At least Christians aren’t brainwashed into thinking that Macedonia is Greek, because as the bible tells the story of Pauls travels, it quite clearly refers to Macedonia and Greece (or achaia as Greece was called during Roman times) it refers to them as different nations and people.
Great work khan academy. The only detail that was missing was James the just’s role as leader of the early/first Jerusalem church for 30 odd years after the messiahs death.
It think you did not mention it clearly..so people will not get confused. that Paul was not sent to jail by the church... he was sent there by the Jewish leaders, that were against the church.. well back then there was not "Church" but a small community of believers.. After Paul came to Jerusalem and met with the other apostles, they all agreed with one another, and there was no hostility between them. They agreed that Gentiles should also hear the Gospel. (Acts 21) "And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders (Of the Church) were present. When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, "You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. What then?" Next we can clearly see that the elder agree with Paul: "But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing (to be circumcised.. keep the law etc...), except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality."
Not Church Leaders, but the Religious Jews were mad. The talk with the Church Leaders was about if the Gentiles should also follow the Mosaic Laws. The trial at court was to gain an audience with the Emperor. There was a bit of a mix up but great video over all!
Dear Sir, what don’t you know?! You must have an incredible mind. Thank you for Khan Academy and all the added subjects over the years. Have you considered collaborating with Michel van Beizen?
love this video it's so informative not only of Christianity but of history as well! One statement I'd like to correct is the term used 'head of the church.' The Bible states that Christ is the Head of the Church (Colossians 1:18-20), not Peter, although I can see where that line of thinking can come from. Jesus actually referred to Peter as 'the rock on which I will build My church' (Matthew 16:18-19).
you dont understand why SAUL be comme PAUL they lie name SAUL is Hebrew and and PAUL is ROMAN the bigest lie is that when they say he was a JUDA,s family. The truth is this ''use logic'' translate Albanian vs Eng.. A or O-IS if we ad letter ''S'' in front becommes isn't SO or SA-ISN'T UL-FELL or sit name means ''rebel'' he didn't fell in his knees you know the word SOUL after person is dead it dont fell down it gows in sky after he sees a light he chang the name from SAUL or SOUL to PAUL PA-SEE he see a light PA-SEE UL-FELL meaning ''PAUL-Humble'' he was no rebel no more he was no JUDA,s he was Albanian it matches perfect the story of a BIBLE israelis where no JUDAs. Juda bertray Jesus true ISRAELIS are Alb... imo they have 12 tribes PAUL was no JEW or juda,s word JUDA is in Albanian language it means translate Alb...vs Eng.. JU-IT ny eng is not that good i think DA-SPLIT i am shure for this ''juda-itsplit''
..14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. 15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. 18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
..14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. 15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. 18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
"I will build my Church on the rock." Jesus said that the faith of Jesus will continue with Peter, referred to as the "Rock". Jesus, as a Jew would have build a synagogue and not a church. Even then Jesus was never seen to worship in a SYNAGOGUE .The PHARISEES had compromised the House of the LORD and Polluted it. The only time he went in was to remove the filth and impurities and the corruption of ages set in by the greed of the Priests.
Peter is NEVER refered to as the Rock@ It was Peter's statement concerning Christ, that REVELATION,that Christ is God the Son!! Peter writes that Paul's letters are sacred Scripture!! Peter was called Cephas, by Paul no?? 😮😮😮😮@abdillahijalalkhan2128
I think you did not mention it clearly..so people will not get confused. That Paul was not sent to jail by the church... he was sent there by the Jewish leaders, that were against the church.. same ones that condemned Jesus and gave Him to the Romans to be crucified. After Paul came to Jerusalem and met with the other apostles, they all agreed with one another, and there was no hostility between them. They agreed that Gentiles should also hear the Gospel. (Acts 21) "And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders (Of the Church) were present. When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, "You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. What then?". In the next verses, we can clearly see that the elders agree with Paul: "But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing (to be circumcised.. keep the law, etc...), except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality."
Great video! What is your take on John the apostle vs John the Elder. Do you think they were different figures or the same figure? Who among them do u think wrote Revelations and who wrote the Gospel and the Epistles of John? I personally hold the view that John the Elder wrote Revelations, while John the apostle wrote the Gospels.
Whoa. Khan, are you actually doing this? I may need to resub? I subbed when I needed help for math and science during uni, but dang, now we graduated to Bible studies
..14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. 15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. 18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
What fabulous way to teach history-religion and about human life/behaviour. One suggestion though - "If the accounts are true" is a very dangerous way of undermining one's own teachings. Either one uses a source because it is trustworthy or because of lack of a better alternative (which is the case in most instances - no CREATION is omniscient ;-)). Mentioning "... based in the sources ..." is something completely different. BTW - ALL SCRIPTURE is THE TRUTH simply based on the fact that it exists. And what exists is THE TRUTH by definition. Which way to understand it in order to learn discernment from it in order not be be deceived by THE LIE is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GAME. But even this can be learned by the teaching from the BIBLE.
(7:57) _"Christianity" or the name “Christian” was started at Antioch, and was not started at Jerusalem, not started by Jesus, nor started by Jesus' disciples._ _The things (the gospel) that Jesus instructed his disciples to preach was to begin at Jerusalem._ Luke 24:46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: Luke 24:47 And that *repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.* Luke 24:48 And ye are witnesses of these things. Luke 24:49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high. _The phrase Christians started with Barnabas and Saul/Paul, and not with Jesus nor Jesus' disciples._ _The phrase of calling them “Christians” began at Antioch, and not at Jerusalem._ Acts 11:25 Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul: Acts 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples *were called Christians first in Antioch.* _Again Jesus foretold and instructed that the things which was to be preached in his name was to begin in Jerusalem and go out from there. The phrase Christians did not begin at Jerusalem and go out to Antioch. It began in Antioch and from there went out and went to Jerusalem._ _Paul does many things backwards to Jesus' teachings and instructions._
Paul made Christianity and finished in Rome. Mattias was elected 12 in acts 1.. Genesis17 exodus12 Joshua 5 numbers9 John 7 : 23 acts7 : 8 Ezekiel 44 : 8 - 9
@@osumanaaa9982 The Apostle Paul's teaching was not against Jesus Christ. If his teaching was against Jesus Christ we (christians) would not accept him. The Lord Jesus Christ chose Paul: Acts Cap. 9 | NIV-EN 15 But the Lord said to Ananias, “Go! This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel."
