In an episode of the PBS series, "Connections," it was said that Columbus was a devotee of an Italian scholar (I forget his name) who, from his study of the logs of Marco Polo, concluded the Earth was much smaller than the accepted (and fairly accurate) size. Now, here's my speculation... Other monarchs turned him down, no doubt because they figured such an extended trip was not practical. But Ferdinand & Isabella of Spain said, "Go!" Why? St. Brendan, an Irish monk, had previously explored the North Atlantic in his raft. Had he discovered North America? Perhaps. And being a monk, his records were certainly turned over to the Vatican. Spain, and its king & queen, were the most devout Catholic country & monarchs, in Europe. Maybe, partly as a reward for their devotion, and partly, to spread the Faith to a new Continent, the Church sent a message to Ferdinand & Isabella: "This 'Columbus'? Give him what he wants!"
Another fantastic Hamercopia of Knowledge this evening. Glad to be back with the weekly lectures. Thank you to everyone at Centre Place for bringing these to us. I give this one 5 bags of popcorn, 2 sodas and 2 academic disciplines of literary criticism.
He starts off lying. He is a liar. Why would you keep listening? Why do you people love frauds? The menorah literally represents the 7 luminaries... The center candle is literally called the Shamash... They literally added 2 candles when uranus and neptune were discovered..
The confusion in John 3:3 is because "born again" also means "from above" in Greek. There seem to be 2 stories there, in one Nicodemus questions the "born again" but Jesus explains he meant "from above" later in the text (13 and 14). Likely a story not from Jesus himself as John is very late, Bart Ehrman makes this point very clear.
Bart Ehrman is a joke. I have two degrees in the field myself and studied in Germany. Ehrman simply copies all the German higher criticism from 100 years ago. Things that often have long been debunked. Like the idea that John is late because it has a "high Christology". There has been more than one scholar criticizing that idea like the German theologian Klaus Berger or the Anglican John A. T. Robinson.
@@MrSeedi76 But John does have a high Christology and it's illogical to suppose that this would predate simpler ones. Yeah, and two is"more than one". All you've said is "Scholars disagree." If "Ehrman is a joke", please explain what is so funny about the following: "When dealing only with Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the synoptic Gospels, then, we are talking not just about three books written late in the first century. We are talking about at least four sources: Mark, Q, M, and L, the latter two of which could easily have represented several, or even many, other written sources. Many leading scholars of the Gospel of Mark think that it too was compiled not just of oral traditions that had been circulating down to the author’s day but of various written sources…Scholars have long suspected that John had at his disposal an earlier written account of Jesus’ miracles (the so-called Signs Source), at least two accounts of Jesus’ long speeches (the Discourse Sources), and possibly another passion source as well…All of these written sources I have mentioned are earlier than the surviving Gospels; they all corroborate many of the key things said of Jesus in the Gospels; and most important they are all independent of one another". From Did Jesus Exist? p.65.
Part of the reason that Jesus likely never said this is because the double meaning only makes sense in Greek. In the language they would have been conversing in, Aramaic, this meaning is lost.
Is it leather-bound and approved within the parameters of your state with the law and order for the bible that is allowed/mandated in the local schools? - This is important.
When you consider how often what counts as "scripture" has changed, how do you determine which to take literally? Depending on what year you were born, you might follow the scripture completely perfectly yet still be committing blasphemy because some later group decides a book you thought was holy is actually heresy. It seems safer to assume all scripture is flawed by default.
Is there a spiritual world where dinosaurs dance with humanity.😂😂? Yabba yabba dooo...black people were not enslaved by the white settlers, they used happy to be enslaved friendly dinosaurs 🦕 🦕 So is spiritualism, romantic and dangerous? Imagenery fantasy politics. Thank you John for your work, I learn so much from you 😊.
John, I think you are mixing genres in a point you were making about understanding the Scriptures spiritually. You gave the example of Jesus speaking with Nicodemus about being born again. Jesus was clearly speaking metaphorically. His words did not have a literal meaning. However, can you say that the following Scriptures have a spiritual meaning only and that they should be read that way? (1) The story of the little boys teasing the prophet Elisha: Is this story meant to be historical or should we believe that the story never happened in history and that the story only has a spiritual meaning.? (2) The story of Phineas "thrusting through" the Israelite man and his Moabite woman in Numbers 25:7-13: Is this story to be understood only spiritually or was the story meant to be a historical event?
