Incredible, once again. As the concept of Logos is making a comeback, this material is a strong case for it's justification in Christianity, plus the sayings of Jesus was always an invitation to use your own mind for christ sake! (jesting) Bravo!
Like the Buddha and Socrates and Muhammad, cowards, fools and villains turned Jesus into an idol. Why? To spare themselves the "burden" of living up to the freedom he offers all of us. No matter: one day that freedom will triumph over all oppression, or we will drive ourselves extinct. People love to believe some people are "superhuman" so they can spare themselves the shame of not living up to the full dignity of human potential. Dostoyevsky's "Grand Inquisitor" nicely shows this. How beautiful, when Christ, after listening in perfect silence to the resentful, bitter Inquisitor, kisses him sweetly on the forehead.
@@lukehall8151 ironic how you call other peoples cowards while your supposed God on the cross cried out for help to God (which he himself is ? Lmfao) the god damn cognitive dissonance in you people is so freaking high, it would be funny if it wasn’t obnoxious at the same time.
My thinking has been that the NT authors understood Jesus to be the fulfillment of the OT and other Jewish scripture. But I've been increasingly aware that he is presented as the fulfillment of Platonism as well. Paul wrote the "all scripture is inspired by God and profitable," not "all Jewish scripture." So when Jesus is described as "the LOGOS," for example, he is described as fitting that bill as well as the Jewish writings. And notice how well this lines up with Plato's Allegory of the Cave: *[Colossians 2:16-17 NLT] (16) So don't let anyone condemn you for what you eat or drink, or for not celebrating certain holy days or new moon ceremonies or Sabbaths. (17) For these rules are only shadows of the reality yet to come. And Christ himself is that reality.*
@Ruminator - This 'fulfillment' framework fails because "Platonism" is a mere umbrella term to describe an historically incommensurate bricoleur of communal ritual practices and competing philosophical schools. Later, state-sponsored Christian ideologues such as Irenaeus (who belonged to what later came to be called 'orthodoxy') in fact worked toward the censorship of these competing pagan philosophical schools (Greek haireses; 'opinion,' 'thought'). Thus, 'heresy' derives from this completely neutral term simply connoting decentralized opinion, belief, etc., with the goal of attaining gnosis. Not very different from the goal of modern science. For them, it was more of a 'spiritual science.' And again, there is nothing 'fulfilling' about an orthodoxy which claims superiority or uniqueness by historically slandering and censoring their rivals in the marketplace of ideas. In modern terms, you could call this late-antique orthodoxy movement a "Cancel Culture."
@@josephpercy1558 Irenaeus' 'Against Heresies' was hardly "state-sponsored." Christianity was a religio illicita within the Greco-Roman empire until the toleration edicts of the 4th century, where as Irenaeus wrote in the 2nd century; and his opponents were those that even Plotinus would write against in the Enneads.
@@martianuslucianus4485yep, that's true. I've emended my position on heresiology since I wrote that post about 5 months ago. Thanks for pointing that out, though. 👍
Get an Orthodox study bible. I recently did and it's wonderful and it explains the Jewish customs and such and it makes so much more sense. Remember Paul who never met Jesus and based all of his "testimony" on visions and personal interpretations.Not saying Paul was wrong on anything I'm just sayin...iykwim. I've read the Nag books enough to say they're mostly information meant for other mystics and apostles not for the common follower of Christ. What Mr Grimes doesn't address is just the sheer volume of the old testament and all the apocryphal books is so vast and Remember that books back then had to be handcopied and many monks and Saints made it thier life's work and I think that speaks for itself as these books were the most valuable assets on the planet.
Very interesting!! Thank you! Broadened my perspective in many ways. So many insights! No idea why so much negativity in the comments, its like they came in with a closed mind about what the video ought to be and wrote negatively when it didn’t match what their closed mind wanted and criticized before fully understanding. Lol fantastic lecture!
The Nag Hammadi Library find and the Hellenistic Galilee and the Greek and the 5 stage Greek tragedy format is a bit traumatic....to be sure. ......wow. :>
The lady who asked the question at 1:12:59....no Jesus was the exact opposite of the prophesied Jewish messiah....they were waiting on a King/Conqueror who would push back the romans...not a softy like Jesus....clearly Q is the original christian text...while the 4SG are literary works from maybe an organized group of writers...