@@MichaelChemane1962 No offense. I was just guessing his point. However, I'd encourage you to learn more about Paul vs Jesus. There are debates and books written by Christian and former Christian scholars as well.
@@osumanaaa9982 I got your point. I am a Christian and I know the reason why the Apostle Paul is attacked (Ex: *Acts 24* ). I'm not in two minds about my faith and I don't care about another false and liberal Christian scholars' points of view. Jesus Christ chose him ( *Acts 9* ) and the other apostles recognized his apostleship (Ex: *2 Peter **3:15**-16* ). Read *Galatians **1:10**-24;Romans 1:1; 1 Corinthians 1:1; Acts 15:1-35* . May God bless you!
Pretty noteworthy that it was Jesus having the conversation with Saul on the way to Damascus. (Jesus was killed a few years earlier and claimed to have come back from the dead). Maybe having a conversation with someone who was dead and was apparently came back to life was the reason for Saul's sudden change of heart. After that conversation, Saul stopped persecuting Christians and actually joined with them, spreading the Christian religion at the risk of his own life.
@@DSAK55 Most reasonable conclusion is occams razor, the simplest explanation is that he was a liar. Saul was always a liar and a persecutor. He retold his story multiple times, but three times were they recorded. The first two did not match his story when he told his story to King Agrippa. He lied. acts 26:12-19 is vastly different than his previous statements. Acts 9:26-28 When he came to Jerusalem, he tried to join the disciples, but they were all afraid of him, not believing that he really was a disciple. 27 But Barnabas took him and brought him to the apostles. He told them how Saul on his journey had seen the Lord and that the Lord had spoken to him, and how in Damascus he had preached fearlessly in the name of Jesus.
Most reasonable is his account and others with him are telling the truth. There is no evidence that he lied. Circumstances line up with him telling true accounts
He did have witnesses actually, and his conversion and subsequent persecution teaching faith in Jesus which did not benefit him in any worldly manner is also powerful testimony.
@@spyroninja who is his witness then? And furthermore, persecution doesn't make you a saint. Do you understand that I am telling you Saul was one who Yahushua said would come and con you all. He is one claiming Christ is the messiah yet leading you with a false doctrine of Grace. He even sounds like the serpent. "Sure you can eat of the tree of life. You won't die. And you don't have to be cicumcised, it won't save you. And you don't have to keep the Lord's abbath because everyday is the Lord's despite Adonai saying to always keep it separate and apart from other days. And you can eat whatever you want because clean or unclean doesn't sancitfy a person. Adonai didn't really mean not to eat pig or other vial creatures. I mean he calls it an abomination but that was only for his chosen people. The people who follow me can eat whatever they desire!" .... Paul
@@sharonsmith1203 paul had peter as a witness And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 2 Peter 3:15-16 KJV Here peter talks about pauls revelation and the things he speaking about is HARD TO UNDERSTAND. and that people TWIST HIS WORDS TO THEIR OWN DESTRUCTION. Also Paul had Timothy, luke and many more people as his witnesses. Learn your bible.
@@wesaussi9865 Peter never gave him a witness. You have to take into effect that the Roman Catholic church chose what to put in the bible and what to take out. Be careful. Revelation 2:2 New International Version (NIV) 2 I know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate wicked people, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false.
According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. Paul did not convence the Apostles,he was taken on the word of Barnabas a witness to Pauls preaching ..But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
So, a large portion of Christianity is actually the teaching of Paul instead of the teaching of Jesus Christ? Oh, wow, I'm so speechless right now *smh*.
Revelation 2:2 New International Version (NIV) 2 I know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate wicked people, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false.
Paul the deceiver. Paul claimed to be the “apostle to the Gentiles”, Galatians 2:7. Not so. All the apostles were told to preach the gospel to all the world, Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:15, Luke 24:27. Jesus didn’t teach or have a separate gospel for the Gentiles. Paul claimed to be blameless (sinless) in the Law, Philippians 3:4-6. Christianity is a hoax much like Paul. Protestants today follow Pauls teachings and quote from his letters, he tricked them all the way to his death lol
Paul preached his own gospel, Romans 16:25, I Corinthians 15:1, Galatians 1:6-7, I Timothy 2:8, 3:10. Jesus said to preach His gospel. Paul instructs the Corinthians “be ye followers of ME”, I Corinthians 4:16. To the Thessalonians: “ye became followers of US . . . and of the Lord”, I Thessalonians 1:6. To the Galatians: (Syria and Cilicia) “they glorified God in ME”, Galatians 1:24. Paul preached his own gospel, Romans 16:25, I Corinthians 15:1, Galatians 1:6-7, I Timothy 2:8, 3:10. Jesus said to preach His gospel. Paul refers to his teachings as “MY gospel” and “ye are all partakers of MY grace”, Romans 2:16. 16:25, Philippians 1:7, II Timothy 2:8. Paul is a false apostle, a self appointed one at that. Protestants and most of the christians follow his teachings and not Jesus as they contradict each other. I implore you to do more research on this, seriously. Learn to think for yourself instead of following some priest or pastor that tells you what to do and learn to do research on your own. Much will be revealed to you, that youve been preaching Pauls teachings and not Jesus, but doesnt matter, both are false religions made by Man. There was a time when all believed in god and the church ruled , this time was called the dark ages. "Paul substituted faith in Christ for the Christlike life." even Thomas Jefferson said Paul was the first corruptor of the doctrines of Jesus. Christianity is a false god that wages war throughout history. Look at all the europeans that brought it with them, they brought weapons, wars and death with christianity to Africa, South America, Americas, Asia with the purpose of COLONIZING US. TO steal our land and gold then convert us to their religion so we may be 'thankful' to the lord.
