliwithgod4848 Wha...?
This is one of the most heartening and hope-giving videos I've seen all year. Something to be thankful for!
I said the same thing! Very positive and uplifting 😅
I'm trying to convert my friend, but it's important not to be harassing.
The way I try to convert her is to show her what Christ did to my life.
The good deeds i did because of Him. The bad habits i had that I'm trying to fight off thanks to Him.
Me thinks you use too many I statements!!!
(Pray the humility prayer)
I can only convert me.
show her the mystical side, visions an powerful gifts, i was a pagan once, Catholicism has all the things i wanted about nature that pagans fake, the hebrew word for Heaven shemayim contains the hebrew word for water mayim, there are man mystical things about the church.
What worked for me was the evidence. Christ isn't just some character in a fictional book, this stuff REALLY HAPPENED, and is verifiable.
The best way to convert an atheist is to let them know that the Bible built our civilisation, first, get them to agree with the undeniable - that all our values and morals come from there, it's our origin story. Tell them to read it as a historical document rather than a way to find God/salvation.
32:35 seven kids with number eight on the way. I'm doing my part (insert starship troopers meme)
Great job man, and congratulations 🎉
I know someone who had 8 kids, Catholic homeschooled them. Seems they all left the Faith as adults. Raise your treasures well.
@@wms72 Sometimes its out of your control. Sometimes it skips a generation to grandkids like us.
How do you find the time to read all these books? I can hardly find the time to listen to your podcasts 🙈
It's part of his job as an apologist. Reading lots of books (or at least extracting from them what is useful) is easy when it's required for your daily work.
I know, right? 😅
@@ThePlayfarermaybe not easy but there at least are dedicated time blocks for it for sure haha
Spot on!
I usually start reading book about 1 hour on my bed before fall asleep. It is a habit I develop long time ago.
Everybody has 24 hours each day. Today people spend a lot of time on devices. This has two drawbacks, first it takes up time, second it trains the brain to become passive.
Try to spend an hour each day in silence, no music or devices. Do a little reading and thinking in some of this time. You will be surprised at how productive you become in a short time.
The age of constant noise and portable devices is only one generation old. That silence is also vital for meditation.
The rest of the world besides the west is becoming more Christian. The west is the most important place for most of us to evangelize right now. Good thing most people who watch this live in the west.
It is not only about bringing in new people, but also about retaining the people inside. Strengthen the faith of your brothers and sisters in faith.
Man you are everywhere lately i cant even listen to the number of videos and podcasts and cahtolic answers shows you are doing never mind be able to make them.
But Dont stop.
Happy Thanksgiving!
The math behind this is called exponential growth, and it's beautiful
Islam grew even more rapidly.
@@anthonyzav3769wrong... Bro
please check out the data
@anthonyzav3769 yes, but started by conquest, which doesn't behave exponentially
@anthonyzav3769 Isl@m is so fake and ghey it’s hilarious
0:00 Introduction: How Christianity Conquered Rome (And How Can We Do It Again)
7:42 Step #1: Convert a Couple of People.
18:00 But How Do We Convert Others?
25:46 Step #2: Get Married And Have Kids
37:41 Step #3: Proclaim That Jesus is Lord
43:33 The Future of Faith and Secularism
I always listen to your videos as I work like podcast, and every time the music at the end starts coming up it freaks me out a little and I look around, bewildered, for its source.
This is really hopeful. Thank you.
Happy Thanksgiving!!!
I can confirm everything about non-doctrinal conversion in the middle of this video. I wasn’t interested in doctrine when I first started looking for a religion, I was just a kind of wounded animal that wanted to make sense of life and death, and I started by looking at the faiths of people I trusted, one of which was Catholicism. Since then I’ve been privileged to help catalyze the decisions of two friends to join the Catholic Church. Both of these friendships started with exterior cultural interests, not from doctrinal ones (and so did my own). So yeah, if you want to make converts then go to the Rotary Club or Dungeons & Dragons or music-scene events, things that put you with the same people repeatedly and aren’t dangerous to your soul, and work the friendships you make there.
This is one of the BEST! Informative, fascinating and gave the me answers that have been troubling me. So sad I haven't had 1 convert of those friends I love.