Having listened to a lot of theological scholars I believe the general consensus is nothing in the Old testament is historical in any way. Also why would God send bears to murder children?
How did the author/s of Genesis intended it to be understood? That's the question. The answer is, as real history. "While some take this to the logical extreme forcing them to reject science...." Hate to burst your bubble there, but all the major branches of modern science were started by Bible believing creationists... long before Darwin popped up. There is nothing in nature, the fossils, etc that does not fit creation... far better. And no real science or logic supports the idea that everything made itself, which the only alternative to creation.
There are some questionable beliefs in the Church, but the existence of Christ and the resurrection are not one of them, if you don't accept that, fine good luck on your path and I will stay with the Gospel 🙏 God bless you 🙏
LITERALLY! Takebeach and every WORD literally. Yet the HEBREW is and IS POETRY, FILLED WITH THE SPIRIT. HENCE is Living, NOT factually literal, concretely objective, solid AS is SCIENCE, an entirely different Language.
I will give you this, I always say there are truths and non truths in all religious texts. But the existence of Jesus Christ, and that he rose from the Dead are truths.
According to the song they all walked into the ark two by two: 🦎🦎🐢🐢🐊🐊🐇🐇🐁🐁🐀🐀🐈🐈🐩🐩🐕🐕🐖🐖🐎🐎🐄🐄🐂🐂🐃🐃🐏🐑🐐🐐🦙🦙🦥🦥🦘🦘🐘🐘🦒🦒🐆🐆🐅🐅🐒🐒🦧🦧🐪🐫🐿️🐿️🦨🦨🦦🦦🦇🦇🐦🐦🐓🐔🦅🦅🦉🦉🦜🦜🕊️🕊️🦢🦢🦆🦆🦩🦩🦚🦚🦃🦃🐧🐧 like that. And the King James Bible has unicorns in it.
😂 Wrong - the axis of the earth is tilted. Where did you come up with that? In your non working flat earth model where the sun constantly changes its size in the sky 😂?
If you mean an apparent straight line in your field of vision, as a hula hoop would look if your eye was looking at it from the center of the hoop, then yes, at least at the the equinoxes it is that sort of straight path. The greatest deviances would be the solstices, where it would be the equivalent of moving your eye slightly above or below the plane of the hula hoop around your head, which the apparent path of the sun would curve slightly, as would the hula hoop in your field of vision.
@@opinion3742 i did not think it through enough. the saying "don't throw your pearls to swine" comes to mind.🤔thanks for reminding me. you are not ready🐷
A 5th century monk, the Venerable Bede, wrote a book De Natura which has a chapter titled That the Earth is a Sphere
Akshually it’s an oblate spheroid.
Mulțumim!
In an episode of the PBS series, "Connections," it was said that Columbus was a devotee of an Italian scholar (I forget his name) who, from his study of the logs of Marco Polo, concluded the Earth was much smaller than the accepted (and fairly accurate) size. Now, here's my speculation... Other monarchs turned him down, no doubt because they figured such an extended trip was not practical. But Ferdinand & Isabella of Spain said, "Go!" Why? St. Brendan, an Irish monk, had previously explored the North Atlantic in his raft. Had he discovered North America? Perhaps. And being a monk, his records were certainly turned over to the Vatican. Spain, and its king & queen, were the most devout Catholic country & monarchs, in Europe. Maybe, partly as a reward for their devotion, and partly, to spread the Faith to a new Continent, the Church sent a message to Ferdinand & Isabella: "This 'Columbus'? Give him what he wants!"
Excellent. Thank you. The ‘idiocy’ of literalism (and anti-science) needs to be exposed.
Thanks!
Another fantastic Hamercopia of Knowledge this evening. Glad to be back with the weekly lectures. Thank you to everyone at Centre Place for bringing these to us. I give this one 5 bags of popcorn, 2 sodas and 2 academic disciplines of literary criticism.