If you want to tell TRUTH..Tell the whole Truth. Paul was mistaken for an Egyptian by a Greek speaking Chief Captain who was most likely a European because Rome had control of Israel at that time. Paul could not possibly be white and be mistaken for a black Egyptian by a European guard. Paul has to be a dark skinned Hebrew man. Acts 21:38 “Art not thou that Egyptian, which before these days madest an uproar, and leddest out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers?
Paul Cannot be Considered a reliable Witness, to either the Teachings, The Life, Or the historical existence of Jesus, this Evangelist admitted In Romans 3:7, that he is a Liar.
Peter said.....14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. 15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. 18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
..14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. 15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. 18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
..14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. 15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. 18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
Thank you. The gospel they conveyed. → Christ died for our sins. He was buried. He was raised on the third day. He appeared to the apostles. 1 Corinthians 15:1-5 Isaiah 53 Anyone is saved just by believing in the gospel. Romans 1:16 Ephesians 2:8-9
Romans 3:23-26 KJV For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; [24] Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: [25] Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; [26] To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
The book of Matthew is really the book of Peter. Matthew was just the scribe. Peter commissioned Mark, Luke, and John to write the other three gospels, each writing to a different audience. Just an extra bit of information.
Indeed. But the problem is that the man supposedly attesting to Mark and Matthew's gospels between 100 - 110 AD (Papias) never met either of them and he described books that don't appear to be the books that we call the gospels of Mark and Matthew. He said that Mark's work was a record of the oral teachings of Peter, in no particular order and as and when he gave them. The gospel of Mark certainly isn't this. It's an ordered account of the last year of Jesus' life. It also omits the saying of Jesus "That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it". You would have thought that Peter might have mentioned this as it establishes his credibility and authority but it's not recorded in Mark. He said of Matthew's work that it was a record of Jesus' sayings written in Hebrew. Matthew wasn't written in hebrew and it is far more than a list of Jesus' sayings. It also copies most of its content from mark. So Papias almost certainly wasn't referring to our gospels of Mark and Matthew. This is why biblical scholars say they don't know who wrote them.
@MHM EEKK Where are you guys getting any of your information. No scholar worth their salt would agree with either Savannah or Mhm?? Savanna, I'll start with you: show me one credible source for your claim that Matthew was a scribe dictating for Peter? There is some church tradition that Mark was, but that comes much later and is entirely unsubstantiated. Then to claim that Peter commissioned the others? You do realize that 90% of Mark is in Matthew and Mark is overwhelmingly acknowledged as the source text for Matthew and Luke and even parts of John. Then we have MHM, with even more buffoonery. What man in 100 CE, sir? Irenaeus, connected to Rome no doubt, in 185 CE was the first to acknowledge the gospels by name and he insists there's four, corresponding to the 4 corners of the earth. Brilliant guy he was. Yet xtians love to quote this clown, completely unaware of his belief, also found in his "Against Heresies," that JC died around 50 years old, that Peter and Paul founded the church of Rome (not possible according to Paul's own words - choose which to invalidate people, you can't have your cake and eat it too). The reason they are called Matthew Mark Luke and John is because Irenaeus, the man ignorant of history and purporting contradictions your faith cannot sustain, named them. And since we're on the subject... Dennis MacDonald’s first book “The Gospels and Homer” was a short primer on gospel borrowing (specifically MARK, the first “gospel”) from Greek epics, but received some criticism from fundie-evangelical critics (such as JP Holding), who set up their usual straw man arguments and poked one or two holes in an overall excellent thesis. That may have worked, until he struck back hard with the full load of the thesis in his subsequent more scholarly works. MacDonald is not a side hobbyist or amateur. He is a Harvard PhD and a longtime member of the Society of Biblical Literature who’s writings cover what he calls “mimesis criticism” (whereas Biblical scholarship has previously covered form criticism, redaction criticism, literary criticism & historical criticism). Almost every time I’ve found something in the gospels I needed explanation on that would have otherwise been relegated to “faith”, MacDonald’s work covered it. The use of Greek mythology is more widespread than I could have ever imagined, and I don’t just mean in similar theme and mytheme. MacDonald has a very rigorous and well thought out 7 step criteria for his mimesis criticism where he analyzes the New Testament. To date I’ve not seen a single Amazon reviewer OR someone in the world of academia be able to touch these volumes, though I expect Holding and his brainwashed minions to do their usual tricks, and likely without ever even cracking the first page. That’s not honesty or scholarship folks. That’s fundamentalism. It’s an illness. Believe me, I was once terminal. Maybe I do believe in miracles!? : ) Here they are: amzn.to/2DVAhVX The Gospels and Homer: Imitations of Greek Epic in Mark and Luke-Acts amzn.to/2DWWP8Q Luke and Vergil: Imitations of Classical Greek Literature amzn.to/2zzYVb1 The Dionysian Gospel: The Fourth Gospel and Euripides I’ll be the first to admit, they aren’t cheap, and I’m generally a cheapskate but these were an investment. Like I said, they were the final nail in the coffin for me after years of intense study. If the entire gospel story of Mark (which lends itself to Matthew and Luke for sure and likely John, though John borrows itself much from the Bacchae), were a borrowed narrative, what is left? Frankly, the only accounts of any jesus left are hearsay stories about christians OR gnostic gospels that contain just flat out insanity. However, and without going full conspiracy theory, many arguments have been put forward over the years that original xtianity WAS gnostic (or perhaps an offshoot of the Essenes or even a hybrid that included themes and ideas borrowed from the mystery religions). When you lose a literal Jesus of the gospels, you’re left with Jesus the hallucination of Paul (save a couple likely interpolations to make Jesus historical. No one has definitive proof of anything at this point, but for millennia the church has given it’s answer and the more we research the more said answer erodes. Time to follow the evidence to where it ACTUALLY leads. MacDonald’s book will illuminate that trail for many.
