I was a hard-core fundamentalist Christian. Until I got a hold of a book called the Bible unearthed. After reading that book and a couple of others. I realized what I believed in my whole life was a lie. So, I became a Skeptic. Bart hit the nail on the head when he said Christianity is not about the religion of Jesus. It's a religion about Jesus.
43:17: To me this is the most eye-opening comment in Dr. Ehrman's presentation: "Christianity is not so much the religion of Jesus -- the religion that Jesus had -- it's really more the religion about Jesus. ...It isn't what Jesus was preaching. Jesus was a Jew from rural Galilee who understood himself to be Jewish and probably had no idea of starting a religion. He was preaching the correct understanding of Judaism. Christianity became something else. ...And Christ ended up being not an apocalyptic prophet but God himself."
If anyone earnestly studies the entire book they really have no choice but to come to the same conclusion. The Gospel Y'shua taught is not the gospel Paul taught and it is Paul who Christianity really follows.
When I listen to of read Bart Ehrman about Christianity/Jesus I hear 100% echos of Islam. Now THAT is something he should try to understand next. How is it possible that Islam understands Christ/Christianity better than Christians themselves? THAT is the really perplexing question for a historian like him.
+Kadir El-Moumni I think it is very eye-opening that Muslims "hear 100% echos of Islam" in atheists' words. So if atheism is a 100% echo of Islam, are you sure Allah is the real God? Maybe he is Muhammad's mental idol that replaces the true God, the God that the Gospel preaches (which the Quran claims to somehow confirm)?
jews don't even believe heaven and hell, they are more obsessed with the world affairs and they only care money not God so maybe you should do your own research about judisam before u comment.
There is no evidence that Jesus was a real person who preached anything. There were lots of preachers around that time, probably lots of them named Jesus. The proposition that one of them specifically gave rise to the legend is unfounded.
@OTO TAKE church lying about its history is from satan, Jesus is a Muslim who worshipped Allah, term son was figurative on Adam and David so why not Jesus peace on him! no reason and thats what it is!
@Kimi Furmily First of your comment of being a muslim would serve the same purpouse as staring with as a christian, as an hinduist, as a pagan, as an atheist and so on, it means nothing for the factual disscusion other then your statements and arguments will be based on your faith, belife and feelings. I have studied religion for most part of my life on a basic level, so im no authority and the same goes for most belivers of any religion, its important to understand that a priest or rabbie or imma, witchdoctor whatever are studiyng their religion on a way depper level then what a normal believer does and all they are tought they dont tell the congregation for the reason its to complicated, for the masses the religion despite is keept easy to follow. A good friend of min studied to be a christian priest and i had wounderfull talks with her about what she stidued. One thing that surprised me was the admittion that there were more God's according to the bible but as christians you choose to follow ours, for me i was convinced that the bible lied and said there is only 1 god since thats how ive allways been told. Congregations doesnt understand all the underlaying things in their faith if you need to read a encyklopedia to understand the religion most believers reads a newspapper in comparison and for them thats enough. A church having this lecture to educate their staff on this subject will more strengthen them, it takes nothing away from their faith since faith doesnt deal with facts but they have a deeper understanding and any doubt they would have to deal with on their own part or someonec in their congregation they could use this to explain. Besides Dr. Bart aint attacking anyones faith here he gives the historical background and fact and you cant argue with fact with beliefe. I must say that after watching some lectures with Dr. Bart ive now have a greater acceptance for christianity and its beliefes then ive had for many years, i was raised christian but turned pagan since christianity didnt make any sense to me and the questions i had, this man has answered many of those questions by showing how christianity and judeism has evolved. Religion is a good thing in my mind but fundamentalism is bad, ive talked to christians that believe the erath is only a couple of thousands years old, ive spoke to muslims that told me that the realm of god is in heaven a couple of thousand years journey away, both of those statements are plain stupid since they cant accept basic scientific facts, follow religion if you want but ppl doing so should still be critical about what they learn or are told so they can think for themself or they will be led astray.
I used to ask my religious protestant parents all kinds of questions about these inconsistencies and things that didn't make sense in the bible. I always got the same answer; "its about faith. don't worry if it doesn't make sense, you only have to believe". That was never good enough for me. At 8 I had serious doubts, and at 12 I was an atheist. Now I'm 59 and still an atheist. I'm the only one in my extended family whom the religious indoctrination didn't "take". All my relatives are fervent believers.
Paul Purcell that why it’s called “Christ”ianity Beautifully said, not the religion of Jesus, but a religion about Jesus may peace and blessings be upon him.
The more I learn about Christianity, the more I find it tragic that the teachings of modern Christianity (or at least Catholicism, which I grew up in) does not teach the many nuances and rich lore/mythology of both Old and New Testament teachings. I’ve learned more about Christianity from these three lectures than I had from roughly 15 years of catholic middle and high school education
Hello Chris. Qur'an is the only book that hasnt been changed since its relevation. Not one single letter. Science now confirms all the claims that Qur'an has made 1400 years ago. If you are interested in absolute truth, please reply.
@joker joker hahahaha are you sure sir???? So will your faith be void if it is ever proven some words have been changed or certain words are very likely have to be added or fabricated later on???
This guy took 3 lectures to conclude Jesus was a prophet whom pagans converted into a god, Quran tells same in a very simple and straight manner without being apologetic like this guy hehe.
well, Chris, if the Nicene Creed is no longer universal that does that mean anyone can call themselves a Christian irregardless of what they believe ... maybe you haven't left or were never there in the first place.
I left the church many many years ago but I still see value in religion because it gives hope, friendship, and support for so many people. Some religious organizations do wonderful work for the homeless and the poor for example. You have to admit the world is a better place because churches are still here and functioning. I don't believe any of their doctrines, it's all made up but I think we are a better place because they exist, am I right or wrong for thinking this way?
The doctrine of the Trinity is encapsulated in Matthew 28:19, where Jesus instructs the apostles: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." The parallelism of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit is not unique to Matthew’s Gospel, but appears elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., 2 Cor. 13:14, Heb. 9:14), as well as in the writings of the earliest Christians, who clearly understood them in the sense that we do today-that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are three divine persons who are one divine being (God). .
