Why Paul's Churches Won
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.พ. 2024
- Although Paul of Tarsus never met the historical Jesus, his vision of the risen Christ convinced him to change his life’s course, become an apostle, and devote the rest of his life preaching the “good news” of the resurrection. Not everyone in the growing movement was pleased by this development and Paul records coming into serious conflict with Jesus’ actual disciples, Peter, James, and John. Paul’s insistence that Christians should not follow Jewish law was at the center of the argument and during the conflict, Paul’s opponents questioned whether he had authority to plant churches. At the end of his career, Paul despaired that many of his own churches in the Eastern Mediterranean seemed to have converted to follow the interpretation of his opponents, causing him to plan a retreat to Spain to start anew. Despite these setbacks, only a few decades later, Paul’s teachings on the law became doctrine for a majority of Christians and his writings were revered as scripture. John Hamer of Toronto Centre Place will trace the conflict among early Christians and consider why Paul’s churches ultimately won.
Join the livestream to participate in the discussion and to ask questions to our lecturer during the Q&A:
Other topics covered in this lecture include:
Browse our catalogue of free lectures at www.centreplace.ca/lectures
Your generous support allows us to offer these lectures at no cost. Please consider a making donation (tax deductible in the US and Canada) at www.centreplace.ca/donate ️
Paul converting Judaism-curious Gentiles strikes me as similar to how various "gurus" will sell Eastern religion to curious Westerners today, often diluting or reframing the cultural context to better appeal to their cultural sensitivities.
Jesus and John the Baptist were living among the Essenes. A gnostic and strictly separate community from others.
Jewish but separate from the temple folk.
Think Amish or Quakers?
You could join but only after a year of observation.
They were like yogis.
As was Jesus/Jeshuah.
Seek.
Search.
In the stillness you will find me.
The only place in the Bible that says where "you" can find God in his words. Where else?
Be still, and know that the "I Am" is God. You have to still the mind to recieve. Your 3rd eye can only receive when you still the projections of the mind, ego, thinkingness and story.
This is what prayer used to be.
The Paulinian church was built much differently.
Its an institution with a finger pointing at something that requires personnel integrity and intentionally reaching for personally communion with God/consciousness/all that is.
Religion is like training wheels for the unconscious .
The Authenticity of the seeker is more important than the religion you come from.
Religion is just a human finger pointing at something that you can have a personal relationship with.
It doesn't matter what you call it.
@@josephpchajek2685 the current Bible or the first century Christian apocryphal gospels as well? Alot changed in the hundreds of years moving towards Europe.
The mixed multitudes apparently were not limited to the exodus from Egypt. Another writer I listen to spoke of Jesus’ teachings being in the Synogogue and from Synogogue life in the 21st Century this seemed implausible. This explanation fits. Thanks
Paul barely touched on Judaism with Greeks/gentiles/pagans. In fact his goal was to use a rebellious Jew Paul persecuted in Jerusalem, Yeshua, recast by Paul into a different role, undoing Judaism in the creation of a new religion antithetical to it, to destroy the Greek religion of the Greek gods and attempt to destroy Judaism by claiming Jews killed Iesous, Paul's character he created to steal Yeshua's mantle as literally the legendary Son of Zeus Greeks knew was foretold in Greek legend to someday eclipse his father Zeus, and succeeded in doing exactly that while failing to take down Judaism though succeeding in 1900 years so far of genocidal persecution of Jews for refusing to accept the preposterous claim Iesous was the Son of God when the God of the Jews was not a human, let alone one who magically fertilized a Jewish girl to make him his "son". To this date, which will never end, Jews refuse to succumb to the lies Paul made about the Hebrew Bible and his other insulting twaddle. And there it stands.
@@josephpchajek2685 The trinity is a concept that came long after Jesus and is not in the bible.
I really enjoy your lectures. I am not a Christian, in fact I am not a believer on any deity but I really enjoy your lectures and how you answer complex questions. Congratulations!!
Sorry for the nitpicking but it's distracting me from your otherwise very interesting presentation: "We" is NOT the 2d person. It is the First Person Plural. The 2d person is "You" (both in singular and plural).
Right: "we" is first person plural.
How can one trust Saul? A former critic of Christianity who later asserts himself the leader and rule maker? Sounds like the perfect infiltration.
Well he lies a lot, soooo.😊
yes, I have believed that for the last 10 years. Something wrong happened when the "church" started its Canon in the 3rd century [ by then, the Catholic church that constructed the new testament bible ]. Too much Paul. Its almost as if they wanted people to be suspicious and not believe the big claims of the bible, because most of the original sources were GONE or dead or not allowed to have their writings and stories in the constructed first bible.