@MHM EEKK Actually your naive claim citing anything of Papias is both spurious and fails to take into account the ridiculous things Papias said otherwise. Bottom line is we have no direct sources for Papias. What we have is accounts of accounts, many of which were Eusebius, the great forger of church history himself. If you are banking on Papias for evidence of anything, you're a fool.
@MHM EEKK The Gospels were not written by early Christians. The early followers of JESUS were called the NAZARENES. It was nearly a century later after the death of Jesus that Paul Wrote the Gospels and his followers came to be called "CHRISTIANS by the People of ANTIOCH and never by JESUS himself.
..14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. 15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. 18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
Don't be tricked by the order of the books in the Holy Bible that was agreed upon at the council of Nicea. Paul's letters aka Epistles aka emails were written long before the Gospels. Meaning Paul's letters most likely influenced the writing of the Gospels. The truth is Paul never met Jesus and he very well could have been lying about meeting Peter and James. Luke who wrote The Gospel of Luke and Acts was a disciple of Paul not Jesus which is opposite of what most people think. The truth is Paul created the church not Jesus nor Peter nor James.
This video shows poor scholarship. To rely on the Acts of the Apostles as a historical source is a mistake. There is more good evidence that Paul flourished after the Roman Jewish War than before it. Peter is a legendary character who features in the original myth. This presentation is not academic.
Multiple types of Christianity lol. He has roman citizenship lol. Faj2atan t8ayar. Shil circumsion he wanted power. Ra7 jeresulam he has a safe card goes ot emperor and lives there house arrest. They probably not dead just say like why one beheading and one crucifixion. Why would Paul 's and Peter body be buried and be known they were in jail tf. Like same with jesus doesn't make anh sense. Judaism for the masses. Buried if they aren't tortured. Especially labeling them
At the time PAUL started his bounty hunting business , about a century after the death of JESUS, there were only bona fide followers of JESUS . It was nearly a century after that PAUL went against the teachings of JESUS by teaching and converting the non Jews, i.e. the Gentiles who later came to be known as "Christians."
Just like he said in a previous video, there is NO evidence to prove the details of Christianity. This history was written by someone hundreds of years later. Please remember that as you study this.
I mean, are you trying to dispel the idea that All glory cometh through him? Not us? Is this some sort of play, that because a unit given power through belief can achieve more to spread, does not correlate to the idea that the power to even do that, comes from Jesus himself. Lol. It's so simple, and people who overthink really ruin things.
Your an intelligent man and i think your muslim so why dont you do a video proving Allah's existence scientifically or mathematical and scientific miracles of the Quran
I stopped listening when you stuck the word CONSERVATIVE, in there. What is the message exactly?.. That made me feel that you have some type of bias that skews the information.
Conservative: A disposition in politics to preserve what is established. I fail to see what “bias” was presented so unless you were being sarcastic, I think that you should just focus on what makes a source of information “biased”.
![KRK - ชนิสรา Ft.WanMai , N/A [Official MV] Prod. By Sakarin](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/C-WMwwYobcU/mqdefault.jpg)
I appreciate how well done the world religions are equally treated. thankyou.
This is a redo with (hopefully) clearer visuals.
Do more please on this topic, thanks
watching this at school what is it?
At least Christians aren’t brainwashed into thinking that Macedonia is Greek, because as the bible tells the story of Pauls travels, it quite clearly refers to Macedonia and Greece (or achaia as Greece was called during Roman times) it refers to them as different nations and people.
Great work khan academy. The only detail that was missing was James the just’s role as leader of the early/first Jerusalem church for 30 odd years after the messiahs death.
It think you did not mention it clearly..so people will not get confused. that Paul was not sent to jail by the church... he was sent there by the Jewish leaders, that were against the church.. well back then there was not "Church" but a small community of believers.. After Paul came to Jerusalem and met with the other apostles, they all agreed with one another, and there was no hostility between them. They agreed that Gentiles should also hear the Gospel. (Acts 21) "And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders (Of the Church) were present. When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, "You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. What then?" Next we can clearly see that the elder agree with Paul: "But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing (to be circumcised.. keep the law etc...), except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality."
Love ✝️ when Jesus comes into your life
There are so many details that get debated
Just become meaningless ✝️🛐 Thank you Holy Sprit
"I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the father but through me."
Not Church Leaders, but the Religious Jews were mad. The talk with the Church Leaders was about if the Gentiles should also follow the Mosaic Laws. The trial at court was to gain an audience with the Emperor. There was a bit of a mix up but great video over all!
Dear Sir, what don’t you know?! You must have an incredible mind. Thank you for Khan Academy and all the added subjects over the years. Have you considered collaborating with Michel van Beizen?
He is the narrator .
Thank you for uploading this video, it is of great importance to my bible study,God bless all your team
love this video it's so informative not only of Christianity but of history as well! One statement I'd like to correct is the term used 'head of the church.' The Bible states that Christ is the Head of the Church (Colossians 1:18-20), not Peter, although I can see where that line of thinking can come from. Jesus actually referred to Peter as 'the rock on which I will build My church' (Matthew 16:18-19).
best lesson youve ever made . do more on this plz!