The Didache "After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living [running] water. . . . If you have neither, pour water three times on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (Didache 7:1 [A.D. 70]). The Letter of Barnabas "And further, my brethren, if the Lord [Jesus] endured to suffer for our soul, he being the Lord of all the world, to whom God said at the foundation of the world, ‘Let us make man after our image, and after our likeness,’ understand how it was that he endured to suffer at the hand of men" (Letter of Barnabas 5 [A.D. 74] emphasis added) Hermas "The Son of God is older than all his creation, so that he became the Father’s adviser in his creation. Therefore also he is ancient" (The Shepherd 12 [A.D. 80]).
Ignatius of Antioch "[T]o the Church at Ephesus in Asia . . . chosen through true suffering by the will of the Father in Jesus Christ our God" (Letter to the Ephesians 1 [A.D. 110]). "For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary in accord with God’s plan: of the seed of David, it is true, but also of the Holy Spirit" (ibid., 18:2). "Jesus Christ . . . was with the Father before the beginning of time, and in the end was revealed. . . . Jesus Christ . . . came forth from one Father and is with and has gone to one [Father]. . . . [T]here is one God, who has manifested himself by Jesus Christ his Son, who is his eternal Word, not proceeding forth from silence, and who in all things pleased him that sent him" (Letter to the Magnesians 6-8 [A.D. 110] emphasis added).
Justin Martyr "We will prove that we worship him reasonably; for we have learned that he is the Son of the true God himself, that he holds a second place, and the Spirit of prophecy a third. For this they accuse us of madness, saying that we attribute to a crucified man a place second to the unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator of all things; but they are ignorant of the mystery which lies therein" (First Apology 13:5-6 [A.D. 151]). "God speaks in the creation of man with the very same design, in the following words: ‘Let us make man after our image and likeness.’ . . . I shall quote again the words narrated by Moses himself, from which we can indisputably learn that [God] conversed with someone numerically distinct from himself and also a rational being. . . . But this offspring who was truly brought forth from the Father, was with the Father before all the creatures, and the Father communed with him" (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 62 [A.D. 155]). Mathetes "[The Father] sent the Word that he might be manifested to the world. . . . This is he who was from the beginning, who appeared as if new, and was found old. . . . This is he who, being from everlasting, is today called the Son" (Letter to Diognetus 11 [A.D. 160] emphasis added).
Theophilus of Antioch "It is the attribute of God, of the most high and almighty and of the living God, not only to be everywhere, but also to see and hear all; for he can in no way be contained in a place. . . . The three days before the luminaries were created are types of the Trinity: God, his Word, and his Wisdom" (To Autolycus 2:15 [A.D. 181]).
Irenaeus "For the Church, although dispersed throughout the whole world even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and from their disciples the faith in one God, the Father Almighty . . . and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became flesh for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit" (Against Heresies 1:10:1 [A.D. 189]). "It was not angels, therefore, who made us nor who formed us, neither had angels power to make an image of God, nor anyone else. . . . For God did not stand in need of these in order to accomplish what he had himself determined with himself beforehand should be done, as if he did not possess his own hands. For with him [the Father] were always present the Word and Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, he made all things, to whom also he speaks, saying, ‘Let us make man in our image and likeness’ [Gen. 1:26]" (Against Heresies 4:20:1 [A.D. 189] emphasis added).
Tertullian "We do indeed believe that there is only one God, but we believe that under this dispensation, or, as we say, oikonomia, there is also a Son of this one only God, his Word, who proceeded from him and through whom all things were made and without whom nothing was made. . . . We believe he was sent down by the Father, in accord with his own promise, the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, the sanctifier of the faith of those who believe in the Father and the Son, and in the Holy Spirit. . . . This rule of faith has been present since the beginning of the gospel, before even the earlier heretics" (Against Praxeas 2 [A.D. 216]). "While keeping to this demurrer always, there must, nevertheless, be place for reviewing for the sake of the instruction and protection of various persons. Otherwise it might seem that each perverse opinion is not examined but simply prejudged and condemned. This is especially so in the case of the present heresy [Sabellianism], which considers itself to have the pure truth when it supposes that one cannot believe in the one only God in any way other than by saying that Father, Son, and Spirit are the selfsame person. As if one were not all . . . through the unity of substance" (Against Praxeas 2:3-4 [A.D. 216]). "And at the same time the mystery of the oikonomia is safeguarded, for the unity is distributed in a Trinity. Placed in order, the three are the Father, Son, and Spirit. They are three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in being, but in form; not in power, but in kind; of one being, however, and one condition and one power, because he is one God of whom degrees and forms and kinds are taken into account in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (ibid.). "Keep always in mind the rule of faith which I profess and by which I bear witness that the Father and the Son and the Spirit are inseparable from each other, and then you will understand what is meant by it. Observe now that I say the Father is other [distinct], the Son is other, and the Spirit is other. This statement is wrongly understood by every uneducated or perversely disposed individual, as if it meant diversity and implied by that diversity a separation of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" (ibid., 9). . . . I say this, however, out of necessity, since they contend that the Father and the Son and the Spirit are the selfsame person" (ibid. 9:1). "Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent persons, who are yet distinct one from another. These three are, one essence, not one person, as it is said, ‘I and my Father are one’ [John 10:30], in respect of unity of being not singularity of number" (ibid., 25).
@@George040270 " ..the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are three divine persons who are one divine person (God)". That is the most idiotic statement Christians have ever made.
I am a Muslim, but have really been learning a lot and also enjoying your lectures. You have a good sense of humor too. I have an idea of some of the things you speak, so getting more background on them really helps.
People are falling away from churches with the rise in modern education. Rational explanations render most religious doctrines unbelievable. I find it similar to children shedding the belief in Santa Claus and yet encouraging the belief at maturity, when having children of their own. The traditions may endure, but the mystery is gone. Many great civilizations have flourished and ended without Christianity. It is only logical that our civilization will endure without Christianity until it ends to be replaced by whatever comes next.
If one can define God, that is proof that the definition is wrong. The very meaning of God, transendence, omnipotence, truth, justice, love, mystery, paradox, etc, is useless if God is defined as one of our own perceptions.