God knows I have tried to explain..no I am not dogmatic, but there's only 1 truth.
Thank you! Have a new enthusiasm, all is not lost ;)
This is really good news! Thanks and God bless you
That is good news! Many thanks Joe. Makes the mountain look a lot smaller!
Happy thanksgiving y’all.
My husband and I reverted and converted to the Catholic Church this year at Pentecost. Since becoming Catholic my brother in law is now becoming Catholic and my long time Protestant friend is in OCIA and will enter the Catholic Church in the Spring! It’s possible!! 💕🙏💕
The number of Christians in the early apostolic age is most certainly orders of magnitude larger than 1,000 Christians, that just doesn't line up with the number of *churches* that existed at that time. On Pentecost alone about 3000 converted on top of the 500 or so that saw Jesus during his ascension. This means that the Church on its first day in 30 or 33 had 3500-4000 people. That is a minor point though.
There were no Christians at all anywhere until the destruction of the Temple. The arguments were all about whether Gentiles needed to follow Mosaic Law. Nobody considered them to be a separate religion.
Agreed
@@ji8044It wasn’t considered a separate religion at first by many because converts recognized it to be the same religion as that practiced by their ancestors. It’s the fulfillment of eternal covenant.
@@powerhouse8310 More or less correct, at no time before the destruction of the Temple was Christianity as separate religion.
@ Right. But I wouldn’t call Christianity a separate religion. I would more so call Judaism a separate religion starting at the destruction of the Temple. The destruction of the Temple really solidified Christianity as the fulfillment because the old elements of sacrifice and priesthood were no more.
Beautiful post, full of hope. I have been enjoying your videos, just wanted to give props to the level of research and clarity you give each post.
I have learned a lot
Utterly fascinating.
Theodosius made Christianity the official religion of the empire, not Constantine.
Point taken, but let's put this into relative context shall we:
Although Constantine is often credited with being the first Christian emperor, he didn’t make Christianity the OFFICIAL religion, this is true. However, Constantine, declared emperor at York, Britain (306), converted to Christianity, convened the Council of Arles (314), became sole emperor (324), virtually presided over the ecumenical Council of Nicaea (325), founded the city of Constantinople (330), and died in 337. In the 4th century he was regarded as the great revolutionary, especially in religion. He did not make Christianity the religion of the empire, BUT he granted important concessions to the church and its bishops, and his conversion encouraged other Roman citizens to become Christian.
His foundation of Constantinople (conceived to be the new Rome) as a Christian city untainted by pagan religion profoundly affected the FUTURE political and ecclesiastical structure of the empire and the Church. Constantine completely ALTERED the relationship between the church and the imperial government, thereby BEGINNING a process that EVENTUALLY made Christianity the official religion of the empire.
Skipping forward, the quietly mounting pressure against paganism in the 4th century CULMINATED in the decrees of Emperor Theodosius I (reigned 379-395), who made Catholic Christianity the OFFICIAL religion of the empire and who closed many pagan temples. BEGINNING with Constantine, by the end of the 4th century, Christianity had been transformed from a persecuted sect to the dominant faith of the empire.
@ you literally added nothing to my comment other than to try and flex.
@Anonymousduck161 not intended, and I literally agreed with you. I simply added further context around your view. Go well.
@@byonnoybthe concession was ending the persecution and leaving christianity be on equal footing with anything else to influence public life. Not that big.
@@byonnoybThank you for your elucidating post
Joe is just doing incredible work these days. Not a topic I’d normally be interested in but after 5 minutes I was hooked. 🙌🏻🙌🏻
Great video on evangelization! Would you consider doing a video on Catholic vs. Protestant missionary work? I find that Protestants bring children and wives into extremely dangerous areas, and leave their parents + God-given family responsibilities. Not to mention “evangelizing” in primarily Catholic regions. Plus, Protestant missionaries seem to move permanently to regions which makes one wonder how one defines missionary work as distinct from preaching where you have the most ability to evangelize (e.g. your home country).
I just find that we live in an increasingly pagan/atheistic world and Christians are more capable of spreading the gospel at home *without* having to teach a small group of natives in Papua New Guinea (for example) how to write in their own language - not to mention PNG is largely Christian already.