Saul, Damascus, and becoming Paul @ 4:55
you dont understand why SAUL be comme PAUL
they lie name SAUL is Hebrew and and PAUL is ROMAN the bigest lie is that when they say he was a JUDA,s family. The truth is this ''use logic''
translate Albanian vs Eng..
A or O-IS if we ad letter ''S'' in front becommes isn't
SO or SA-ISN'T
UL-FELL or sit name means ''rebel'' he didn't fell in his knees
you know the word SOUL after person is dead it dont fell down it gows in sky
after he sees a light he chang the name from SAUL or SOUL to PAUL
PA-SEE he see a light PA-SEE
UL-FELL meaning ''PAUL-Humble'' he was no rebel no more he was no JUDA,s he was Albanian it matches perfect the story of a BIBLE
israelis where no JUDAs. Juda bertray Jesus true ISRAELIS are Alb... imo they have 12 tribes
PAUL was no JEW or juda,s word JUDA is in Albanian language it means
translate Alb...vs Eng..
JU-IT ny eng is not that good i think
DA-SPLIT i am shure for this ''juda-itsplit''
What do you mean?
Praise the Lord and Bless Kahn Academy!
..14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
Thanks again for your efforts to educate all students
Peter is not the head of the church tho. It is Jesus, Colossians 1:18
..14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
"I will build my Church
on the rock."
Jesus said that the
faith of Jesus will
continue with Peter,
referred to as the "Rock".
Jesus, as a Jew would have build a synagogue and not a church.
Even then Jesus was
never seen to worship in a SYNAGOGUE .The
PHARISEES had compromised the House
of the LORD and Polluted
it.
The only time he went in was to remove the
filth and impurities and
the corruption of ages
set in by the greed of the Priests.
Peter is NEVER refered to as the Rock@ It was Peter's statement concerning Christ, that REVELATION,that Christ is God the Son!! Peter writes that Paul's letters are sacred Scripture!! Peter was called Cephas, by Paul no?? 😮😮😮😮@abdillahijalalkhan2128
I think you did not mention it clearly..so people will not get confused. That Paul was not sent to jail by the church... he was sent there by the Jewish leaders, that were against the church.. same ones that condemned Jesus and gave Him to the Romans to be crucified.
After Paul came to Jerusalem and met with the other apostles, they all agreed with one another, and there was no hostility between them. They agreed that Gentiles should also hear the Gospel. (Acts 21) "And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders (Of the Church) were present. When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, "You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. What then?".
In the next verses, we can clearly see that the elders agree with Paul: "But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing (to be circumcised.. keep the law, etc...), except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality."
Great video! What is your take on John the apostle vs John the Elder. Do you think they were different figures or the same figure? Who among them do u think wrote Revelations and who wrote the Gospel and the Epistles of John? I personally hold the view that John the Elder wrote Revelations, while John the apostle wrote the Gospels.
Imagine if Paul was a double agent the whole time
Terrifying, but he proclaims good news so I'll trust him lel
😂
@@Iustusxi you guys clearly aren't Christians lol
A bit hard to follow your mouse cursor sometimes ;(
Whoa. Khan, are you actually doing this? I may need to resub? I subbed when I needed help for math and science during uni, but dang, now we graduated to Bible studies
history is a subject as well.
@@dougsmith6346 interesting bc every source he cited was a book from the Bible
Jesus Christ is Lord!
thank tou for posting this this will help me
..14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
What fabulous way to teach history-religion and about human life/behaviour.
One suggestion though - "If the accounts are true" is a very dangerous way of undermining one's own teachings. Either one uses a source because it is trustworthy or because of lack of a better alternative (which is the case in most instances - no CREATION is omniscient ;-)). Mentioning "... based in the sources ..." is something completely different.
BTW - ALL SCRIPTURE is THE TRUTH simply based on the fact that it exists. And what exists is THE TRUTH by definition. Which way to understand it in order to learn discernment from it in order not be be deceived by THE LIE is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GAME. But even this can be learned by the teaching from the BIBLE.
Thank you. 😃
thank you Khan! you DA best! continue with your work because you are helping those who don't know the story.
Many think Paul wrote Hebrews, but no one knows for certain.
Excellent
Peter was not the first Bishop. James was. The church of Jerusalem was led by James
Awesome !! Thanks
What year did the light from heaven flashed him?
(7:57) _"Christianity" or the name “Christian” was started at Antioch, and was not started at Jerusalem, not started by Jesus, nor started by Jesus' disciples._
_The things (the gospel) that Jesus instructed his disciples to preach was to begin at Jerusalem._
Luke 24:46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
Luke 24:47 And that *repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.*
Luke 24:48 And ye are witnesses of these things.
Luke 24:49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.
_The phrase Christians started with Barnabas and Saul/Paul, and not with Jesus nor Jesus' disciples._
_The phrase of calling them “Christians” began at Antioch, and not at Jerusalem._
Acts 11:25 Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul:
Acts 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples *were called Christians first in Antioch.*
_Again Jesus foretold and instructed that the things which was to be preached in his name was to begin in Jerusalem and go out from there. The phrase Christians did not begin at Jerusalem and go out to Antioch. It began in Antioch and from there went out and went to Jerusalem._
_Paul does many things backwards to Jesus' teachings and instructions._
Is the church of Antioch still there today?
TLDR: Paul was a Flavian who wrote his own religion by co-opting the movement of Yeshua.
Paul made Christianity and finished in Rome. Mattias was elected 12 in acts 1.. Genesis17 exodus12 Joshua 5 numbers9 John 7 : 23 acts7 : 8 Ezekiel 44 : 8 - 9
What are you talking about?