"Religion" has already taken the best seats on the "science bus". Just go listen to some of the "spokespersons" for science. Like Neil de Grasse Tyson and Bill Nye. Wake up
I was raised southern Baptist. Even as a child, I had questions they could never answer satisfactorally or their answers flew in the face of true facts. that made me switch to other Denominations, but was never satisfied. Then I read Zechariah Szitchtzin and from that Point, I slowly became Gnostic. With Bart Erhman, I am now more fully understanding my gnostic Christian beliefs and have a much better understanding of what I believe is God, and Jesus role as a man (Not god) and his teachings
to funny, i was raised SBC, asked the same questions, got the same answers, studied history of the church, rome, (i always wanted to know what the other, non roman Christians thought ) found nag hammadi library, and now more or less where you are.
"Say it is a nonexistent entity that is alleged to have magic powers. One of a number of different asserted beings that allegedly can influence the world through special powers, but for which no repeatable and demonstrable evidence of their existence can be found." Surah Al Steve 1:15.
Why do you believe what you believe ? Do you have any examples where a God does not beget ? Gods normally do beget sons as per Bart's lecture in this video
Come to Islam brother. Prophet Muhammad in a desert solved the issue. is he a historian to understand Jesus more than Christians? Or he had revelation from God.
@@HD13POWER in chrisitianity we respect ideas, u can criticize everything for knowledge seek, u cant do that in islam. by the way muhammad was born in 7th century AD in saudie arabia, how did he know about jews history? archeologist and historians dont use quran because it very unreliable, it contadicts facts, and besides muhammad was an illiterate guy , thats why he married a 6 year old child
I always find it funny that when Christians try to picture their god as some absolute ultimate perfect thing it gets them tied into paradoxes, whereas if they were to say, yeah god isn't completely perfect, he's just really really good, and really really powerful (which I think they kind of subconsciously believe when they aren't thinking about it, even if they won't admit it), those paradoxes would go away.
What is the reason behind Matthew 11:25, which Jesus said, thanking his God and his Father, that these things are hidden from the wise but reveal these to the babes. 1 Corinthian 1:20, says, The wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.
I found Tracie Harris' kinda definition to be fitting for fundamentalist. "If you were willing to die for your beliefs, then you were a fundamentalist"
"Christianity is a religion of development." He basically says in his calculated manner that christianity is a false religion. That's what it is. If the truth wasnt there from the beginning, there can be no truth afterwards.
It's the way around. The beginning was the right real story. Then people started to develop fairytales upon it in the span of time. 👍🏼 If I told you "I went to hospital and took an appointment" You go to another person and say "He went to hospital while being tired and weak and then slapped a nurse and took an appointment" 😂
Such a typical reaction from someone who is not looking for the truth. If MY religion is wrong then all religions are wrong. If you all know I am in the wrong then you all are wrong. Childish.
I am a born Muslim who believes in Jesus. I have followed Dr Bart. We should be like him , always seeking Truth and not believing in something blindly. Christianity has been exposed to Greek and Romans’ interventions who were actually enemies of Christianity. Thus we must be careful in the scriptures left by them.
They say charity begins at home , this is true in my case and literally in my home as I am a mentor for my landladys son and and a life coach for her. So I commend our speaker here for giving his money to charity. Faith hope and charity lives today in us who I like to call defenders of the faith .
Sidenote - The Next Emperor that came after Constantine, Julian was a traditionalist (hate that word pagan) and tried to dial everything back, but it was too late. Everyone knows Rome's history but after its sacking in 410, the remnants of the old priesthood blamed the abandonment of the gods as the reason why Rome fell. We understand that Rome would have fallen no matter what God or faith it had adopted, but I don't see having a Pantheon of gods as necessary divisive. The Romans were very practical people when it came to religion. They conquered a nation, they could welcome that nation's god into the Pantheon. You cannot do that with one God though, which means you have to suppress or convert the subject people.
Bart's deep study on the field proves that Jesus is a messanger of God the Almighty. As other messanger, like Abraham or Moses, the main teaching of Jesus' is to convey message from the God, and give example in his life how to be a good people who will be loved by the God.
Wrong. Bart shows the disciples of Jesus believed he was Messiah sent by God but after crucifixion, their belief was modified to Jesus was more than just a Messiah. The theology kept on modifying over the decades till it reached at Trinity. Belief is not proof ...it can be true or it can be false.
I seem to remember, while at school, being told that water could coexist in its three different states (solid ice, liquid water, and water vapour). I think it was called the triple point? That was 30 years ago and I may have got it wrong
It’s evident there is no supreme being behind any of these understandings. Logic doesn’t even play into a trinity teaching. A son is a son. How hard is that. He prayed to his father. How hard is that. Only conclusion is people love to argue and the Bible leaves way to much room for debate to be from god. Jmho
On your point, the entire bible (not just the NT) is an amalgamation of many religious ideas stolen from other mythologies and religions that neighboured the Jews. The entire concept of the messiah, the kingdom of god, judgment day, resurrection of the dead, hell, dualistic battle between good/evil etc were all stolen from Zoroastrianism.
If Jesus and God the Father are the same in attributes and power, why doesn’t Jesus know the hour or day of the end of this world. Which He makes very clear in Matthew 24:36. Not even the angels in heaven know, just the Father.
bart ehrman mention few great things we benefited this lecture 1) trasnscripts and development of diety of jesus was entirely different even before nicea agreement . 2) jesus was sent to Israel alone and to fulfill the comandment of his predacessors.same as muslims believe this affirms their case..
Great to listen to this yet again. But it was never argued that God was three beings. Rather "of one being with the Father". One God with two or three beings would not be a mystery or an anomaly but a contradiction.
I'd like to have heard Dr Ehrman say something about Aquinas' thought on nature and person: one divine nature and three divine persons or, in the case of Jesus, one divine Person but two different natures.
Hello brother. Dont let media tell you that islam opresses women and they are terrorists and stuff. Islam is fastest growing religion at record speed, and they are just trying to stop it. Please use your reason and brain, look all the scientific evidences that science is coming up to now, which have been said in Quran 1400 years ago. It is absolute truth, with not single bad thing in it. Peace.