I can elaborate more, but something makes me uneasy about this well-accepted premise that it should be English speaking Americans going to obscure parts of the world? Happy to be wrong about this perspective, though.
Just my fallible opinion… when non-Catholics try to pull Catholics away from the fullness of truth it’s a mortal sin. Christ came for the gentiles, pagans, sinners, and non righteous. Rome perfectly aligned with his purpose and that is why Rome is the perfect example of what Christ can accomplish. Lost sheep is what our Lord was after, and if disagree, you choose to ignore scripture and put limitations on what our Lord Jesus Christ can do. I pray for you.
Jesus Christ told the Apostles that they would conquer Rome at Caesarea Philippi when He changed Simon's name to Peter. Caesarea Philippi was a microcosm of Rome in Isreal during our Lord's ministry. So when He took them there -in hindsight- Christ was speaking of Rome and all the world when He said that the "gates of hell would not prevail" on the Rock of which His Church is built on today, and that's Rome.
Awesome episode Joe Heschmeyer!
The one different thing is that the people are "already" Catholic or Christian. How do you effectively convert someone who's a Christian on the outside but, on the inside, lives no differently than a secular liberal?
"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it" (Mt. 7.13-14).
Legend has it that Constantine the Great became a Christian during the Battle of Milvian Bridge when he saw the Chi Rho in the sky.
Constantine was baptized into the Arian heresy. He called the council to bring union to the Arians and Christians. Unfortunately Arianism continued for centuries after his death. His children and grandchildren were both Christian and Arian. That is why the filioque was so important. The Eastern Othodox didn't have the same theological battle that Catholics had in the West.
@@classicalteacherConstantine was baptized by the Pope, not by Eusebius. Arianism was condemned by the Council.
Yes!!!!! It's time we talk about this.
I just ordered Stark's book because of your video.
Thank you. Always high quality. If you’re still looking for some ideas, how about expounding on some of the condemnatory teachings of Jesus. We almost never hear them expounded in church, even when they comprise most of the scripture readings.
Well we can look at the history of or Lady of Guadalupe, many convert to Catholics because of the miracles from heaven. Same way happens in my country Philippines. It is because of the work of the Holy Spirit and our Mother Mary’s interceding 🙏🙏🙏
No it's because the Spanish explorers threatened your ancestors with enslavement or death if they didn't become Catholic. The Chinese were actually in the Philippines long before the Spanish but when then they arrived the Spanish drove out the Chinese and murdered the ones who didn't leave fast enough.
Another insightful perspective. Thanks!
Joe, thank you for this video!!
This was really good. Lots of stats (which I like) and “I did not know that” moments.
Given these claims, the Church’s Walk with One approach, part of the National Eucharistic Revival, is right on point
Best video ever Joe!!
Another great video, Joe. Thanks and God bless you!
No mention of the martyrs? No mention of the attractive charity and treatment of women?
Definitely would be a great way to approach it. Not sure if that applies more to this day than his approach, but these are certainly great to remember and this comment should be higher
POLL for converts: as a content creator, I want to make videos non-Catholics would watch and find interesting, and let their TH-cam algorithm bring them to people like Joe. What kind of content would have intrigued you before you converted?!
@26:30 so history repeats itself huh
Great subject, great coverage, one can see how it relates today, thank you.
How did it spread through social connections when Christians were socially isolated and percecuted?
Assuming Revelation was written during the Neronian persecution, Revelation 7 indicates 144,000 from the 12 tribes alone had entered the Church by the mid-1st century. Food for thought! Thanks Joe
It was not. Revelation was written at the end of the 1st Century or beginning of the 2nd.
There is no basis for the Rapture.
@ I didn’t say anything about the Rapture, which is not a scriptural doctrine. As for the date of Revelation, it at least purports to predict the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, as many Catholic theologians have noted through the ages. We can leave it to the scholars to decide whether the author is truly John and whether the writing was true predictive prophecy or written after the events and made to appear predictive.
@@realSeanMcMahon Revelation was 100% definitely written long after the destruction of Jerusalem. No credible scholar today places it before then.
I'm not a historian but I would imagine that the rise of Christianity had a lot to do with plague, and then later, the printing press and the fact that people could now read.