@@MichaelChemane1962 I think he refers to the fact that Paul' teachings were against Jesus' own teachings.
@@osumanaaa9982 The Apostle Paul's teaching was not against Jesus Christ. If his teaching was against Jesus Christ we (christians) would not accept him. The Lord Jesus Christ chose Paul:
Acts Cap. 9 | NIV-EN
15 But the Lord said to Ananias, “Go! This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel."
@@MichaelChemane1962 No offense. I was just guessing his point. However, I'd encourage you to learn more about Paul vs Jesus. There are debates and books written by Christian and former Christian scholars as well.
@@osumanaaa9982 I got your point. I am a Christian and I know the reason why the Apostle Paul is attacked (Ex: *Acts 24* ). I'm not in two minds about my faith and I don't care about another false and liberal Christian scholars' points of view. Jesus Christ chose him ( *Acts 9* ) and the other apostles recognized his apostleship (Ex: *2 Peter **3:15**-16* ). Read *Galatians **1:10**-24;Romans 1:1; 1 Corinthians 1:1; Acts 15:1-35* . May God bless you!
Pretty noteworthy that it was Jesus having the conversation with Saul on the way to Damascus. (Jesus was killed a few years earlier and claimed to have come back from the dead). Maybe having a conversation with someone who was dead and was apparently came back to life was the reason for Saul's sudden change of heart. After that conversation, Saul stopped persecuting Christians and actually joined with them, spreading the Christian religion at the risk of his own life.
Or he was schizophrenic
@@DSAK55 Most reasonable conclusion is occams razor, the simplest explanation is that he was a liar. Saul was always a liar and a persecutor. He retold his story multiple times, but three times were they recorded. The first two did not match his story when he told his story to King Agrippa. He lied. acts 26:12-19 is vastly different than his previous statements.
Acts 9:26-28 When he came to Jerusalem, he tried to join the disciples, but they were all afraid of him, not believing that he really was a disciple. 27 But Barnabas took him and brought him to the apostles. He told them how Saul on his journey had seen the Lord and that the Lord had spoken to him, and how in Damascus he had preached fearlessly in the name of Jesus.
Most reasonable is his account and others with him are telling the truth. There is no evidence that he lied. Circumstances line up with him telling true accounts
this is a great video
Thanks
By early 50s I almost thought you meant 1950s
Paul had NO WITNESS!!!
What did Yahushua say about persons who testify without a witness? Don't believe them!
He did have witnesses actually, and his conversion and subsequent persecution teaching faith in Jesus which did not benefit him in any worldly manner is also powerful testimony.
@@spyroninja who is his witness then?
And furthermore, persecution doesn't make you a saint.
Do you understand that I am telling you Saul was one who Yahushua said would come and con you all.
He is one claiming Christ is the messiah yet leading you with a false doctrine of Grace.
He even sounds like the serpent.
"Sure you can eat of the tree of life. You won't die. And you don't have to be cicumcised, it won't save you. And you don't have to keep the Lord's abbath because everyday is the Lord's despite Adonai saying to always keep it separate and apart from other days. And you can eat whatever you want because clean or unclean doesn't sancitfy a person. Adonai didn't really mean not to eat pig or other vial creatures.
I mean he calls it an abomination but that was only for his chosen people. The people who follow me can eat whatever they desire!" .... Paul
@@sharonsmith1203 paul had peter as a witness
And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
2 Peter 3:15-16 KJV
Here peter talks about pauls revelation and the things he speaking about is HARD TO UNDERSTAND. and that people TWIST HIS WORDS TO THEIR OWN DESTRUCTION. Also Paul had Timothy, luke and many more people as his witnesses. Learn your bible.
He did have witness.and he was converted after that.
@@wesaussi9865 Peter never gave him a witness. You have to take into effect that the Roman Catholic church chose what to put in the bible and what to take out. Be careful.
Revelation 2:2 New International Version (NIV)
2 I know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate wicked people, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not,
and have found them false.
According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. Paul did not convence the Apostles,he was taken on the word of Barnabas a witness to Pauls preaching ..But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
Myths and legends...
So, a large portion of Christianity is actually the teaching of Paul instead of the teaching of Jesus Christ?
Oh, wow, I'm so speechless right now *smh*.
@4u soul but jesus didnt preach Christianity. he came for jews to preach and correct the corrupted jewish religion.
Revelation 2:2 New International Version (NIV)
2 I know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate wicked people, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not,
and have found them false.
Paul the deceiver. Paul claimed to be the “apostle to the Gentiles”, Galatians 2:7. Not so. All the apostles were told to preach the gospel to all the world, Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:15, Luke 24:27. Jesus didn’t teach or have a separate gospel for the Gentiles. Paul claimed to be blameless (sinless) in the Law, Philippians 3:4-6. Christianity is a hoax much like Paul. Protestants today follow Pauls teachings and quote from his letters, he tricked them all the way to his death lol
Paul preached his own gospel, Romans 16:25, I Corinthians 15:1, Galatians 1:6-7, I Timothy 2:8, 3:10. Jesus said to preach His gospel.
Paul instructs the Corinthians “be ye followers of ME”, I Corinthians 4:16. To the Thessalonians: “ye became followers of US . . . and of the Lord”, I Thessalonians 1:6. To the Galatians: (Syria and Cilicia) “they glorified God in ME”, Galatians 1:24.
Paul preached his own gospel, Romans 16:25, I Corinthians 15:1, Galatians 1:6-7, I Timothy 2:8, 3:10. Jesus said to preach His gospel.