As one of its most profound persecutors and critics of the faith, if Saul's intention to subvert Christianity was to infiltrate it by masquerading as its biggest supporter...seems like he would have burned the whole thing to the ground once he was regarded as an authority. That just doesn't make logical sense to suggest he infiltrated anything.
@@mallen1045 but he did burn it to the ground, you just cant see it for some reason.
@@mallen1045 he did burn it to the ground by allowing everyone in 🤷 There’s not a single verse in the Old Testament for a gentile
This is excellent I cannot believe how much I learned in such a short time. Quite the eye opener for me. Thanks so much.
John: It would be interesting to hear a discussion of what may have occurred in Jerusalem when James the Just led the movement. How his perspective changed, how others in his group viewed him as time passed, and how situations changed upon his death. A lot to get into there.Thanks for your time creating these wonderful and enriching learning experiences. Your teaching is something to behold, along with putting my learning curve into hyperdrive.
We'll consider that, thanks for the suggestion!
@@centre-place Thank you very kindly!
My favorite channel on youtube- big thanks to everyone involved! Keep up the good work :)
Thank you!
Yes it’s very interesting. I also like watching Blogging Theology on TH-cam.
I am falling in love with this channel. And this is by far the most entertaining and information packed lecture I’ve seen here. The wealth of knowledge contained in this TH-cam channel is astonishing. Thank you so much for your work.
Wow, thank you!
I chuckled with Paul finishing his story of the meeting with Peter with the ancient equivalent of "and then everyone clapped" lol
They made this gentleman say "Bloated Warlock" and "Cheddar Baby" 😅.
Like many others, was looking forward to this presentation. Great job, and thanks!
It's truly rewarding to receive such positive feedback!
Soooooo excited when these come out! Love you guys! Thanks John and everyone who makes these so great!
Thank you!
Great lecture John, the first 100 years of the church are so shrouded in mystery and drama, it’s fascinating to study. I didn’t get to ask this during the live chat, but what are your thoughts on the Pseudo-Clementines literature in relation to the schism between the Pauline and Jacobite branches?
Modern day Ebionites and Nazarenes try to claim that they actually go back to Peter, but I haven’t read them myself yet. My understanding is that scholars say they were written in the 4th century. I’d love to hear a lecture by you on the Pseudo-Clementine literature like you did with Pseudo-Dionysus.
Wow! Almost 10K views in less than 24 hours - congrats on the growing ministry, @CentrePlace. Just as Paul opened Jewish tradition to those who could not adhere to the letter of judaic law - I hope that you are opening Christian tradition to many who can't hold unquestioning belief in things that don't fit with modern knowledge.
Thanks you! Glad you enjoy our content!
You are incredible! I can listen all day.. I have learned so much from your videos..thank you!
I really enjoy your lectures!
1:12:00 Paul says: "Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me."
This is not "Conclusive proof of a New Testament woman apostle". He merely says that the couple is well-known among the apostles. Meaning the apostles know about the couple. Even if you don't agree with this interpretation, at least it's a VALID interpretation. It's not conclusive proof that Andronicus and Junia were apostles.
The whole presentation is filled with things like this, taking a small passage and making a big conclusion about early Christianity from it.
I absolutely agree with your statement; you can look for my similar comments. the dude is total clickbait ; he's been doing this for quite a few years. I used to listen to him cause I like the historical interpretations; but now he's apostate.
This was the most informative video I’ve watched by far!
Thanks for that feedback!
I wonder what really happens in the brain with these Eureka / Damaskus moments.
One is contemplating a problem that resists solving, and suddenly one makes a leap to a solution that gets around whatever was in the way. And the larger the problem seemed to be, the greater the feeling of release probably is. It’s like gaining a new perspective, from which the original roadblock now seems meaningless.
The question is: what in the original gospel made Saul go after the followers of Jesus? And what jump occurred in his thinking?
You see, the problem is: If you have a single wrong axiom in your thinking, you can deduce anything. Garbage in, garbage out. If you start false, you can prove everything / get to any conclusion you like, which makes the whole endeavor of getting to conclusions / Eureka moments useless.
Paul was certainly wrong about the end of the world; from a secular individual perspective he is also wrong about death not being the end. What then would it even mean to be right about Jesus being Christ as predicted in the scriptures - which tbh is also wrong, as the gospels are constructed as types from the anti-types of the OT. (And it can’t be otherwise, when most of the predictions are retrodictions, as literary criticism teaches.)
((Die Propheten waren keine Vorhersager, sondern Hervorsager. (Gruß an Dr. Böttcher, falls er das liest.))
So: rationally I don’t share any of the assumptions. Why am I even watching these lectures?
Ethical law ideally is about how to live a life well lived. A conduct of life that makes it conducive to the continuation of life and civilization in general (“playing the long game”): So to not (only) gather capital in your own bank / grain in your own barn, but gather “Treasures in Heaven” = do good, give back to the community. Maybe also help stabilize the institutions that adjudicate the law sensibly, give the law democratically, execute the law without bias, teach the law in its original spirit. - Or transform or replace the old institutions with new ones that do these things.