@@jokerjoker2873, oh... Stop! You're as deluded as the Christians. No bad thing in the Quran?? 🤣 Quran 4:56 "Indeed, those who disbelieve in Our verses - We will drive them into a Fire. Every time their skins are roasted through We will replace them with other skins so they may taste the punishment. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted in Might and Wise." All the chapters I read until now have threats of hellfire and eternal punishment. And Islam is not the fastest growing religion, right now atheism is growing inside Islam.
They have certainly disbelieved who say that God is Christ, the son of Mary. Say, "Then who could prevent God at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?" And to God belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and God is over all things competent.
Lmao in the case of it not ever being a moment christ didn't exist. Could only mean, he was never created which also means, he is not the son but the father himself. Jesus Christ is the seed of no one in that case.
you right. if John's Jesus is the correct Jesus, then the label "son" is not the best label. the label "Word" is more appropriate i.e Father, Word, and the Holy Spirit
@@thagip2241 He was both, existing before time as the "word" (John 1:1) and existing in the flesh as "seed of David", Philippians 2:6,7,8. This speaks of Christ in both places; his "glory" in Heaven and his "humbling" on Earth. As far as his "seed", he is of the seed of David, the human aspect of the offspring of David through Mary's linage. Basically, before He was flesh and blood, he was spirit. It was only after Mary gave birth to Him through being "overshadowed" by the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:35) that Jesus became flesh and blood. Rajeev Deshpande, The believing the report that Christ came "in the flesh" through the virgin birth is what save's,John 3:16, and he is, in this sense, the son. One either believes and is saved or refuses and is lost John 3:36.
In the context of current foundational mathematics theory it is not a problem, since some infinities can be 'proven' as bigger than others. I do think that this BS though and I am writing a paper on it at the moment.
Jesus didn't become God, he did Father God's will. Jesus said himself that he could do nothing of himself. God raised Jesus from death. Jesus was/is always in subjection to Father God. Jesus is the only 1 found worthy to take the scroll out of the right hand of the 1 on the throne. The trinity doctrine is not found nor taught in the Bible. It is of man's imagination.
The "ONE" in the Trinity is the divine nature (essence). The divine nature/essence is shared by 3 persons, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The 3 persons in the Trinity are one God because they come from the same divine essence. It's not the "new maths". The concept of the "essence" comes from Greek philosophy.
@@70AD-user45 This is the interpretation of Origen, btw. If you can get enough people to agree with it, we should be able to get someone to reinvent Arianism in about 20 years.
There were many hypothesis regarding relationship between Jesus and Yahweh ... The Roman leader thought its unhealthy and bishops with different views should come together and debate and decide. He did not wanted different sects ...its not good for political stability ... Muslims also had similar differences and were killing each other for such kind of differences. Groups like Mutazali, Ashari, Msturudi, Athari These group differ in may points like 1. Can morals be derived from reason alone without Quran. 2. Whether Quran is created or uncreated word of God. 3. Do we have free will or not 4. Science and philosophy are un-islamic or not And many more
Timothy Mostad Moon symbol is not invited by Muslims , was not even popular until 1970s , many people don’t accept it. Go and read before giving made up story...
Shafik Nawla u actually right, though those issues were not the main of the religion, they all still worship god almighty and didn’t not worship Mohammed, in the contrary Earlier Christian instead of following Jesus teachings they become around his life and worshiped him, there debates are the shape of Christians today and born of something Jesus didn’t teached
The best way to get your head round the Trinity is not to focus on the three individuals of the Trinity as being Gods, but to understand that true divinity is ONENESS. God is what arises from the unity of the three persons of the Godhead, or as I put it; THE ONENESS OF THE ONES BECAME THE ONE
A simple understanding of the reading of the book is all that is needed. One Almighty (the Father). Yahshua said this himself. The trinity concept is man-made and cannot be right.
12:53 so god is father of jesus and jesus is son of god but then god is the son and the son is the god. Dosent that make god the son of himself which also makes him his own father? How is this still not a paradox?
John Romer suggests, in Testament: The Bible and History, that Constantine favoured the doctrine of the Trinity precisely because it created unity by tidying up the hierarchy above the emperor. No one could come along and claim to be the son of God and challenge his power.
I'm now really interesting into how the formation of Buddhism might be similar to the formation of Christianity. I don't know much about Buddhism, but it seems to me they might have some similarities in how they formed. edit: I don't think they are in itself similar. But both originate from another religion (as far as I understand it) and Both have one or multiple human head-figures and both have originally anti-authoritarian tendencies.
+oggi mog 500 years before Jesus, Siddharta Gautama was a well-documented prince. The religion around him was a very young, almost crude Hinduism; before the majority of their sacred texts and philosophical developments (which many may have happened as a response to Buddhism). The religion was mostly devoted to preserving order, and at the time a lot of people were basically 'defecting' from that order by swearing asceticism and living as hermits. Basically the Buddha was one of these - almost the equivalent of an atheist (though his words were something along the lines of "don't care") and he developed a philsophy of what basically amounted to a really good pain management program. After he died, a bunch of different sects sprang up in internal argument, some more like the Hindus in rituals, devotions, philosophy etc, some more radical compared to the society the Buddha came from. His philosophy's agnosticism made it compatible with other religions, and opened the way to a lot of esoteric beliefs that developed in the millenia after his death. Some think he was God, some think he was like a god (a god in the pyramid theory Ehrmann talked about before), some think he was a man with something spiritual to the point of supernatural about him, some think he was just a man. Some think Nirvana is just a mindset, some think of Nirvana in a language sort of like what's used to describe platonic ideas, some think of it like heaven. I kind of recommend Reasonable Doubt's podcasts on Buddhism, if you're coming from a western secular point of view.
There is a time point in the past where your children could not exist! If you have a son and you have a father and a grandfather, you can go on to till first human ! The most logical thing is that God has no son or family, all humans, including Jesus, (Everything, including the universe created by God) were created by God! God has no partners!
I must dispute the claim of Constantine being a christian. He played the Christians, first his troops at the Milvian Bridge and then at Nicaea. There are NO christian symbols on his arch in Rome nor on his coins.
If christians saw Jesus as a prophet of god among other prophets of god then the problem is solved. I believe many wise sages have been just as jesus was, and it has been totally misinterpreted by all his followers.How about we stop arguing over who is right and who is wrong and start thinking about the morality of the actions of those who may be such prophets?