He starts off lying. He is a liar. Why would you keep listening? Why do you people love frauds?
The menorah literally represents the 7 luminaries... The center candle is literally called the Shamash... They literally added 2 candles when uranus and neptune were discovered..
Applause was appropriate at several points in this video. Best video ever. Peace brother.
The gospel of Tolkien is revealed to me from the youtube channel In Deep Geek.
Jokes aside, it's a great channel.
Speak like, and subscribe.
One of my favorite channels.
Hello fellow geeks
That's exactly what I was taught - Columbus proving the earth was round. 1973😐
Lol😢😮..😅😊😂
20:00 The FUNDAMENTALISTS do EXACTLY that!
Many texts were told through stories containing metaphors and allegories.
Well done
Yes, yes, yes, yes....
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
5:14 Does these verses indicate a flat earth.
The confusion in John 3:3 is because "born again" also means "from above" in Greek. There seem to be 2 stories there, in one Nicodemus questions the "born again" but Jesus explains he meant "from above" later in the text (13 and 14). Likely a story not from Jesus himself as John is very late, Bart Ehrman makes this point very clear.
Bart Ehrman is a joke. I have two degrees in the field myself and studied in Germany. Ehrman simply copies all the German higher criticism from 100 years ago. Things that often have long been debunked. Like the idea that John is late because it has a "high Christology". There has been more than one scholar criticizing that idea like the German theologian Klaus Berger or the Anglican John A. T. Robinson.
@@MrSeedi76 But John does have a high Christology and it's illogical to suppose that this would predate simpler ones.
Yeah, and two is"more than one". All you've said is "Scholars disagree."
If "Ehrman is a joke", please explain what is so funny about the following:
"When dealing only with Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the synoptic Gospels, then, we are talking not just about three books written late in the first century. We are talking about at least four sources: Mark, Q, M, and L, the latter two of which could easily have represented several, or even many, other written sources. Many leading scholars of the Gospel of Mark think that it too was compiled not just of oral traditions that had been circulating down to the author’s day but of various written sources…Scholars have long suspected that John had at his disposal an earlier written account of Jesus’ miracles (the so-called Signs Source), at least two accounts of Jesus’ long speeches (the Discourse Sources), and possibly another passion source as well…All of these written sources I have mentioned are earlier than the surviving Gospels; they all corroborate many of the key things said of Jesus in the Gospels; and most important they are all independent of one another". From Did Jesus Exist? p.65.
Part of the reason that Jesus likely never said this is because the double meaning only makes sense in Greek. In the language they would have been conversing in, Aramaic, this meaning is lost.
HEBREW, GREEK and LATIN yield 3 different expressions referring to the same fact/object with nuances.
The Bible is real, I have one.
Anyone who's read it knows it's astrology.
Is it leather-bound and approved within the parameters of your state with the law and order for the bible that is allowed/mandated in the local schools? - This is important.
The Bible debunks astrology. It declares at the very start that the sun and moon aren't gods but simply lights in the sky.
@@MrSeedi76 It only debunks not taking astrology literally.
When you consider how often what counts as "scripture" has changed, how do you determine which to take literally? Depending on what year you were born, you might follow the scripture completely perfectly yet still be committing blasphemy because some later group decides a book you thought was holy is actually heresy. It seems safer to assume all scripture is flawed by default.
A bold claim that has no basis in the history of the Bible.
Is there a spiritual world where dinosaurs dance with humanity.😂😂? Yabba yabba dooo...black people were not enslaved by the white settlers, they used happy to be enslaved friendly dinosaurs 🦕 🦕
So is spiritualism, romantic and dangerous? Imagenery fantasy politics.
Thank you John for your work, I learn so much from you 😊.
Chat gone. Tyvm YT
Is 'literallistically' literally a word?
It's funny how people ask questions that the computer they carry in their pocket can answer.
@WayneBraack what's the difference between literally and literalistically?
@@WayneBraack Not my computer. It is constantly lying to me.