The message of the NT still is: Turn your life around from taking to giving, get a view for the needs of others. - Jesus approach is reverse psychology: the best way to teach people to see the need of others, and to give freely, is to confront them with intentionally poor disciples, who on the one hand serve as extreme examples, as they have given everything away themselves out of their free will, but also must inevitably be seen by the host as a good opportunity for a practical first step of true cathartical change in their life by literally practicing giving, or at least as an opportunity for virtue signaling, as practically they only are required to show a minimal amount of hospitality anyway.
The burning of the books in every revolution is first about the burning of the debt records, and only second about establishing a new ideology and destroying the old values and hierarchies. Think that the Year of Jubilee in the OT even allowed keeping the structure and values of society as a whole intact, by only getting rid of the excesses.
How would preparing for the end of the age look like? How long can you survive the Zombie Apocalypse? You have food for a year in your bunker? So what? - You need intact communities, because in the end, everybody has to start over from pretty much nothing again, and this works only by working together again on a basis of free will (and pure need), as all the larger social structures will probably collapse. So we are back to family and friends and local communities, where everyone knows everyone else.
So it will all be about your skills (and your tools), your general wisdom and problem solving capabilities, your health and mainly your relationships and ability to integrate and communicate. - But that is what it should have been all along from the beginning. - Why don’t we have that now / before? What do we have in its place? Accumulated wealth and societal structures that keep the incentives and penalties in a way to support the perpetuation of structures of privilege.
But the original reason for accumulating wealth and creating hierarchical structures of power, was to ward off greater crises in the first place, or be prepared to mitigate them when they happen.
The problem is: in times when there is no crisis, those structures and potentials and fortunes become self-serving. And then when the crisis happens, but they fail to react and the potentials and fortunes and powers are not getting used to mitigate the damage, they lose their legitimacy. Then the powers and the wealth need to be transferred and transformed to new institutions and actors that are willing to do what is necessary.
Conclusion? The natural growth of Christianity might have been a failing of the existing elites in times of crisis. Out of the crisis did grow grand new institutions later on.
Feels like we are in the nth cycle. The Elites are failing us again. Rahm Emmanuel said during the banking crisis in 2008 “Never let a good crisis go to waste.”, but the crisis was not used to mitigate the damage, but to consolidate wealth and power even more in the wrong hands.
Crisis calls for a new Reformation of structures, or for cutting them down and growing them back from grassroots. Phoenix reborn from its ashes.
Great potentials for the mitigation of our modern day crisis remain unused, as our elites fail us again. This destroys the legitimacy of their power and wealth and privilege.
Good times for religion, I guess.
This is a great lecture. Great context for understanding mythicist debates too - since Paul had such an influence despite never meeting an actual Jesus, it could appear as if no such person existed from a certain perspective, but not so if we take the Jerusalem church into account.
Incredible though if the Jerusalem church plotted Paul's downfall... but eye opening that they apparently had such a deep disagreement about adherence to law.
See you next Tuesday for another Hamercopia of Knowledge
Ha! You ain't lyin' !
We hope to see you there!
There are people in Britton who say that Paul's accusers never showed up to his trail in Rome so he was released and he went on to Spain and Britton. They say he lived there for a couple of years then when back to Spain. There's a lot of early Christian history in Britton that we know little about.
Love your presentations and all of the work you study in-depth.
As far as writing goes of the Jerusalem church, the one letter of Paul to the Corinthians says that the community had received a letter from some of the followers of the Jerusalem Church. As Paul's take became dominant, might any letters or works in opposition to Paul were suppressed and destroyed and seen as heresy?
Thanks!
Thank you so much for your generous donation. This gift helps us continue to produce this content!
Thanks been waiting for this one
Hope you enjoyed it!
Thank you. Always worth listening to; I always learn interesting stuff from these lectures.
I find James' writings to be the most logical and swalloable truths of the new testament. Works always makes more sense than just Faith. Works proves what you believe. Faith is just hope that isn't really acted upon.
This should be good and should include a bit about why Jews don't believe a word Paul comes out with...
So was Jesus wrong when he stated that Peter would be the rock upon which his church would be built, or were his followers just disregarding Jesus's words.
I'm not sure that Saul had head that.
No one knows what Jesus actually said.
We just know what early Christ groups thought he said and believed.
That saying could just be a quote from a work that comes from the Jerusalem church.
There is only one Gospel. Peter, Paul and all the Apostles preached the same Gospel. The idea that Paul preached a different gospel is only about 200 years old and is an offshoot of Darby's dispensationalism.