@Thedisciplemike through the bloody sword of Rome. For every prophecy he supposedly filled there are 30 he didn't. Isaiah isn't about jesus. The writers of the gospels knew the material well. The messiah was supposed to bring in the kingdom of heaven. Which is a kingdom of god on earth. That didn't happen
Is the argument that the apocalyptic aspects of the synoptic gospels are unimportant because Mark is structured like a tragedy? Making Q the only authentic representation of Christianity?
They had time to build and add on to the original story pretty much making jesus a super hero. What Jesus says and what Paul says are two different things
Prof. Grimes said very little about Platonism. At first, he seems to tell us that a Platonist is anyone who understands Platonism. I'm a Thomist. But I think I understand some Platonism.
I love his teachings. Even with short Mark ending at 16.8, that is the women witnessing the empty tomb. It is a dramatic ending to pick up the teachings of Paul, who preached the Resurrected Lord Jesus. Mark is the Roman Church teaching set up by Peter and Paul. I believe he is first also. "Why would God write in Greek and not very well?" It was a peasant's religion. As far as Q's date, well it's all between Jesus' death, early 30s, and Jewish Revolt 66-70.
Half an hour in and gotta say the title is misleading. I thought this was going to be a discussion on Saint Gregory of Nyssa and other neoplatonic Christians, but instead got a very dry and pointless textual criticism of the NT... Maybe the plato stuff comes later but I don't have the time for this
Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period; Martin Hengel Wipf and Stock Publishers, Mar 14, 2003 - Religion - 666 pages Martin Hengel gathers an encyclopedic amount of material, ancient and modern, to present an exhaustive survey of the early course of Hellenistic civilization as it related to developing Judaism. The result is a highly readable account of a largely unfamiliar world which is indispensable for those interested in Judaism and the birth of Christianity alike. An extensive section of notes and bibliography is included.
Absolutely. Identifying with anything, i.e. name and form, is lower level or ignorant. Thing is with Platonism, it's all about recollection, of the emanation, which is beyond name and form, thus liberation at it's core - Wisdom. But still, I haven't finished this lecture yet.... however, when it comes to the bible, there is an authority: Bill Donahue - God sent. The politics concerning the Bible is a waste of time. At the core is science and metaphysics. Bill Donahue! Nobody can do it like Bill had! All other lectures are a waste of time. The Bible, reconcocted wisdom teachings from time immemorial. There was no Mathew, mark, Luke, John - these are western names. These are really aspects of ourselves and the cyclical nature of all phenomena and psychology. It's sad what people have done with the Bible, because if the spirit were in them, great shame would come over them.
@@VVeltanschauung187In Platonism the Logos CANNOT incarnate this is a major difference between Platonism and Christianity. Any thinking platonist would reject this idea
Incredible, once again.
As the concept of Logos is making a comeback, this material is a strong case for it's justification in Christianity, plus the sayings of Jesus was always an invitation to use your own mind for christ sake! (jesting)
Bravo!
Like the Buddha and Socrates and Muhammad, cowards, fools and villains turned Jesus into an idol. Why? To spare themselves the "burden" of living up to the freedom he offers all of us. No matter: one day that freedom will triumph over all oppression, or we will drive ourselves extinct. People love to believe some people are "superhuman" so they can spare themselves the shame of not living up to the full dignity of human potential.
Dostoyevsky's "Grand Inquisitor" nicely shows this. How beautiful, when Christ, after listening in perfect silence to the resentful, bitter Inquisitor, kisses him sweetly on the forehead.
@@lukehall8151 ironic how you call other peoples cowards while your supposed God on the cross cried out for help to God (which he himself is ? Lmfao) the god damn cognitive dissonance in you people is so freaking high, it would be funny if it wasn’t obnoxious at the same time.
Crazy, this lecture was 4 days before I was born
Me a month, I see you!
I was a child, but still amazed how we can form time-travel groups of International intellectuals.. what an amazing time to be alive..
Probably shouldnt leave your date of birth on the internet.
does someone know the song name of the intro/outro ,so calm...