Wow that Scientology analogy is such a great analogy, I never heard that argument b4. Saying that the president of the united states becomes a member of Scientology, to gain fear, & power.
And saying he did it to gain more votes is genius.
When we start thinking outside the box like this about Catholicism. It can help put ourselves in a 4th century Roman mindset.
Bc if I was a Pagan Roman, becoming Christian would be the last thing I do.
Especially having more support for a Roman Emperor who converted into Christianity. That should be considered a trader, betrayal against the Roman kingdom.
There's zero logic to this.
Hopefully this will help more protestants to see there is zero continuity, with the early Apostolic Church.
God bless u all
Very well researched and presented. Thank you.
That book review is by Scott, not part of the contest.
Vivo Christo Rey
Viva Cristo Rey
@@Maranatha99i have the right spirit, wrong grammar🤣
@thebenzaga 😅😅😅
VIVA! ❤
@@thebenzagaHey the intention counts
I'm at the 17 minute mark and I just want to add that usually when the head of the household converts to Christianity, the immediate family converts as well, including servants and slaves. So, one household, or one wealthy household can equal between 4 converts to 100 converts just by converting 1 head of the household. That's how we can justify an expediential conversion. Compare that with the Mormons, who had/have large families and the printing press.
No that's not at all the case. Roman households didn't care what the slaves did or didn't believe, outside of those perhaps who served the immediate family. It was actually the opposite, Christianity appealed to slaves and those with a short life expectancy like soldiers more than any wealthy people. Christianity offered them something no other religion did, the chance of a firmly defined afterlife.
stunning parallels to today
nothing has changed
I think traditional Liturgy is important also
"There's going to be some numbers, you're going to be okay."
Me: Yay, numbers!
I do think that Christianity has some aspects that made it superior to Roman paganism and that were revolutionary at the time.
- Jesus interacted with sinners, prostitutes and in general people that were generally despised. So, a certain sense of equality is foundational to Christianity. In the Church, slave and master, poor and rich, men and women, are all brothers and sisters in Christ. Charity comes naturally from that. That makes Christianity attractive to slaves, the poor, women etc. And we know how persuasive women can be, especially in situations where they have zero formal power. Growing among the poor and slaves, people that were virtually invisible, made it possible to remain under the radar until it was quite large. The Roman Empire had a huge underclass.
- Christianity is about conviction. About true belief. Paganism is very ritualistic and transactional. A Roman pagan doesn't really have to believe that Jupiter is real. He only has to believe that it is important that the rituals are being performed. That those are instrumental to the wellbeing of the state. If that is disproved, paganism collapses. Christianity is about faith, a Christian does have to believe that God is real, that Jesus is God incarnate and that Jesus died for men's sins and rose from the death. There is a much stronger conviction in that. Strong enough to be martyred for it. There are no Roman pagan martyrs. That just doesn't make sense in a pagan context. Seeing people get martyred willingly was a shocking experience for Roman pagans. It toppled their entire worldview. It opened their eyes.
- Pagan priests too were not fundamentally driven by conviction and true belief in their deity. They did believe that what they did had some function, but especially in the Roman context, they were first and formost politicians. Almost all Roman priests were elected for a limited term. Being flamen or pontifex was part of a political career. These people would not die for their faith. They would not face vikings unarmed, praying the rosary. They would never set that kind of example. If becoming pontifex wouldn't pay off any more, the best people would not be available. They would follow some other career path. So, the priesthood would athrophy as soon as being a priest didn't bring sufficient benefits anymore. That is true at the top in Rome, but also locally. If being priest in the temple wouldn't help becoming mayor anymore, people wouldn't be bothered doing that function.
- Christianity has defined theology. It has a concept of orthodoxy and as such a coherent message. Paganism doesn't. It has mythology, but not theology. Paganism is in essence a bunch of similar, but not identical, local folk cults. The concept of Zeus in Athens is not necessarily the same in Sparta. That is why a god like Apollo has so many different functions. Because in one place he was the sun-god, in another place he was the god of music and art etc. Of course, Hellenism and the Roman Empire brought some kind of harmonisation, but it still didn't have any kind of unified theology. Christianity is much tighter defined. Of course there were heresies. But pagan heresies were impossible by definition because there was no orthodoxy.