That's not what Jesus said though. That's what the Jesuits chose to interpret is as, so that they could create Roman Catholicism and popery.
@Kornheiser10 Jesus was with his disciples in a place know for pagan worship, and believed to be the gateway from hades to this world, when Peter declared :
"You(Jesus) are the Christ, Son of the Living God" implying Jesus deity as the Messiah.
He was literally standing on a rock, and was probably using a play on words to declare that on the truth of what Peter had confessed the Church of Christ would be established.
Perter was one of those at the forefront, but nothing was 'built' on him
Christ is our rock, there is no other.
Sound is not good you must turn it up to max and still don’t hear unless it’s a few inches away
I believe in the 1st century there were two main sects
1. Yeshua apostolic church
2. Pauline church
The yeshuan church did not live long enough because they were eventually overshadowed by the the Pauline and Roman church, the closest to this sect are the Muslims and other non trinitarian middle eastern sects.
The Pauline Christianity is solely responsible for the recklessness in the lives of believer's who look to forsake the law, thus the pervasion and unrighteousness in the church. It gave rise to high level of immorality and unguided living.
The Pauline church later became mainstream Christianity, instead of the righteous/law/faith base church of James and Peter founded in jerusalem. Jesus specifically appointed Peter to head his church not Paul. Early Jewish Christianity is clearly Peter based or based of faith and Torah.
@ashichiroma1183 There is only one God, one faith, one baptism and one body of believers - the church
You clearly don't know what you are talking about if you think being saved by grace through the blood of Jesus is a license to live lawlessly.
Maybe you're coming from a catholic background, as Jesus never 'chose' any one person head his body, in fact contrary to what you understand, at least by your comment, Jesus is the head of his body, the church, leading today by his Spirit, the Spirit of God
Jesus called Paul to preach this message predominantly to those who were not Jews by birth, those from the worlds nations.
@@MRFITTA too much nonsense in such a short statement! Only those blinded by indoctrination and ignorance can be so wrong in so many ways. Look around you.
@@vtblda How am I wrong, points please, so I can address them.
It looks you are in Hebrew root movement. Paul knew the new covenant. Torah law is for Israel kingdom which failed miserably. We are after a man Israel, Jesus. Not after a nation go corrupt.
You can’t call Paul a false Apostle
And one in derision with the other Apostles
When both Luke and Peter call him a Brother in Christ
2 Peter 3:14-16
“Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless; 15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation-as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.”
2nd Peter wasn't written by Peter.
2 Peter is pseudepigripha
Luke isn't one of the 12 AND didn't write Luke
Paul's teaching of savation was contrary to James and Yeshua. On the matter of Faith Paul and James disagreed. Paul said that justification comes “by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law” (Galatians 2:16) while James said that “by works a man is justified, and not by faith only” (James 2:20-21, 23-24). For James faith alone was not enough to put a person into a right standing before God. There is a stark differences in teachings between Jesus and Paul regarding salvation. Jesus taught that SALVATION was obtained by obeying God's commandment ( Matt. 19: 16-21) while Paul stated that salvation came through the death and resurrection of Yeshua (Rom 5:10, 8: 11) and believing in Jesus. Let us compare:
Salvation according to Jesus (as expressed in the synoptic gospels, which are considered more historical than John’s “spiritual gospel”):
Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?” “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.” “Which ones?” he inquired. Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother,’and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’” “All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?” Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” (Matthew 19:16-21, NIV). Salvation according to Paul:
If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. (Rom 10:9-10, NIV). [Source: Salvation according to Jesus vs. Apostle Paul
MAY 8, 2014].
Not surprizingly in the literature written by Paul he is silent on Jesus’ earthly life and teachings.
@@kendrajade6688go and make disciples”
The mandate to the twelve was to duplicate themselves. Not being apart of the 12 is not a disqualification.
Paul sat under the teachings of the apostles for years before his ministry to the gentiles.
It's no mystery to me. You can follow Paul that says you don't have to follow the Jewish laws or you can have a very painful procedure made on the most sensitive part of your body that is circumcision. As an adult male which one will you choose.?
Neither. I follow Jesus.
Wow, thank you so much! It was excellent!
Where do you get all this "quoted" information from???
I absolutely agree with your statement; you can look for my similar comments. the dude is total clickbait ; he's been doing this for quite a few years. I used to listen to him cause I like the historical interpretations; but now he's apostate.
Good presentation, many truths to it in terms of historical context, many non christian can come to the same faith by hearing this divine works of God.
I would highly suggest you read something on Jesus according to Islam. Paul clearly corrupted Jesus's original teachings. Please. Thank you ✌️
@@uncledan2uwhich teachings?
@@uncledan2uWhere is the evidence in the Koran and Hadith that Paul distorted history? your book is just a book without history and witnesses, it's a trash book. In fact, in Surah Yasin verse 14, Ibn Kathir interprets Paul/Baulus as the messenger of isa Ibn Maryam.