The Music Bakery-India's Mantra
@picketytwin its not even good.
I found gold of TH-cam
My thinking has been that the NT authors understood Jesus to be the fulfillment of the OT and other Jewish scripture. But I've been increasingly aware that he is presented as the fulfillment of Platonism as well. Paul wrote the "all scripture is inspired by God and profitable," not "all Jewish scripture." So when Jesus is described as "the LOGOS," for example, he is described as fitting that bill as well as the Jewish writings. And notice how well this lines up with Plato's Allegory of the Cave: *[Colossians 2:16-17 NLT] (16) So don't let anyone condemn you for what you eat or drink, or for not celebrating certain holy days or new moon ceremonies or Sabbaths. (17) For these rules are only shadows of the reality yet to come. And Christ himself is that reality.*
@Ruminator - This 'fulfillment' framework fails because "Platonism" is a mere umbrella term to describe an historically incommensurate bricoleur of communal ritual practices and competing philosophical schools. Later, state-sponsored Christian ideologues such as Irenaeus (who belonged to what later came to be called 'orthodoxy') in fact worked toward the censorship of these competing pagan philosophical schools (Greek haireses; 'opinion,' 'thought'). Thus, 'heresy' derives from this completely neutral term simply connoting decentralized opinion, belief, etc., with the goal of attaining gnosis. Not very different from the goal of modern science. For them, it was more of a 'spiritual science.'
And again, there is nothing 'fulfilling' about an orthodoxy which claims superiority or uniqueness by historically slandering and censoring their rivals in the marketplace of ideas. In modern terms, you could call this late-antique orthodoxy movement a "Cancel Culture."
@@josephpercy1558 Irenaeus' 'Against Heresies' was hardly "state-sponsored." Christianity was a religio illicita within the Greco-Roman empire until the toleration edicts of the 4th century, where as Irenaeus wrote in the 2nd century; and his opponents were those that even Plotinus would write against in the Enneads.
@@martianuslucianus4485yep, that's true. I've emended my position on heresiology since I wrote that post about 5 months ago. Thanks for pointing that out, though. 👍
@@josephpercy1558 Appreciate the humility.
Get an Orthodox study bible. I recently did and it's wonderful and it explains the Jewish customs and such and it makes so much more sense. Remember Paul who never met Jesus and based all of his "testimony" on visions and personal interpretations.Not saying Paul was wrong on anything I'm just sayin...iykwim.
I've read the Nag books enough to say they're mostly information meant for other mystics and apostles not for the common follower of Christ.
What Mr Grimes doesn't address is just the sheer volume of the old testament and all the apocryphal books is so vast and Remember that books back then had to be handcopied and many monks and Saints made it thier life's work and I think that speaks for itself as these books were the most valuable assets on the planet.
Very interesting!! Thank you! Broadened my perspective in many ways. So many insights! No idea why so much negativity in the comments, its like they came in with a closed mind about what the video ought to be and wrote negatively when it didn’t match what their closed mind wanted and criticized before fully understanding. Lol fantastic lecture!
Get this man a projector.
The Nag Hammadi Library find and the Hellenistic Galilee and the Greek and the 5 stage Greek tragedy format is a bit traumatic....to be sure. ......wow. :>
Explains a lot though, just love the fact that he covers so much grounds in such a nonchalant way.
Did pierre grimes read robert graves's stuff?
The lady who asked the question at 1:12:59....no Jesus was the exact opposite of the prophesied Jewish messiah....they were waiting on a King/Conqueror who would push back the romans...not a softy like Jesus....clearly Q is the original christian text...while the 4SG are literary works from maybe an organized group of writers...
Jesus is the True Messiah, and absolutely Conquered not only Rome, but the entire world
@Thedisciplemike through the bloody sword of Rome. For every prophecy he supposedly filled there are 30 he didn't. Isaiah isn't about jesus. The writers of the gospels knew the material well. The messiah was supposed to bring in the kingdom of heaven. Which is a kingdom of god on earth. That didn't happen
Is the argument that the apocalyptic aspects of the synoptic gospels are unimportant because Mark is structured like a tragedy? Making Q the only authentic representation of Christianity?