Paul refers to his teachings as “MY gospel” and “ye are all partakers of MY grace”, Romans 2:16. 16:25, Philippians 1:7, II Timothy 2:8. Paul is a false apostle, a self appointed one at that. Protestants and most of the christians follow his teachings and not Jesus as they contradict each other. I implore you to do more research on this, seriously. Learn to think for yourself instead of following some priest or pastor that tells you what to do and learn to do research on your own. Much will be revealed to you, that youve been preaching Pauls teachings and not Jesus, but doesnt matter, both are false religions made by Man. There was a time when all believed in god and the church ruled , this time was called the dark ages. "Paul substituted faith in Christ for the Christlike life." even Thomas Jefferson said Paul was the first corruptor of the doctrines of Jesus. Christianity is a false god that wages war throughout history. Look at all the europeans that brought it with them, they brought weapons, wars and death with christianity to Africa, South America, Americas, Asia with the purpose of COLONIZING US. TO steal our land and gold then convert us to their religion so we may be 'thankful' to the lord.
@@reggieangus5325 I don't think you have the whole pieces of the puzzle yet. keeping looking
If you want to tell TRUTH..Tell the whole Truth. Paul was mistaken for an Egyptian by a Greek speaking Chief Captain who was most likely a European because Rome had control of Israel at that time. Paul could not possibly be white and be mistaken for a black Egyptian by a European guard. Paul has to be a dark skinned Hebrew man.
Acts 21:38 “Art not thou that Egyptian, which before these days madest an uproar, and leddest out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers?
Paul Cannot be Considered a reliable Witness, to either the Teachings,
The Life, Or the historical existence of Jesus, this Evangelist admitted
In Romans 3:7, that he is a Liar.
Why wasn’t Pauls teaching recognized by the first Mesianic Synagogues? Because they followed Yoshuah not Paul. They taught the four gospels.
Peter said.....14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
Saul, the Jewish Stephen Miller.
..14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
Are you in agreement with catholic teaching, Peter first pope??? Please clarify!
How was Romans accept Christianity? After the crucification of Paul and Peter.
High high overview of Christianity.
..14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
Oooh, I get it now... Nero Burning ROM
Btw there's nice book about beggining of christianity in Rome - Quo Vadis. It's story not history but it's quite interesting
Thank you. The gospel they conveyed. → Christ died for our sins. He was buried. He was raised on the third day. He appeared to the apostles. 1 Corinthians 15:1-5 Isaiah 53
Anyone is saved just by believing in the gospel. Romans 1:16 Ephesians 2:8-9
Romans 3:23-26 KJV
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; [24] Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: [25] Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; [26] To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
Christianity and Rome
Thanx for map
Awesome
The book of Matthew is really the book of Peter. Matthew was just the scribe. Peter commissioned Mark, Luke, and John to write the other three gospels, each writing to a different audience. Just an extra bit of information.
No
Indeed. But the problem is that the man supposedly attesting to Mark and Matthew's gospels between 100 - 110 AD (Papias) never met either of them and he described books that don't appear to be the books that we call the gospels of Mark and Matthew.
He said that Mark's work was a record of the oral teachings of Peter, in no particular order and as and when he gave them. The gospel of Mark certainly isn't this. It's an ordered account of the last year of Jesus' life. It also omits the saying of Jesus "That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it". You would have thought that Peter might have mentioned this as it establishes his credibility and authority but it's not recorded in Mark.
He said of Matthew's work that it was a record of Jesus' sayings written in Hebrew. Matthew wasn't written in hebrew and it is far more than a list of Jesus' sayings. It also copies most of its content from mark.
So Papias almost certainly wasn't referring to our gospels of Mark and Matthew. This is why biblical scholars say they don't know who wrote them.
@MHM EEKK Where are you guys getting any of your information. No scholar worth their salt would agree with either Savannah or Mhm?? Savanna, I'll start with you: show me one credible source for your claim that Matthew was a scribe dictating for Peter? There is some church tradition that Mark was, but that comes much later and is entirely unsubstantiated. Then to claim that Peter commissioned the others? You do realize that 90% of Mark is in Matthew and Mark is overwhelmingly acknowledged as the source text for Matthew and Luke and even parts of John. Then we have MHM, with even more buffoonery. What man in 100 CE, sir? Irenaeus, connected to Rome no doubt, in 185 CE was the first to acknowledge the gospels by name and he insists there's four, corresponding to the 4 corners of the earth. Brilliant guy he was. Yet xtians love to quote this clown, completely unaware of his belief, also found in his "Against Heresies," that JC died around 50 years old, that Peter and Paul founded the church of Rome (not possible according to Paul's own words - choose which to invalidate people, you can't have your cake and eat it too). The reason they are called Matthew Mark Luke and John is because Irenaeus, the man ignorant of history and purporting contradictions your faith cannot sustain, named them.
And since we're on the subject...
Dennis MacDonald’s first book “The Gospels and Homer” was a short primer on gospel borrowing (specifically MARK, the first “gospel”) from Greek epics, but received some criticism from fundie-evangelical critics (such as JP Holding), who set up their usual straw man arguments and poked one or two holes in an overall excellent thesis. That may have worked, until he struck back hard with the full load of the thesis in his subsequent more scholarly works.
MacDonald is not a side hobbyist or amateur. He is a Harvard PhD and a longtime member of the Society of Biblical Literature who’s writings cover what he calls “mimesis criticism” (whereas Biblical scholarship has previously covered form criticism, redaction criticism, literary criticism & historical criticism). Almost every time I’ve found something in the gospels I needed explanation on that would have otherwise been relegated to “faith”, MacDonald’s work covered it.