I really enjoy your video's. If possible, please do not speed up or slow down your content. Trying to correct the play speed is always the first thing I do before watching. Thanks!
Excellent video. I first saw you on Gospel Tangents a few years ago. The development of Joseph Smith Jr.'s teachings is one of the other lectures by you that I've seen previously.
I'm glad I found your TH-cam channel. The lectures on your website match many of my interests. A former Christian, now a 12er Shi'ite Muslim, I have a big interest in history, as well as comparative religion. So, I will be watching many more of your videos.
You chose Islam that right but make more researches of differents schools I don't think 12 are the good one
You have to make a decision to believe a book. I would no more choose his book over pauls writings
Thanks
Thank you for supporting the channel!
Very interesting how the faith alone vs faith + works debate is still going on today
No it's not. Salvation is faith based and there is no debate. There are only liars who want to deceive.
That was Paul who said that. James taught it is by faith and works. Paul never met Jesus. James was his brother. Who are you going to believe more?
@@jrgvsqz I'm going to believe Jesus I am not going to believe you. You just made an ignorant and foolish comment. It came across as arrogant too. Thanks for adding to the conversation even though your contribution is worthless.
The books were written in the language applicable to the people it was written for
There is an historical record you can find in quite a few books on the subject. I have read quite a few. So I am very familiar with the theories and historical records the narrator refers too.
I've been thoroughly enjoying these lectures. Thank you for making scholarly content free and available to all!
I've wanted to know for a long time how a man who never met Yashua, changed his teachings and was able to convince influential people that he was telling the truth...wild stuff😮
He didn't, it is all a plot!!!
He clearly told people things they liked to hear
Easy to do when the character is made up to begin with.
well how does some one believe false narratives..and repeat them❓
They don't go to the source
they are ignorant and gullible
'They have a zeal for God
but not in the knowledge' ~ God
Paul wasn't a Jew he was a Hebrew, as you yourself said he wasn't of the tribe of Judah which is how you said yourself the term Jew comes from, a contradiction in such quick succession from the explanation of where Jews get their name from compels me to correct you.
Fantastic lecture!! Good work.🎉
Thank you! 😃
Excellent presentation. Thank you John
Glad you enjoyed it
John Hamer present a historical perspective quite similar to James Tabor. Curious because Hamer is a pastor. When Tabor is asked a question about his personal beliefs, you really don't get a clear answer. Well he probably is sensible in being cautious about that. I have known about RLDS all my life coming from the Kansas City metro. I was not aware that it is a pretty liberal minded denomination, and I say that with respect. They call themselves Community of Christ now.
The 2nd Person is when you address people directly: "'You' are walking in the desert...and 'you' are thirsty."
Both "I" and "we" are first person; they are first person singular and plural respectively. Modern English doesn't differentiate between plural and singular with the second person (archaic singular: thou). Third person: he, she, it (singular) and they (plural).
The Letters of Paul were written in Greek. It is very different from modern English.
“We” indicates that separation is an illusion
When it comes to Apostles and Prophets… I’ve often wondered how parishioners of evangelical mega-churches can sit in those pews, week after week, listening to those preachers claiming powers of prophecy, while they also insist that Jesus commands said parishioners to empty their pockets, to pay for the preachers’s fourth luxury jet.
How do they square that?🤔
Probably they make the "argumen" that it is not for them personally, but for the wellbeing of the community and the spreading of the message (infamous example: Kenneth Copeland and his private jets that he definetly needs).
@@happytofu5 I’m sure you’re right. But that ‘argument’ seems pretty absurd when one considers what $60M (plus $1.2M a year, in operating costs) could do for that same community. And as far as spreading the ‘message’ goes, he already had 2 private jets, and claimed that he needed the 3rd so he didn’t have to refuel on longer trips… and, so that he didn’t have to fly with demons, lol. One would think that spending that money on people and communities in need, would be far more inline with Jesus’ teachings… and not for nothing but if he was really a man/prophet of God, these said ‘demons’ would be exactly the ones you’re supposed to bring that message to, and ‘save’!😉😂
Reading the New Testament we see that Paul was in union with Jesus' disciples. It describes one disagreement but also that they solved it. Peter also explicitly showed allegence with Paul in one of his letters.
Paul is basically responsible for creating Christianity, it wasn't just him obviously, but he basically founded the religion and he never even met Jesus in the flesh!
Didn't he take it from james and bastardise it...
I agree with you. Looking back on it, Paul created what would become the proto-orthodox church which would eventually lead to the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. I think it also helps he was influential to the Gnostics too.
I think he invented two ideas that have influenced Christians to this day: rejection of the Torah and the Eucharist or communion. By cresting new ways of thinking and new rituals he created the building blocks of a new religion.