- Paganism relied on rich people funding festivals out of their own pocket, in return for popularity. In a sense, this is self-sustaining. Rich people organise festivals, in return they get power. The people like the festival so they support the man organising and funding it and it just goes on. But if the base is eroded too much by people that think other things are more important than the festivals, spending lots of money on festivals doesn't bring power any more. So it makes more sense to keep the cash in the pocket. The festivals disappear and with it the main attraction of the cult. The main thing that kept the Jupiter cult going was never that people believed in Jupiter and loved Jupiter. It was that people believed that sacrificing to Jupiter brought good harvests, that they liked the Jupiter festival, that the priesthood of Jupiter was part of a political career. That is fundamentally different from how Christianity works.
- Christianity has an organisation that goes from the village level right up to the top. Roman paganism had all kind of high ranking priests, but every village temple acted essentially non-denominationally. They did their own thing. Christian Church governance was not perfect, but it did exist. That made it much more coordinated than paganism where every village priest was essentially on his own (and typically a politician in essence).
Only your first paragraph is correct about Christianity before Nicea.
“And true to form (regarding prophesying the end of religion) the very first person who did it was an Anglican clergyman”
Now that’s funny! 🤣
Yess, I can't wait to convert my first personal
Thanks much for this video.
Thanks, Joe. I think you're swell.
Study the Fall of Rome in Armenia ... fascinating ...
I wonder if we can hit these numbers and growth rate in modern times.
Makes no sense to me why anyone would want to be under the delusion that they could time travel back to ancient Rome. Joe Heschmeyer why don't you go watch the fun ficitonal movie to watch called, "Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny" staring actor Harrison Ford instead. Without me because I don't want to see it again.
Been thinking about this and wanting to know why for a while now...
Battle brothers! A call to reconquer Jerusalem! Rome will know no boarders! Deus Vault! ⚔️⛪✝️
*Deus Vult
Anyway, if you want to "conquer" Jerusalem, convert the Jewish people. Nothing else will last.
What Would Jesus Do?
"All those who take the sword shall perish by the sword"
@@ThePlayfarer But Jesus and all his followers WERE Jewish, so that would be inappropriate.
@@ji8044rabbinic Judaism didn't exist till after the destruction of Jerusalem. And that's being very generous.
The modern sects much more formed by medieval innovation than anything else.
@@marvalice3455 Christianity didn't form until long after Jesus and all his disciples were dead and that's being very factual.
I do think there is some merit to the idea that Constantine legalized Christianity and converted for political benefit. This is not a knock against either Christianity or Constantine, but speaks well of both.
First, as you mention, Christianity was growing all on its own, and you’re right: at that rate of growth, a later Emperor would probably convert. I’m sure Constantine had enough records to see this trend himself. There is something to be said for getting ahead of a socio-political trend.
Second, Constantine, at his conversion, was ruling over the West. Whereas his rival for Imperial authority was ruling in the East - the more Christian half of the Empire. By not only protecting Christians but converting himself, Constantine could build up a fifth column for when he decided to unify the Empire under his rule.
Third, and most importantly, I think Constantine could see what many Roman could: the entire panoply of pre-Christian religion and philosophy - neo-platonism, stoicism, the greco-Roman pantheon, the imperial cult, the eastern mystery cults, etc. - were just not cutting it. They did not offer a message that worked for the people, whether high or low. Christianity did. Even if Constantine was 100% cynical (I doubt he was), he could see the benefit in the sort of “cultural Christianity” that even modern atheists appreciate.
But his mother was a saint, Helena. She even went around collecting relics. So wouldn't that lean towards his convertion being sincere?
@billie5057 I agree. I’m saying that even a cynic could do what he did for cynical reasons.
@@CMVBrielman I guess I could see an emperor giving up his god status for the good of his nations. But, he would have to be an extremely good man to do that. Was Constantine known for being caring like that?
@@billie5057 Was Paul known for being a gentle man before Christ appeared to him?