The use of Greek mythology is more widespread than I could have ever imagined, and I don’t just mean in similar theme and mytheme. MacDonald has a very rigorous and well thought out 7 step criteria for his mimesis criticism where he analyzes the New Testament. To date I’ve not seen a single Amazon reviewer OR someone in the world of academia be able to touch these volumes, though I expect Holding and his brainwashed minions to do their usual tricks, and likely without ever even cracking the first page. That’s not honesty or scholarship folks. That’s fundamentalism. It’s an illness. Believe me, I was once terminal. Maybe I do believe in miracles!? : )
Here they are:
amzn.to/2DVAhVX
The Gospels and Homer: Imitations of Greek Epic in Mark and Luke-Acts
amzn.to/2DWWP8Q
Luke and Vergil: Imitations of Classical Greek Literature
amzn.to/2zzYVb1
The Dionysian Gospel: The Fourth Gospel and Euripides
I’ll be the first to admit, they aren’t cheap, and I’m generally a cheapskate but these were an investment. Like I said, they were the final nail in the coffin for me after years of intense study. If the entire gospel story of Mark (which lends itself to Matthew and Luke for sure and likely John, though John borrows itself much from the Bacchae), were a borrowed narrative, what is left? Frankly, the only accounts of any jesus left are hearsay stories about christians OR gnostic gospels that contain just flat out insanity. However, and without going full conspiracy theory, many arguments have been put forward over the years that original xtianity WAS gnostic (or perhaps an offshoot of the Essenes or even a hybrid that included themes and ideas borrowed from the mystery religions). When you lose a literal Jesus of the gospels, you’re left with Jesus the hallucination of Paul (save a couple likely interpolations to make Jesus historical. No one has definitive proof of anything at this point, but for millennia the church has given it’s answer and the more we research the more said answer erodes. Time to follow the evidence to where it ACTUALLY leads. MacDonald’s book will illuminate that trail for many.
@MHM EEKK Actually your naive claim citing anything of Papias is both spurious and fails to take into account the ridiculous things Papias said otherwise. Bottom line is we have no direct sources for Papias. What we have is accounts of accounts, many of which were Eusebius, the great forger of church history himself. If you are banking on Papias for evidence of anything, you're a fool.
@MHM EEKK
The Gospels were not written by early
Christians.
The early followers of JESUS were called the
NAZARENES.
It was nearly a
century later after the death of Jesus that Paul
Wrote the Gospels and
his followers came to
be called
"CHRISTIANS by the People of ANTIOCH and
never by JESUS himself.
Paul is probably the first real writer...Peter is described as an illiterate in the book of acts...
Probably had someone write for him
..14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen
But they were charged to spread the gospel
Deez Nutz
Don't be tricked by the order of the books in the Holy Bible that was agreed upon at the council of Nicea. Paul's letters aka Epistles aka emails were written long before the Gospels. Meaning Paul's letters most likely influenced the writing of the Gospels. The truth is Paul never met Jesus and he very well could have been lying about meeting Peter and James. Luke who wrote The Gospel of Luke and Acts was a disciple of Paul not Jesus which is opposite of what most people think. The truth is Paul created the church not Jesus nor Peter nor James.
Wrong! The books of the NT were not decided at the council of Nicea!
Paul quoted Luke’s gospel in 1timothy.
This video shows poor scholarship. To rely on the Acts of the Apostles as a historical source is a mistake. There is more good evidence that Paul flourished after the Roman Jewish War than before it. Peter is a legendary character who features in the original myth. This presentation is not academic.
Peter called himself head of the church much less a pope. Jesus is the head of the true church. I’m sorry about yours
Khan is teaching Biblical History now? how long has it been hahaha
Multiple types of Christianity lol. He has roman citizenship lol. Faj2atan t8ayar. Shil circumsion he wanted power. Ra7 jeresulam he has a safe card goes ot emperor and lives there house arrest. They probably not dead just say like why one beheading and one crucifixion. Why would Paul 's and Peter body be buried and be known they were in jail tf. Like same with jesus doesn't make anh sense. Judaism for the masses. Buried if they aren't tortured. Especially labeling them
Paul was not persecuting christians but yus..but there are some that say are but are not..the pact Genesis17 John 7 : 23 exodus12 Joshua 5 numbers9
At the time PAUL started his bounty hunting business , about a century after the death of JESUS, there were only
bona fide followers of JESUS .
It was nearly a century
after that PAUL went against the teachings of
JESUS by teaching and converting the non Jews, i.e. the Gentiles who later
came to be known as "Christians."
Well Acts of the Apostles have been written by Luke.
Just like he said in a previous video, there is NO evidence to prove the details of Christianity. This history was written by someone hundreds of years later. Please remember that as you study this.
Untrue. The synoptic gospels were written by mid60’s AD. Johns in thre 80/90 range. Rpistles written by 70 AD
1
I mean, are you trying to dispel the idea that All glory cometh through him? Not us? Is this some sort of play, that because a unit given power through belief can achieve more to spread, does not correlate to the idea that the power to even do that, comes from Jesus himself. Lol. It's so simple, and people who overthink really ruin things.
Cringe.
Paul is a false apostle.
Your an intelligent man and i think your muslim so why dont you do a video proving Allah's existence scientifically or mathematical and scientific miracles of the Quran
Allah's existence scientifically or mathematical and scientific miracles of the Quran....great LOL
Junaid Shakoor “allah’s existence scientifically mathematical and scientific miracles of the quran”..great laugh.
Theres the ontological argument.
he's not a religion preacher.... he just cover major world religion & it's history...
I stopped listening when you stuck the word CONSERVATIVE, in there. What is the message exactly?.. That made me feel that you have some type of bias that skews the information.
Conservative: A disposition in politics to preserve what is established.
I fail to see what “bias” was presented so unless you were being sarcastic, I think that you should just focus on what makes a source of information “biased”.
And also unlike you I listened to the whole video and have found it very useful and unbiased.
Wow first super boring class from the course