@@jdjones4825 I suppose you could look at it that way. Interesting suggestion!
@@michaelhenry1763 Yes well said! I didn't know about the Eucharist rejection. I need to study Paul more
'You are my rock'
'Get behind me satan' ~Jesus to Paul in the olive grove
You are impressive in your tackling this historically. Shows great strength. Last, a good discussion might be about what were exactly those laws the Jewish Christians had to adhere to? Were they the over 600 ones Jews now follow? And if relaxed rules were allowed for gentile Christians, which ones might they have been?
I have to say, your lectures make me wonder where you and your church stands on all of this spiritually. Was Jesus God for your group? Maybe only a blessed man? Where do you stand on the faith only, and faith and good works divide? You've piqued my interest. But you stear clear of these in your lectures. Commendable, but leaves me curious.
Thanks! Incredible content
We can produce these lectures and offer them for free because of your support. 🙏Thank you 🙏
Paul had the Gnostics on side, for one. He also travelled a lot, founding churches.
Paul was opposed to the Gnostics
Romans 3:31
“Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.”
@@yellowcoat970 But he does speak like a Gnostic at times if you take the Greek more seriously, 1 Cor. 2: 6-8 - "But we speak wisdom among the perfected, though not wisdom
of this age or of this age’s Archons, who have been brought to nothing; rather, we speak of God’s wisdom in a mystery, which has been
hidden away, which God has marked out in advance for our glory before the ages, which none of this age’s Archons knew"
I am confused: wasn't Barnaby Peter's father-in-law?
Then you for the deep dive on Paul, his letters speak to me most. His story and his dreading of the word is one of the best histories to me!!
Genuinely great lectures. Concerning James, the term "brother" is multivalent, right? It can refer to cousins and close companions. Your thoughts, brother?
He has said on multiple occasions that it would have been a blood brother. I believe it is also the scholarly consensus as I've heard Bart Ehrman say the same thing.
Edit: John also has a lecture on James from a few months back.
It can never mean cousin. This is an invention by St. Augustine because he had this weird notion that all saints must be virgins, and since Joseph was a saint, he must also be a virgin and can't have kids. Thus Jesus' brothers must be his cousins. To justify his interpretation, he then grabbed some Greek writings where cousins call each other brothers out of context. Many of these examples are actually of heroes in combat calling each other brothers in arms who happen to be cousins. However, Augustine became authoritative in the West, so his totally dishonest sleight-of-hand persisted.
What is correct is that brother could mean co-religionists or brothers-in-arms. This is in fact the argument made to justify James not being a true brother of Jesus, but again, this is taking things out of context. Whenever James is referred to as a brother of Jesus it actually means brother.
Bart also says that “brother” can mean ANYONE that believed Jesus performed supernatural acts. As two members of the same motorcycle gang refer to each other.
Read the first chapter of Galatians. You’ll see “brother” used in multiple places, when it’s used to refer to James you can see the difference in context and tone to indicate that James is a relative of Jesus.
Brother used at that time referred to anyone within the burgeoning sect of Judaism.
I am enchanted with Centre Place. "We" is First Person PLURAL form of the pronoun "I". "You" is the Second Person. You have accurately identified a personal pronoun in the Third Person (Subject case: he, she, it, they Object case: him, her, it, them. As I have learned so much from you: Personal pronouns have four attributes: person, gender, number, case. They overlap.
Either Paul had sacred favor as he claimed, to dominate Christendom, or he was the first false prophet to deceive the many.
Is it possible that Paul was setup when he returned to Jerusalem?
I thought Gospel was a military term used to spread word that victory had been achieved in war. And the Gospels were a victory for new life over eternal damnation.
Gospel in English means “good news”
@@yellowcoat970 I was right I just googled it! - In ancient Greece and Rome, the word gospel was a military word that referred to a proclamation of victory by the winning army of a battle or war. In Greek, the word is euangelion, literally translated as good news. After a fight among nations, messengers from the winning side (or angelos) would go around the conquered territories proclaiming the good news of what this victory meant for their lives.
The authors of the New Testament repurposed this word throughout their letters. But rather than a declaration of military victory, it was rooted in a declaration about Jesus.
whilst making a "point" that the writer of Acts switches from third person to "second" (by saying "we" instead of "they") haven't you erred since "we" is not second person but First Person plural? second person pronouns are "thou", singular, and "you", singular or plural.
What’s Paul’s last name? I’m having trouble finding him.
Jones, Paul Jones.
@@michaelhenry1763 Wasn’t he also the drummer for Led Zeppelin?
Most people at that time didn’t really have last names. They’d be referred to as the son-of-whomever or of-wherever to distinguish them from others with the same name.
