We should also keep in mind that God inspired the New Testament in the Pagan Koine Greek language...so He must have felt there was something good there.
How do you know that? Seems like a roundabout way of saying "We don't have the New Testament in its original language and thus anything in there could be a translation error but we have no way of knowing that, so we just have to believe that God inspired these unknown writers."
Luke 24:45 reminds us unless God OPENS the mind to understand Scripture the psychobabble of Protestantism occurs. The Scriptures aren't merely about reading & hearing, but about EXPANDED = ENLIGHTENED consciousness SEEING in receiving INCREATE = UNCREATED Light. Without this Heavenly Validation there is only heresy, because the Lord God does not SHINE on falsehoods. The miraculousness of DEIFICATION = IMMORTALIZATION is normal for those in Christ.
Learning about pagan gods to find ounces of "truth" is contradictory to Jesus being THE Truth. I teach my kids classically but I continue to grow more convicted over this method. St. Augustines words about the dangers of a pagan based education continue to ring in my ears.
I feel like you walked yourself into a hole saying that Paul cited pagan mythology to present His literal account of what Jesus said to Him on the Damascus road, and then halfheartedly backtracked with that last minute clarification. I just don't get the point of saying that. Are you saying there's a possibility that Paul's speaking metaphorically? He definitely wasn't.
He certainly doesn't believe Paul was speaking metaphorically. He was using the language of "the ancients" of his day - that was the point. Or more specifically, Paul was literate in those works, and didn't mind using them. To take an oversimplified, painfully obvious example, when we use the term "Achilles Heal," we're borrowing from Greek thought and mythology. Now, it's such a cliche that many today won't even know where that comes from, but if it weren't a cliche, it would be a good example.
@@foucachon to say that Paul "didn't mind using" quotes from Greek writing of the day would infer that Paul wasn't directly quoting Jesus, but using relevant material to relate to the people of the age. Do you see why I'm drawing that conclusion? I just think it's a pretty absurd claim to say that Paul was influenced by popular Greek writing in the writing of a direct quote from Jesus. That would imply that Paul dishonestly misquoted Jesus to be relevant. Would it not? Serious question; I'm not trying to be contentious.
@@Stanzi18 What makes you think Jesus didn't use that language. But more importantly, we know he didn't exactly, since Paul was writing in Greek. He was de facto using "relevant material" (namely the Greek language). This is something that second nature to me growing up bi-lingual (French and English, and studied Greek and Latin later). My father is also a translator for biblical courses. Translation is always dynamic. Or I should say, TRUE translation that tells the truth about the original author is always dynamic. So he wasn't quoting Jesus' exact words. He was writing in Greek what Jesus communicated in Aramaic or Hebrew. Does that make sense? The whole point here was to show just how assumed classical references were, not to say Paul was trying to be "relevant." He was simply being a good communicator. And the takeaway is that in order to be a good communicator, one must be educated in the roots of our own culture. And that includes the Greek and Roman history and mythology.
@@foucachon I didn't think about it that way. That's really the clarification I was looking for. Those are all very good points. I assume that Jesus was speaking in Greek though or else Paul might've written it in Hebrew and then translated it into Greek like we see in some cases in the Gospel accounts. I suppose Jesus could've made the reference to relate to Paul, but I didn't gather that that's what was being claimed in this video. It's also possible that Jesus just spoke in Hebrew and Paul just wrote it in Greek. Not sure, but you did help clarify what was said in the video. I guess I was just hearing him wrong at first.
let me ask you do you imply that the christian god is real and pegan gods are not i personally do not believe in christianity i believe in wicca and i have many many issues with christianity and "modern religion"
gayandtransandproud I think what he’s saying is that Christianity is on top of all religions. And the other gods and such are fallen angels. But in that they are angels and connected to god there will be kernels of truth in their religions we ought to accept and love.
Yes he does imply the Christian God is the only true God. Because that is the testimony we have from Jesus Christ. The word of the Scriptures are clear that besides this God there is no other. And Jesus Himself said that “no one comes to the Father except by Me”, meaning He is the only way to God the Father. All others are false.
That of course doesn’t mean to say that what we see in the world today of “religion” is right. Jesus condemned the most religious people of his day because they were hypocrites and had owned God as their own but we’re in fact far from Him - see John 8:39-47 for example. So there is good religion and bad religion. Jesus teaches us the way of true religion and that is why we Christians rely on Him, as the Son of God who redeems us, and we keep the word of God as our ultimate authority and rule of faith.
It is called by the Church Fathers "Logos spermatikos", which can be rendered as "seeds of the word".
We should also keep in mind that God inspired the New Testament in the Pagan Koine Greek language...so He must have felt there was something good there.
a language can't be pagan or christian
How do you know that?