Slickest idea that Christianity came up with was, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." Great lead in for Constantine and other Roman Emperors...
Good that we could clarify that God, Christ and the Holy Spirit are one and the same. Now we can start thinking about even more important topics. Like who would win in a fight Batman vs Spider-Man!
So this confusion did not starts today. It strarts Way back in time. Do you wants to tell me Christians of today dont know how it all began. After all this confusion now and then what makes them to still hold on to this conflicting ideas (fictions), called Three in One God (Trinity).
They don't have conflicting ideas you do, you have the idea of your doxy and no idea of theirs, yet you think their doxy is wrong without ever lookingf at your own, to paraphrase Bart Ehrman don't question what others believe question what you believe.
@@shonagraham2752 Seeing that a lot of atheist did believe in Christianity (or some religion) at one point, they did criticize what they believed in and are simply showing their findings lmao
100% human and 100% divine is logically impossible, as the attributes that humans bear are contrary to the attributes ascribed to divinity. Such a concept would make Jesus a 'squared-circle.'
To be honest this is not true! You are judging this with the mentality of a XXI century person. In antiquity things were not this way. It was perfectly fine to be a god and and a human or vice versa. According with greek mithology gods could even interbreed with humans at some point. They saw no problem with this. You can also see this in Roman Empire starting with Augusts emperaror! What happened is that when Christians were faced with the problem of how to classify Jesus they saw no problem at all in creating the Trinity!!
ramses4321 In antiquity it was possible to be a *demigod*, which is not what trinitarians are proposing Jesus was. They aren't claiming Jesus was merely partially divine or human, they believe he was 100% both, which as I said, isn't just paradoxical but logically impossible. To fully bear the attributes of 'God' would mean Jesus was all-knowing, all-powerful, all-present, etc. while simultaneously being a human who isn't any of these things: limited in knowledge (doesn't know when the end will come), admits on several occasions to not being inherently powerful ("by myself I can do *nothing*"), and had to walk from place to place. So whoever thought up this 'Trinity' idea certainly didn't think it all the way through. They are basically calling Jesus a 'squared circle'.
Harold Staiti It's not just 'unique' but paradoxical. You can't be all-knowing, but limited in knowledge at the same time. You can't be tempted, while inherently being impervious to sin. The attributes that make you 'fully human' are precisely why you're not God. Same goes for Jesus, if he was indeed fully human.
Harold Staiti That's the problem though. When attempting to explain or grasp how any of those paradoxes, it all falls apart. I mean, when it comes to the God of the OT, as king Solomon put it, "But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven *cannot* contain you; how much less this house that I have built!" (1 Kings 8:27) But "somehow" this is true and not true at the same time, as Jesus was confined to the human frame. God cannot be tempted (James 1:13) but "somehow" this is true and not true at the same time, since Jesus was "in all points tempted like as we are." It's not a matter of what's comforting, but rather basic logic. The parsimonious explanation would be... Jesus =/= God... and Jesus himself seemed to support that with his teaching.
Harold Staiti Depends on one's level of understanding 'scripture', the early Church (up til Nicaea) and formal logic. I seriously don't see a solid case for trinitarianism on any of those three.
In the beginning of the lecture proper, Ehrman describes a dilemma: Jesus is said to be both 100% human and 100% God. Is this really a paradox? As it would be if someone said he was 100% human and 100% bowl of petunias? Or is it really not a paradox, as it would not be, if he were said to be 100% human and 100% college professor? How is he sure "deity" is in the category of bowl of petunias in stead of college professor? Or, really, "human" for that matter. I could see that, for a deity, being a human is more like a profession, disguise, or avatar, than being a change in essence, unless you ban such by fiat: a human, by definition, is something not inhabited by a god. Not that I would disagree with his main premise.... Sorry, Doctor E., if you're reading. I'm sure you get this question all the time. I'm sure every paradox you bring up is questioned somehow. I agree with you, basically always, as the paradoxes usually are blatantly obvious, and only questioned by someone performing some really impressive rationalization....
Jesus, who is Gods only begotten Son (first creation); ‘voluntarily’ took on the mission to bring back to humanity, what was lost in the garden of Eden - perfection. Adam and Eve, originally created to live forever - lost it by sinning. The process of Jesus birth, faithfulness and then sacrifice, enabled proof to be laid out, that a perfect human could remain faithful to God! Thus, all mankind regained an opportunity to live forever. The prophets before were waiting for a messiah and Jesus ‘knew’ he was that.
The Garden of Eden wasn’t perfect; a perfect garden would not allow any sinning. In order for sin to occur, something with the potential to sin had to exist, and perfection would be inconsistent with the potential to sin. Why exactly does a human have to perfect to remain faithful to God? Did Paul not remain faithful to God, for example?
41:00: Theologians thought that a human consists of 3 elements: body, soul and spirit. What's the difference between soul and spirit again? How did they know (to suggest) Jesus had a human soul, but a divine spirit, and not a divine soul and a human spirit? Don't tell me they were just making it up.
Bart loses me when he brings up Paul’s Epistles. According to the People if The Way, Paul was not to be trusted in Preaching about the Christ. Paul taught quite a different message than the Christ.
What I've always found interesting -- and I'm a non-theist -- is how Tertulian, and, of course others, down to this day and I'm sure beyond, who have made a career of saying "God can't....." "God can't be his own son" etc. To which my answer has always been, HE'S GOD. He can do whatever he wants! If you have this all powerful, all knowing being who created the universe and everything in it (yet who screwed up humanity so badly that they failed before getting out of the starting gate, and he had to punch control/alt/delete time and time again, but that's another topic), who IS the Alpha and IS the Omega, if this being wants to beget himself and exist as the same being in two different places at the same time, then he very well can. He's GOD! And the first time you bring up the word 'can't' in relation to this God, then why call him God? Quantum physics shows that on and off can be the same, two different particles can be in two different places at the same time and pop in and out of existence. If particles can do it, and the God who supposedly created those particles cannot, then he either isn't God, or he's still on his learner's permit and HIS father better take his car keys away before he hurts someone else.