People didn't have a second name as we do today. To distinguish one John from another John, for example, historians would normally use the town the persona was from or their father's name. Saúl/Paul was "of Tarsus" because he was born there.
@@MiguelRamosLIve thank you for your post. It’s a joke. We are having fun about not having last names.
On a serious note. Based on reading Paul’s letters, I do not think his original was Saul, I think it was always Paul. Additionally, I do not think he was from Taurus. I think, based on his letters, he may have been from Damascus.
I don't think Paul ever thought that his ministry could it had been superseded by Peter's. Otherwise, he wouldn't had written to his assistant Timothy stating that he has fought a good fight and had finished the race when his mission was culminating (2 Tim 4:7). He further wrote that "a crown of righteousness was waiting for him". That is a thought of knowing that his work was a great climax and successful at best. The conflict that arose between the two was relating to issues of jews laws and customs which was not the gospel the Lord revealed to Paul for the gentiles.
3rd person: she, he, they. 1st person: I, we. 2nd person: thou, you
Most people ignore what Jesus had to say on this matter.
John 11:25-26
New King James Version
25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. 26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
Why would anyone chose a different salvation than what Jesus offers here? Let me put it bluntly, who is going to offer you a better deal? You can have the resurrection and the life that He's offering you. Perhaps you would rather rise up with the "dead in Christ?" If you don't believe in Jesus, you will have to die. When you arise in the last day resurrection, it will be to face the white throne judgement. In between your death and resurrection, you missed the opportunity to meet Jesus in Paradise and also the opportunity to be born on the new 1000 year earth.
Jesus will judge you fairly according to every jot and every title of the law because He won't break his covenant. Now that you’re resurrected with the “dead in Christ” it's a hard path that you’ve chosen to follow. Now your salvation depends on how well you followed the law and kept its commandments. Wouldn't it have been better to keep His covenant because of your belief in Him and to never die? Since you chose not to believe in Him, now your best hope is that He will allow you to die.
This is a nice talk however I think the real reason Paul's church is one is that the Romans destroyed the church in Jerusalem when they leveled Jerusalem and basically left those other churches as the default Church
Thank you
Saul of Tarsus is currently being tortured in his grave and he will get worse on judgement day and still worse in hell. He will receive the punishment of every soul he misguided without taking away from each of their burdens.
I don't know what his motivations were but he's screwed.
Great work!
Thanks!
great overview
Thank you!
1:48:19
That's one way to put it.
Always look on the bright side of death!
There are lots of lines in the New Testament that could have never been written in Aramaic because they contain idioms unique to Greek
Thanks for your informative lecture. I learned a lot.
I wish the TV evangelists would listen to this .....and realize how wrong it is to beg for airplane money while wearing a 5k dollar suit..
Very good video! I live in Yellowknife
It's truly rewarding to receive such positive feedback!
John, I understand It is possible that the Jerusalem Jewish/Christians after moving to Pella and possible other parts of Arabia may have been around until 1000 or 1100. It seems Mohammed might have been aware of their monotheism and took from it a solid monotheism as opposed to the Greek influenced Trinitarians. Do have any info on this or is it accurate?
Muhammad is the last prophet what is telling is the Coran
The Holy Trinity has ALWAYS BEEN PERIOD!☦️☦️☦️
Muhammad is the BIGGEST FALSE PROPHET EVER! And if the Jews and us Christians and Non-believers knew what Muhammad teach about us! Some of the things this guy said I agree with but some I disagree with him! He said take away from The Holy Bible. Wow! If you true Christians wouldn't NEVER say that! And he totally wrong about The Church Fathers and the times he saying! Do yours on studies about Our Lord Jesus Christ and the 4 Gossips and The Church Fathers. Y'all need him close because he is wrong!
Sorry, bu "we" is 1st person plural. Great content, anyways!
Side note: ref. 55:50. When Paul met Peter and James...man, WHERE WERE THE REST of the Apostles? did he ask?
I am pretty sure "we" is 1st person, just plural. 2nd person would be "you" (both plural and singular), just as "he, she, it" are singular 3rd, and "they" is plural 3rd person.
Wouldn't Paul have had to known the gospels (or accounts of Jesus) before his conversion? Even if only by word of mouth? Otherwise, how could he have known what he was persecuting? How could he have been converted without that knowledge? Therefore he did not invent but rather he modified. And it doesn't seem to me that he modified radically. But then, I wasn't there. None of us were. Anyway, I'm only 22 min into this video but it seems like a very excellent presentation so far. Comments section looks good also. IMHO.
Christianity didn't "Come later" as the Way is mentioned along with Christianity in Acts, the King even mentioned Christianity in court with Paul saying that Paul "Almost convinced him of Christianity" which was My Gospel according to Paul.
You mentioned anachronisms in Ephesians, can you share more about those?