Contrary to creationists evolutionists belive that fossils was made because a Mammoth was gardualy burried during thousansds of years
Nonsense
John, I think you are mixing genres in a point you were making about understanding the Scriptures spiritually. You gave the example of Jesus speaking with Nicodemus about being born again. Jesus was clearly speaking metaphorically. His words did not have a literal meaning. However, can you say that the following Scriptures have a spiritual meaning only and that they should be read that way? (1) The story of the little boys teasing the prophet Elisha: Is this story meant to be historical or should we believe that the story never happened in history and that the story only has a spiritual meaning.?
(2) The story of Phineas "thrusting through" the Israelite man and his Moabite woman in Numbers 25:7-13: Is this story to be understood only spiritually or was the story meant to be a historical event?
Having listened to a lot of theological scholars I believe the general consensus is nothing in the Old testament is historical in any way.
Also why would God send bears to murder children?
You don’t know.
How did the author/s of Genesis intended it to be understood? That's the question. The answer is, as real history.
"While some take this to the logical extreme forcing them to reject science...."
Hate to burst your bubble there, but all the major branches of modern science were started by Bible believing creationists... long before Darwin popped up. There is nothing in nature, the fossils, etc that does not fit creation... far better.
And no real science or logic supports the idea that everything made itself, which the only alternative to creation.
There are some questionable beliefs in the Church, but the existence of Christ and the resurrection are not one of them, if you don't accept that, fine good luck on your path and I will stay with the Gospel 🙏 God bless you 🙏
LITERALLY! Takebeach and every WORD literally. Yet the HEBREW is and IS POETRY, FILLED WITH THE SPIRIT. HENCE is Living, NOT factually literal, concretely objective, solid AS is SCIENCE, an entirely different Language.
I will give you this, I always say there are truths and non truths in all religious texts. But the existence of Jesus Christ, and that he rose from the Dead are truths.
Really! Where did he go after he rose from the dead? Up into the firmament?
Look into anything by Richard Carrier.
...or Kenneth Humphries...
@@derekallen4568he may still be navigating the milky way galaxy
All four Resurrection stories are different. How can that be?
Farm animals not polar bears in ark
Noah shouldn’t have let the mosquitoes on the ark.
According to the song they all walked into the ark two by two: 🦎🦎🐢🐢🐊🐊🐇🐇🐁🐁🐀🐀🐈🐈🐩🐩🐕🐕🐖🐖🐎🐎🐄🐄🐂🐂🐃🐃🐏🐑🐐🐐🦙🦙🦥🦥🦘🦘🐘🐘🦒🦒🐆🐆🐅🐅🐒🐒🦧🦧🐪🐫🐿️🐿️🦨🦨🦦🦦🦇🦇🐦🐦🐓🐔🦅🦅🦉🦉🦜🦜🕊️🕊️🦢🦢🦆🦆🦩🦩🦚🦚🦃🦃🐧🐧 like that.
And the King James Bible has unicorns in it.
in the globe(heliocentric) model, the sun's path accross the sky would be a straight line. 🤔think about it. is that what you observe?
😂 Wrong - the axis of the earth is tilted. Where did you come up with that? In your non working flat earth model where the sun constantly changes its size in the sky 😂?
Thought about it and am forced to conclude that you have some learning to do.
If you mean an apparent straight line in your field of vision, as a hula hoop would look if your eye was looking at it from the center of the hoop, then yes, at least at the the equinoxes it is that sort of straight path. The greatest deviances would be the solstices, where it would be the equivalent of moving your eye slightly above or below the plane of the hula hoop around your head, which the apparent path of the sun would curve slightly, as would the hula hoop in your field of vision.
@@opinion3742 i did not think it through enough. the saying "don't throw your pearls to swine" comes to mind.🤔thanks for reminding me. you are not ready🐷
@@MrSeedi76 i did not think it through enough. thank you. the saying "don't throw your pearls to swine" comes to mind. you are not ready🐷
You either believe the word of God or you don't .
Bibilical Literalism isn't extreme enough for me. I don't believe anything UNLESS it's in the bible.
In English?
@@jttj742 He's taking the piss.
The King James version was good enough for Jesus so it's good enough for me 😂