It's an un-evidenced assertion about an intelligent magic entity that is allegedly responsible for the creation of the universe through magic. Of course it's going to get around any paradox by making an appeal to magic, that's the very nature of the claim. Can a god create a burrito so large that even it can't eat? If you answer no, well it's a god so it can do anything. If you answer yes, well it's a god so it can do anything, how can it be limited even by itself? The entire presumption is based upon an appeal to the supernatural, i.e. an appeal to magic. Thus, any claims about limitations can be refuted by appealing to the same.
I am a little confused. Where does it state anywhere in the Bible that Jesus is God? I can't find it anywhere. So there is really no problem to figure out. Jesus is not God, but God is God. Dilemma solved.
it's mainly in John and then various other parts are used in terms of prophecy from the OT. But it mainly comes from the theology which followed on from the gospels themselves. In a sense what you are saying is the jewish & islamic view on it, that Jesus was a prophet of some sort. But the christians in a way created a theological problem for themselves and then set out to try and solve it.
The Bible make the claim that only God is perfect, and the Bible says that Jesus was perfect. If both these statements are true, Jesus is God because he is perfect and only God is perfect.
Again I admire your knowledge of the gospels. But what you told your audience about Constantine and his mother Helena is a bit disappointing for those who have read the dubious biography of Eusebius of Cesarea and the legend of his mother Helena in the Legenda aurea.
Too bad god didn't explain the concept of superposition to anyone back then 'cause that would have instantly solved the trinity dilemma with actual physics instead of hand waving.
Mason Glaves .. What a lovely god ,who loves us .. Leaves us in this big mess & lost in a doctrine which salvation depends on !!!!! This is a satanic god then
@@hassanm2357 actually it is. The "god of this age" is evil. And the Bible belongs to this world. It's written that God created and YHWH gave shape. Maybe there's a creator and there's a shaper. That would kind of fit on the 'emptiness' of matter. Jesus teachings were about praising the Father, the soul creator, and to not to love the things of this world. Also, behind the whole idea of gravitational astrophysics you can find the Jesuits, plus it's built upon ideas rather than evidence. Plasma cosmology seems the way to get to the truth. Or as far as our limited human mind allows us. Plus, without getting rid of ego it's impossible, that should be the number one priority; "the pride of life"
Constantine did NOT convert to Christianity in 312, not until he was on his death bed. He did make Christianity the state religion prior to converting at the end of his life.
where was this word trinity BEFORE the NICAEA convention in 325 c e sir ?. I think trinity might had been incorporated in the Mathew's gospel in the 4th century only .
![ทุกครั้งที่หลับตา (Lucid Dream) - AYLA's [ Official MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4i1OBAQyv58/mqdefault.jpg)
I was a hard-core fundamentalist Christian. Until I got a hold of a book called the Bible unearthed. After reading that book and a couple of others. I realized what I believed in my whole life was a lie. So, I became a Skeptic. Bart hit the nail on the head when he said Christianity is not about the religion of Jesus. It's a religion about Jesus.
43:17: To me this is the most eye-opening comment in Dr. Ehrman's presentation: "Christianity is not so much the religion of Jesus -- the religion that Jesus had -- it's really more the religion about Jesus. ...It isn't what Jesus was preaching. Jesus was a Jew from rural Galilee who understood himself to be Jewish and probably had no idea of starting a religion. He was preaching the correct understanding of Judaism. Christianity became something else. ...And Christ ended up being not an apocalyptic prophet but God himself."
If anyone earnestly studies the entire book they really have no choice but to come to the same conclusion. The Gospel Y'shua taught is not the gospel Paul taught and it is Paul who Christianity really follows.
When I listen to of read Bart Ehrman about Christianity/Jesus I hear 100% echos of Islam. Now THAT is something he should try to understand next. How is it possible that Islam understands Christ/Christianity better than Christians themselves? THAT is the really perplexing question for a historian like him.
+Kadir El-Moumni
I think it is very eye-opening that Muslims "hear 100% echos of Islam" in atheists' words.
So if atheism is a 100% echo of Islam, are you sure Allah is the real God? Maybe he is Muhammad's mental idol that replaces the true God, the God that the Gospel preaches (which the Quran claims to somehow confirm)?
jews don't even believe heaven and hell, they are more obsessed with the world affairs and they only care money not God so maybe you should do your own research about judisam before u comment.
There is no evidence that Jesus was a real person who preached anything. There were lots of preachers around that time, probably lots of them named Jesus. The proposition that one of them specifically gave rise to the legend is unfounded.
I think it is unprecedented for this church to hold these types of lecturers. Good for them!
Why is it unprecedented? One's personal beliefs really should not have anything with the subject matter.
@OTO TAKE church lying about its history is from satan, Jesus is a Muslim who worshipped Allah, term son was figurative on Adam and David so why not Jesus peace on him! no reason and thats what it is!
@Kimi Furmily First of your comment of being a muslim would serve the same purpouse as staring with as a christian, as an hinduist, as a pagan, as an atheist and so on, it means nothing for the factual disscusion other then your statements and arguments will be based on your faith, belife and feelings.
I have studied religion for most part of my life on a basic level, so im no authority and the same goes for most belivers of any religion, its important to understand that a priest or rabbie or imma, witchdoctor whatever are studiyng their religion on a way depper level then what a normal believer does and all they are tought they dont tell the congregation for the reason its to complicated, for the masses the religion despite is keept easy to follow.
A good friend of min studied to be a christian priest and i had wounderfull talks with her about what she stidued. One thing that surprised me was the admittion that there were more God's according to the bible but as christians you choose to follow ours, for me i was convinced that the bible lied and said there is only 1 god since thats how ive allways been told.
Congregations doesnt understand all the underlaying things in their faith if you need to read a encyklopedia to understand the religion most believers reads a newspapper in comparison and for them thats enough.
A church having this lecture to educate their staff on this subject will more strengthen them, it takes nothing away from their faith since faith doesnt deal with facts but they have a deeper understanding and any doubt they would have to deal with on their own part or someonec in their congregation they could use this to explain.
Besides Dr. Bart aint attacking anyones faith here he gives the historical background and fact and you cant argue with fact with beliefe.