Paul was the Ray Kroc of religion
Excellent lecture. Simply put yet very clarified and informative.. Thank you.🤍 As student of religious studies that lives in Thessaloniki city, in the region of Macedonia in Greece ,can I ask you to please refrain from repeating that "Macedonia AND Greece " ? . Because Greece and Macedonia were never two separate countries /states /regions /nations. Not in the 1st century AD not in the middle ages not now..We are one. Excluding macedonia from Greece is like excluding Crete from Greece , or Peloponnese from Greece..sounds pretty off. The newly formed state of north Macedonia aka ex FYROM (former Yugoslavia) has nothing to do with macedonia the greek region and as far as i know Paul never visited there. Forgive my intervention, but that name dispute it's just a very delicate matter for the modern hellenic republic..Just to avoid confusion.
Sorry for nitpicking. But "he, she, it" (singular) and "they" (plural) is 3rd person. "you" ("thou", singular) and "you" (plural) is 2nd person. And "I" (singular) and "we" (plural) is 1st person. However, thank you very much for an, again, very informative lecture!
This is in English. The original text was written in Greek. Big difference.
@@VSP4591 In Greek it's the same thing, though.
I am not so sure but if you know Koine is OK.@@chutspe
Why do you say the contradictions don't matter?
Regarding Romans 3:28 v James 2:24:
Romans is talking about faith apart from Mosaic law. James is talking about faith apart from one’s actions. These are not contradictory at all.
Regarding James 2:8, he is saying that it is impossible to be righteous by upholding the law because no man can uphold all of the law all of the time (even looking at a woman lustfully breaks the law of adultery), because the law sets man up for failure and for condemnation/guilt. Only by Faith in Jesus Christ can man fulfill the law and become righteous and free from condemnation/guilt.
Then, James goes on to say that faith without actions are useless and gives Abraham faithfully presenting his son for sacrifice as an example. An example which would have been a clear violation of the law (thou shalt not kill), so it is clear he is talking about works in terms of one’s actions and not in terms of the law!
Nice take!
thank you
26:12 nice map
In a future video, can you address the ultimate fate of the Jewish Christians after they took refuge in Pella? Do you agree with the thesis that there were some in Arabia until the time of Mohammed?
If you like to read I have a book for you it speaks directly to your question
Grammatical point of order: 2nd person singular and plural are both 'you'. 1st person singular is "I". 1st plural is 'We'. I suspect your use of 2nd person 'We' should actually be stated as 1st person plural.
Just wrote a similar comment. I hadn't read yours before.
He sold a ticket to heaven and people bought it.
Thank you. When you use the word "churches", it appears as if there were physical locations; I don't know when the first actual physical churches were built, and the Roman concept of civil locations of government were parts of their system thus diocese & classes of bishops, cardinals, etc., a much later form of organization based on the Roman model of civic rule, but I suspect the "churches" Paul established & wrote letters or the Jerusalem "church", were actually held in individual's homes. And the "home" in antiquity, the Greek oecoi (sp) origin of our word, economics, was the total domain of women. (And I suspect supporters of Jesus financially) such as Lydia successful businesswoman in dyed cloth...
It is women in the home, opening up to believers, cooking the meals, singing hymns, prayers, and called, "deacons", was the actual beginning of the Christian "churches". Where gentiles, particularly Greek homes, where HESTIA of the hearth and sometimes HERMES (Mercury) were standard protectors, guardians, guides, and celebrated gods of the "home", with no great temples but nevertheless, extremely important gods, and reason for Marion worship perhaps.
This important beginning of the earliest " churches" is an important one, I think. The important role of women that in this patriarchal time, would be taken over by men, such as the structures of church hierarchy developed later. Yet this feminine input and voice, remains a strong part and keeps returning in mysterious ways, such as the gnostic gospels, Marion apparitions such as Fatima, Mary as the mother of God, myths of the Magdalene, even to the present in the insanely best seller, "The Davinci Code"...
Also, instead of a negative, Christianity's diversity and challenges in dealing with a new "eastern" influences (Dionysus comes to mind, lol), actually led to that wonderful Greek idea of DEBATE. The true meaning of LOGOS (logic), communication, language, politics (in the first democracy Athens...), Reason, argument, it's all about a process- DEBATE. (And part of a "trinity" of concepts in Greek thought: LOGOS (reason); ETHOS (ethics, morals), and PATHOS (emotions, ecstasy, theatre, chaos...).
...Something the other two monotheistic religions more "Eastern" in flavor, much less debate, controversy, and differences... Because OBEDIENCE, not discussion, democracy, freedom, etc., rules their agenda... Basically, slavery.
It's said: Western Civilization is like a Family, whose Father is Greek; whose Mother is Hebrew, and they packed up the Family and moved to Rome!
Uh Alexander!?
God of jesus christ is ammon dias the amen