Constantine was manifestly not cynical. Even if you ignore Eusebius, he was almost dangerously sincere. Great book: Constantine and the Conversion of Europe by A.H.M. Jones. He's very much a secular scholar, almost hostile to Christianity, so we know that he has no skin in the game, and he comes down hard on the side of sincere conversion.
The crusade was the friends made along the way.
Gotcha! I knew Joe secretly wanted to take over the world! 😂
Constantine converted to heretical Arianism. Is that considered Christian? Do all these equations include the heretical sects of Christianity?
Re-read *1 Corinthians Chapter 7* Paul writes a whole chapter encouraging people to stay single. Jesus tells people to leave their wives and children and follow him. Neither Paul or Jesus seemed to endorse marriage and more often stated it was not a good idea.
Both of them were apocalypticists, expecting an imminent end of the world and the Second Coming. That's why there is virtually no talk of having children in the NT by anybody
@@ji8044 No point in marriage and children if God's kingdom is here now. Sorta did not happen. Did it?
@@SergeantSkeptic686 Off by a few millennia, for sure.
You’re not understanding the context or to who they were talking to. Be fruitful and multiply this is one of THE most basic commands of God to humans. Jesus and Paul were talking to missionaries. Of course being single would be better in those cases. And back to what Jesus was saying, he also said some don’t have the gift of the ability for marriage. So I mean there is nuance to these examples.
@@MrMustang13 I don't understand the context? _Repent, the kingdom of Heaven has come near_ *(Matthew 3:2)* John the Baptist starts the whole idea that God's judgment and salvation were imminent. The end of the world was happening. Jesus was a student of John the Baptist and also believed the world was ending and God's kingdom was arriving. Thus marriage and children were a hinderance to preparing for God's kingdom, judgment and salvation. Just read Mark, Matthew and Paul. Pay attention to how often they indicate time is short, the end is near, this world is falling away. The authors of these scriptures had no idea humanity would last another 2,000 years.
_Be fruitful and multiply_ is from Genesis, the beginning. Jesus' ministry from Mark and Matthew is about the end. Marriage and children is a Catholic thing. It's not a Jesus thing.
Any conversion IS a miracle. No one can MAKE anyone a Christian. Conversion is a grace of the Holy Spirit. We need to pray and sacrifice for that. Too many Catholic Homeschoolers have children who abandon their Catholic faith when they reach adulthood. The media and academia are relentless.
It looks like a small number for traditional catholics (3.6), but lets have in consideration that it is above muslims (2.8) a group known for their large families, also alot of people who are comming into traditional Catolcism is people converting at old age, or well into their thirties as in my case, recent converts will have a more dificult time in marrying inside the comunity.
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
There’s a little more to this issue than meets the eye. Read “Jesus’ Biological Father was Joseph: According to the New Testament” (DS WAGGONER). Please do t judge a book by its cover
That's correct. All of the followers of Jesus and even Paul believed Jesus was born human of his father Joseph. There is no mention of a divine birth in any epistle.
@ exactly!!!!
Now I’m curious to learn the JW numbers. They were sending people out constantly for many years. And they kept strict tract of hours and people. 🤔
You take Manhattan, I'll have Rome.
It can be done again. Christ reigns.
Outstanding video! Every Catholic should listen to it. Very doable.
Constantine was the catalyst. Like Cyrus to the Jews, he was anointed by God to liberate the Christians from oppresion. But it so happened that it was him.
Whenever I study the practice of infanticide and how commonplace it was and how essentially all people groups in the ancient world practiced it and how it was viewed as a good thing…I just think women’s mental health had to be atrocious. To get pregnant, go through childbirth and then the baby be killed by the patriarch (because it was viewed as his right and duty) because of a deformity or the wrong gender or they just didn’t want to support another child. Ugh. Obviously, it was normalized in the ancient world, plus a large amount of women died in childbirth, so maybe those women were just tougher but ugh 😣
CAN'T READ ALL YOUR TEXTS...TOO SMALL. they R well-centered 😢😢😢
Sanctvs Petrvs refounded the Vrbs Æterna in the name of Iesvs Christvs , becoming the greatest Roman .Our Latin Ethnicity , Roman to the end , is great in the name of the Almighty and in serving Him .