I must say that after watching some lectures with Dr. Bart ive now have a greater acceptance for christianity and its beliefes then ive had for many years, i was raised christian but turned pagan since christianity didnt make any sense to me and the questions i had, this man has answered many of those questions by showing how christianity and judeism has evolved.
Religion is a good thing in my mind but fundamentalism is bad, ive talked to christians that believe the erath is only a couple of thousands years old, ive spoke to muslims that told me that the realm of god is in heaven a couple of thousand years journey away, both of those statements are plain stupid since they cant accept basic scientific facts, follow religion if you want but ppl doing so should still be critical about what they learn or are told so they can think for themself or they will be led astray.
@@Vedioviswritingservice 1
Cyric London but how can you believe stuff if you accept what he says?
I used to ask my religious protestant parents all kinds of questions about these inconsistencies and things that didn't make sense in the bible. I always got the same answer; "its about faith. don't worry if it doesn't make sense, you only have to believe". That was never good enough for me. At 8 I had serious doubts, and at 12 I was an atheist. Now I'm 59 and still an atheist. I'm the only one in my extended family whom the religious indoctrination didn't "take". All my relatives are fervent believers.
You must belive some or you wouldn't be watching this
"Christianity in many respects is not so much the religion of Jesus. The religion that Jesus had. Its really more the religion about Jesus."
The Urantia Book fully agrees :)
Paul Purcell that why it’s called “Christ”ianity
Beautifully said, not the religion of Jesus, but a religion about Jesus may peace and blessings be upon him.
@@AM-bj7yo Jesus was a pious Jewish preacher. All the rest is just made up nonsense
Yes, they have been diverted from the real message of Jesus to talk about Jesus himself.
Christianity-Christian = Christlike..... You're right...
The more I learn about Christianity, the more I find it tragic that the teachings of modern Christianity (or at least Catholicism, which I grew up in) does not teach the many nuances and rich lore/mythology of both Old and New Testament teachings. I’ve learned more about Christianity from these three lectures than I had from roughly 15 years of catholic middle and high school education
This is incredibly interesting. I left christianity awhile ago and the more i learn the more i'm convinced it was the correct choice.
Hello Chris. Qur'an is the only book that hasnt been changed since its relevation. Not one single letter. Science now confirms all the claims that Qur'an has made 1400 years ago. If you are interested in absolute truth, please reply.
Good choice man. Way2go
@joker joker hahahaha are you sure sir???? So will your faith be void if it is ever proven some words have been changed or certain words are very likely have to be added or fabricated later on???
This guy took 3 lectures to conclude Jesus was a prophet whom pagans converted into a god, Quran tells same in a very simple and straight manner without being apologetic like this guy hehe.
well, Chris, if the Nicene Creed is no longer universal that does that mean anyone can call themselves a Christian irregardless of what they believe ... maybe you haven't left or were never there in the first place.
I left the church many many years ago but I still see value in religion because it gives hope, friendship, and support for so many people. Some religious organizations do wonderful work for the homeless and the poor for example. You have to admit the world is a better place because churches are still here and functioning. I don't believe any of their doctrines, it's all made up but I think we are a better place because they exist, am I right or wrong for thinking this way?
Tertulian: "It would be paradoxical for god to be his own son, so I'll invent the Trinity."
Michael Sommers "That doesn't make sense!"
"It's a mystery!"
The doctrine of the Trinity is encapsulated in Matthew 28:19, where Jesus instructs the apostles: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."
The parallelism of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit is not unique to Matthew’s Gospel, but appears elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., 2 Cor. 13:14, Heb. 9:14), as well as in the writings of the earliest Christians, who clearly understood them in the sense that we do today-that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are three divine persons who are one divine being (God).
.
The Didache
"After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living [running] water. . . . If you have neither, pour water three times on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (Didache 7:1 [A.D. 70]).
The Letter of Barnabas
"And further, my brethren, if the Lord [Jesus] endured to suffer for our soul, he being the Lord of all the world, to whom God said at the foundation of the world, ‘Let us make man after our image, and after our likeness,’ understand how it was that he endured to suffer at the hand of men" (Letter of Barnabas 5 [A.D. 74] emphasis added)
Hermas
"The Son of God is older than all his creation, so that he became the Father’s adviser in his creation. Therefore also he is ancient" (The Shepherd 12 [A.D. 80]).
Ignatius of Antioch
"[T]o the Church at Ephesus in Asia . . . chosen through true suffering by the will of the Father in Jesus Christ our God" (Letter to the Ephesians 1 [A.D. 110]).
"For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary in accord with God’s plan: of the seed of David, it is true, but also of the Holy Spirit" (ibid., 18:2).
"Jesus Christ . . . was with the Father before the beginning of time, and in the end was revealed. . . . Jesus Christ . . . came forth from one Father and is with and has gone to one [Father]. . . . [T]here is one God, who has manifested himself by Jesus Christ his Son, who is his eternal Word, not proceeding forth from silence, and who in all things pleased him that sent him" (Letter to the Magnesians 6-8 [A.D. 110] emphasis added).
Justin Martyr
"We will prove that we worship him reasonably; for we have learned that he is the Son of the true God himself, that he holds a second place, and the Spirit of prophecy a third. For this they accuse us of madness, saying that we attribute to a crucified man a place second to the unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator of all things; but they are ignorant of the mystery which lies therein" (First Apology 13:5-6 [A.D. 151]).
"God speaks in the creation of man with the very same design, in the following words: ‘Let us make man after our image and likeness.’ . . . I shall quote again the words narrated by Moses himself, from which we can indisputably learn that [God] conversed with someone numerically distinct from himself and also a rational being. . . . But this offspring who was truly brought forth from the Father, was with the Father before all the creatures, and the Father communed with him" (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 62 [A.D. 155]).
Mathetes
"[The Father] sent the Word that he might be manifested to the world. . . . This is he who was from the beginning, who appeared as if new, and was found old. . . . This is he who, being from everlasting, is today called the Son" (Letter to Diognetus 11 [A.D. 160] emphasis added).
Theophilus of Antioch
"It is the attribute of God, of the most high and almighty and of the living God, not only to be everywhere, but also to see and hear all; for he can in no way be contained in a place. . . . The three days before the luminaries were created are types of the Trinity: God, his Word, and his Wisdom" (To Autolycus 2:15 [A.D. 181]).