Seems like a roundabout way of saying "We don't have the New Testament in its original language and thus anything in there could be a translation error but we have no way of knowing that, so we just have to believe that God inspired these unknown writers."
Luke 24:45 reminds us unless God OPENS the mind to understand Scripture the psychobabble of Protestantism occurs. The Scriptures aren't merely about reading & hearing, but about EXPANDED = ENLIGHTENED consciousness SEEING in receiving INCREATE = UNCREATED Light. Without this Heavenly Validation there is only heresy, because the Lord God does not SHINE on falsehoods. The miraculousness of DEIFICATION = IMMORTALIZATION is normal for those in Christ.
Learning about pagan gods to find ounces of "truth" is contradictory to Jesus being THE Truth. I teach my kids classically but I continue to grow more convicted over this method. St. Augustines words about the dangers of a pagan based education continue to ring in my ears.
th-cam.com/video/AnYv5uj4Og4/w-d-xo.html
I feel like you walked yourself into a hole saying that Paul cited pagan mythology to present His literal account of what Jesus said to Him on the Damascus road, and then halfheartedly backtracked with that last minute clarification. I just don't get the point of saying that. Are you saying there's a possibility that Paul's speaking metaphorically? He definitely wasn't.
He certainly doesn't believe Paul was speaking metaphorically. He was using the language of "the ancients" of his day - that was the point. Or more specifically, Paul was literate in those works, and didn't mind using them. To take an oversimplified, painfully obvious example, when we use the term "Achilles Heal," we're borrowing from Greek thought and mythology. Now, it's such a cliche that many today won't even know where that comes from, but if it weren't a cliche, it would be a good example.
@@foucachon to say that Paul "didn't mind using" quotes from Greek writing of the day would infer that Paul wasn't directly quoting Jesus, but using relevant material to relate to the people of the age. Do you see why I'm drawing that conclusion? I just think it's a pretty absurd claim to say that Paul was influenced by popular Greek writing in the writing of a direct quote from Jesus. That would imply that Paul dishonestly misquoted Jesus to be relevant. Would it not? Serious question; I'm not trying to be contentious.
@@Stanzi18 What makes you think Jesus didn't use that language. But more importantly, we know he didn't exactly, since Paul was writing in Greek. He was de facto using "relevant material" (namely the Greek language). This is something that second nature to me growing up bi-lingual (French and English, and studied Greek and Latin later). My father is also a translator for biblical courses. Translation is always dynamic. Or I should say, TRUE translation that tells the truth about the original author is always dynamic. So he wasn't quoting Jesus' exact words. He was writing in Greek what Jesus communicated in Aramaic or Hebrew.
Does that make sense? The whole point here was to show just how assumed classical references were, not to say Paul was trying to be "relevant." He was simply being a good communicator. And the takeaway is that in order to be a good communicator, one must be educated in the roots of our own culture. And that includes the Greek and Roman history and mythology.
@@foucachon I didn't think about it that way. That's really the clarification I was looking for. Those are all very good points. I assume that Jesus was speaking in Greek though or else Paul might've written it in Hebrew and then translated it into Greek like we see in some cases in the Gospel accounts. I suppose Jesus could've made the reference to relate to Paul, but I didn't gather that that's what was being claimed in this video. It's also possible that Jesus just spoke in Hebrew and Paul just wrote it in Greek. Not sure, but you did help clarify what was said in the video. I guess I was just hearing him wrong at first.
let me ask you do you imply that the christian god is real and pegan gods are not i personally do not believe in christianity i believe in wicca and i have many many issues with christianity and "modern religion"
gayandtransandproud I think what he’s saying is that Christianity is on top of all religions. And the other gods and such are fallen angels. But in that they are angels and connected to god there will be kernels of truth in their religions we ought to accept and love.
Yes he does imply the Christian God is the only true God. Because that is the testimony we have from Jesus Christ. The word of the Scriptures are clear that besides this God there is no other. And Jesus Himself said that “no one comes to the Father except by Me”, meaning He is the only way to God the Father. All others are false.
That of course doesn’t mean to say that what we see in the world today of “religion” is right. Jesus condemned the most religious people of his day because they were hypocrites and had owned God as their own but we’re in fact far from Him - see John 8:39-47 for example.
So there is good religion and bad religion. Jesus teaches us the way of true religion and that is why we Christians rely on Him, as the Son of God who redeems us, and we keep the word of God as our ultimate authority and rule of faith.
Too much bias view...There exists other religion and non-religious ideologies as well...Please be aware of those...Get out of this Christian bubble...
Interesting, and correct on many accounts, but also wrong on many accounts, IMHO.
This kind of condescending and self-righteousness is unbearable and ubnoxious.
Pagans, heathens, reprobates, oh my!