48:24 - Now if you can just define what exactly it means to be an "Apostolic Catholic"...oh wait, this program is about how to be Christian and not necessarily a Catholic Christian (whatever that means)...
2025 motivation
20:00
Is power in itself evil?
If Saint Paul was in the position of a Herodian public office at the time of his conversion, wouldn’t Paul have used his position to at least legalized and/or protected Christians?
And even though I believe Constantines conversion was sincere, it does not matter because Gods providence is at work in either case.
In a similar way, many conquistadors had ambitious and less than noble intentions when they came to the Americas but we are better for it and if you deny that then go sacrifice a baby to appease the Aztec sun god.
Richard Carrier, an excellent historian, has looked at the question of whether Paul was a Herodian and debunked it. You may agree or disagree, but I think he makes a good case.
The conquistadors themselves didn't convert anyone anyway, it was the Catholic missionaries that came after them
I do agree with your point still
@@ingenieriaavanzada3391 No not at all. The Conquistadors read what was known as the "Requerimiento" to the natives, that told them to convert or die.
Calling any Catholic for response.?
Catholic Church in 589 council of Toledo changed the nicene creed, aka “filioque clause”
Pope Leo III years later refused to change the creed because he believed it was the result of the council fathers' "divine illumination".
Did the vicar of Christ, pope Leo 3 recant this belief before his death ?
The belief that the Holy Spirit doesn’t proceed from the father and the son?
If not then what really is papal infallibility?
Toledo was not an Ecumenical Council.
@ so your saying it was not legit?
@@AncientCornelius It was legit to the people who attended, which was a very limited number of western bishops.
@@ji8044 that’s irrelevant. the eilioque clause is still in the nicene creed in Rome and west. Leo the 3rd agreed with the Greeks. It should not have been added according to pope Leo. So it shows the infallibility. It’s Church history.
Emperor Constantine army was mostly Christian and that is why he had that 'Christian' dream before the battle. It the army was not Christian the last thing you would tell your troops is that they will be fighting for some Jewish carpenter cult figure from 300 years ago.
Start with Constantinople:
Back to Constantinople (21st Century Edition)
th-cam.com/video/XgVTual8cnM/w-d-xo.html
On a tangential note -- contrary to the secularist notion that religion is dying out -- it would be interesting to get your take on the rise of Christianity within Communist China. I recall seeing some projections that they were on the path to becoming the largest Christian nation in the world by the end of the decade. Incidentally, it also seems that Communism is dying -- from what I've heard, there are now more people willing to openly sign declarations of opposition to Communism than there are registered members of the Party. How might their situation be similar to, and different from the Roman Empire of old?
When people say Christianity is dying out, they mean they're worried about white Christians of European ancestry. For instance between 90-95% of Haitians are Christians, up to 2/3 Catholic but absolutely nobody wants to claim them.
China is communist in aesthetics only. It's run as a natiomalist socialist country these days
Thanks Joe.
I was feeling kind of bad that my own evangelization efforts were going slowly (too slow for my preference anyway). Good to be reminded that conversion really does take time and I should at least give the people I interact with as much time as God gave me when He was drawing me into the faith.
Also it's really comforting to know that the only doors I have to knock on are my friends and family's doors.
Nice video, but Constantine did became christian at some point of his life.
Only Eusebius tells us that and there is no way to know at this point.
@@ji8044"Old historians like Eusebius aren't reliable, but my word as a historian is perfect and infallible" sure thing dude
The Jews and "God-fearers" were ripe for conversion. Who "fears"/reverences God today? The ancient world accused Christians of being atheists! Converting a couple people was perhaps easier back then in some ways.
It illustrates well here, your words, how Jesus did exactly what He said He would do while He stood in front of a huge Pagan rock and exclaimed that “upon this rock I will build my church”; there, at a temple to the pagan god ‘Pan’, on that big rock. He did exactly what he said He was going to do. That Pagan nation was replaced by Jesus.
Cope. Show me significant percentages in any society that went post-Christian.
Christianity that is exclusive but without missionaries.
Hmmmm
Why Hello Ethopic Orthodox Church?
Were You summoned?
I kid, but they have a surprising lack of missionary zeal.
I see non-Christian promoting them more than themselves.