They had time to build and add on to the original story pretty much making jesus a super hero. What Jesus says and what Paul says are two different things
Anyone have the quotes he reads around the theme of conscience?
So if Q was written by these Greek like thinkers. Why then use and tie the Jesus story into the Jewish tradition?
Prof. Grimes said very little about Platonism. At first, he seems to tell us that a Platonist is anyone who understands Platonism. I'm a Thomist. But I think I understand some Platonism.
I love his teachings. Even with short Mark ending at 16.8, that is the women witnessing the empty tomb. It is a dramatic ending to pick up the teachings of Paul, who preached the Resurrected Lord Jesus.
Mark is the Roman Church teaching set up by Peter and Paul. I believe he is first also.
"Why would God write in Greek and not very well?"
It was a peasant's religion. As far as Q's date, well it's all between Jesus' death, early 30s, and Jewish Revolt 66-70.
Bro gave up 33 years out of eternity for us and then went on back up neer to be seen again🙏 😍
@@jeffwells9431 O, he's coming back!
@therenewedpoet4292 really? The book says "this generation". It's been 2000 years breh since "this generation"
@@jeffwells9431 Jesus completed everything for the Kingdom of God to come into the hearts of all the world and that generation did see all fulfilled
@@therenewedpoet4292 ok... so he's *not* coming back is what you're saying
Half an hour in and gotta say the title is misleading. I thought this was going to be a discussion on Saint Gregory of Nyssa and other neoplatonic Christians, but instead got a very dry and pointless textual criticism of the NT... Maybe the plato stuff comes later but I don't have the time for this
Textual criticism from 1996, no less.
Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period; Martin Hengel
Wipf and Stock Publishers, Mar 14, 2003 - Religion - 666 pages
Martin Hengel gathers an encyclopedic amount of material, ancient and modern, to present an exhaustive survey of the early course of Hellenistic civilization as it related to developing Judaism. The result is a highly readable account of a largely unfamiliar world which is indispensable for those interested in Judaism and the birth of Christianity alike. An extensive section of notes and bibliography is included.
Absolutely. Identifying with anything, i.e. name and form, is lower level or ignorant. Thing is with Platonism, it's all about recollection, of the emanation, which is beyond name and form, thus liberation at it's core - Wisdom. But still, I haven't finished this lecture yet.... however, when it comes to the bible, there is an authority: Bill Donahue - God sent. The politics concerning the Bible is a waste of time. At the core is science and metaphysics. Bill Donahue! Nobody can do it like Bill had! All other lectures are a waste of time. The Bible, reconcocted wisdom teachings from time immemorial. There was no Mathew, mark, Luke, John - these are western names. These are really aspects of ourselves and the cyclical nature of all phenomena and psychology. It's sad what people have done with the Bible, because if the spirit were in them, great shame would come over them.
Since i was a child, all that christianity taught me was to leave my brain at my feet.
It should be the other way around. Why thinking pagan neoplatonists should become Christian neoplatonists (Pseudo-Dionysius etc.)
Interesting but I’m not convinced. I would have to look at it closer.
@@wiard Do you know him personally? How do you know so much about his spiritual insight?
@@wiard Christ was most definitely the living embodiment of that eternal goodness.
@@VVeltanschauung187 well said
@@VVeltanschauung187In Platonism the Logos CANNOT incarnate this is a major difference between Platonism and Christianity. Any thinking platonist would reject this idea
@@fatherofkos8646 Not only CANNOT but, even more, there is NO NEED.
Should thinking Platonists become Empiricists?
Every culture has these ideas, Zoroaster for one.. Good ethics leads one to heaven is not solely a Greek idea Pierre
Pierre nowhere implies quite literally that 'good ethics' leads one to heaven. You completely take him out of context with low resolution thinking.
Thinking platonists should become thomists.
Which thomism though 🤔
I was once a Thomist. So glad I'm a Platonist now
Thomists are more Aristotelean though.
@@bawerk8324i used to be a Platonist. Im glad im a Thomist now ;)
@disciplemike5821 I will never recover from this interaction. My worldview has been thoroughly assaulted.
Debate Jay Dyer