Irenaeus
"For the Church, although dispersed throughout the whole world even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and from their disciples the faith in one God, the Father Almighty . . . and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became flesh for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit" (Against Heresies 1:10:1 [A.D. 189]).
"It was not angels, therefore, who made us nor who formed us, neither had angels power to make an image of God, nor anyone else. . . . For God did not stand in need of these in order to accomplish what he had himself determined with himself beforehand should be done, as if he did not possess his own hands. For with him [the Father] were always present the Word and Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, he made all things, to whom also he speaks, saying, ‘Let us make man in our image and likeness’ [Gen. 1:26]" (Against Heresies 4:20:1 [A.D. 189] emphasis added).
Tertullian
"We do indeed believe that there is only one God, but we believe that under this dispensation, or, as we say, oikonomia, there is also a Son of this one only God, his Word, who proceeded from him and through whom all things were made and without whom nothing was made. . . . We believe he was sent down by the Father, in accord with his own promise, the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, the sanctifier of the faith of those who believe in the Father and the Son, and in the Holy Spirit. . . . This rule of faith has been present since the beginning of the gospel, before even the earlier heretics" (Against Praxeas 2 [A.D. 216]).
"While keeping to this demurrer always, there must, nevertheless, be place for reviewing for the sake of the instruction and protection of various persons. Otherwise it might seem that each perverse opinion is not examined but simply prejudged and condemned. This is especially so in the case of the present heresy [Sabellianism], which considers itself to have the pure truth when it supposes that one cannot believe in the one only God in any way other than by saying that Father, Son, and Spirit are the selfsame person. As if one were not all . . . through the unity of substance" (Against Praxeas 2:3-4 [A.D. 216]).
"And at the same time the mystery of the oikonomia is safeguarded, for the unity is distributed in a Trinity. Placed in order, the three are the Father, Son, and Spirit. They are three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in being, but in form; not in power, but in kind; of one being, however, and one condition and one power, because he is one God of whom degrees and forms and kinds are taken into account in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (ibid.).
"Keep always in mind the rule of faith which I profess and by which I bear witness that the Father and the Son and the Spirit are inseparable from each other, and then you will understand what is meant by it. Observe now that I say the Father is other [distinct], the Son is other, and the Spirit is other. This statement is wrongly understood by every uneducated or perversely disposed individual, as if it meant diversity and implied by that diversity a separation of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" (ibid., 9).
. . . I say this, however, out of necessity, since they contend that the Father and the Son and the Spirit are the selfsame person" (ibid. 9:1).
"Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent persons, who are yet distinct one from another. These three are, one essence, not one person, as it is said, ‘I and my Father are one’ [John 10:30], in respect of unity of being not singularity of number" (ibid., 25).
@@George040270 thats a nice example for the corruption of the gospel because that trinity was not invented before 400 AD
@@George040270 " ..the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are three divine persons who are one divine person
(God)". That is the most idiotic statement Christians have ever made.
George Pierson What’s your point?
I am a Muslim, but have really been learning a lot and also enjoying your lectures. You have a good sense of humor too. I have an idea of some of the things you speak, so getting more background on them really helps.
Bart I doubt you can feed the world but you are certainly healing the word.
People are falling away from churches with the rise in modern education. Rational explanations render most religious doctrines unbelievable. I find it similar to children shedding the belief in Santa Claus and yet encouraging the belief at maturity, when having children of their own. The traditions may endure, but the mystery is gone.
Many great civilizations have flourished and ended without Christianity. It is only logical that our civilization will endure without Christianity until it ends to be replaced by whatever comes next.
Hopefully whatever comes next will not be another religion. I hope it will be a rise in science and reason.
Well said.
If one can define God, that is proof that the definition is wrong. The very meaning of God, transendence, omnipotence, truth, justice, love, mystery, paradox, etc, is useless if God is defined as one of our own perceptions.
"Religion" has already taken the best seats on the "science bus".
Just go listen to some of the "spokespersons" for science.
Like Neil de Grasse Tyson and Bill Nye.
Wake up
@@jaimegutes4174 Therefore I speculate, God can only be perceived as a concept, not a "reality".
I was raised southern Baptist. Even as a child, I had questions they could never answer satisfactorally or their answers flew in the face of true facts. that made me switch to other Denominations, but was never satisfied. Then I read Zechariah Szitchtzin and from that Point, I slowly became Gnostic. With Bart Erhman, I am now more fully understanding my gnostic Christian beliefs and have a much better understanding of what I believe is God, and Jesus role as a man (Not god) and his teachings
to funny, i was raised SBC, asked the same questions, got the same answers, studied history of the church, rome, (i always wanted to know what the other, non roman Christians thought ) found nag hammadi library, and now more or less where you are.
Randy Moffat watch michael hieser he shows pretty clearly that sitchen is wrong
joeydelrio elohim is those over there more or less and the head one said let us make man in our image.. elogim plural gods
Gnostic ? what is it
@@Davidbengurionrotteninthehell Agnostic he mean! a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
"Say He is God, the One. The Master of All. He does not beget, nor is born. And there is none like unto him". Surah Al Ikhlas.
"Say it is a nonexistent entity that is alleged to have magic powers. One of a number of different asserted beings that allegedly can influence the world through special powers, but for which no repeatable and demonstrable evidence of their existence can be found." Surah Al Steve 1:15.
CatoTheElder * Allahu Akbar Allah is the Greatest!
Why do you believe what you believe ?
Do you have any examples where a God does not beget ?
Gods normally do beget sons as per Bart's lecture in this video
There are four parts to this lecture. I'll be giving _three._ *Way to upsell Bart!*
These lecture series are well presented! Keeps you hooked till the end (which usually isn't the case with me).
Aaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnd this is why I left Christianity a long, long time ago.
Come to Islam brother. Prophet Muhammad in a desert solved the issue. is he a historian to understand Jesus more than Christians? Or he had revelation from God.
@@HD13POWER Islam is just as screwed up as Christianity.
@@Nnnnnzzz7 dont talk shit bro.. Think before you say
@@Nnnnnzzz7 tell me what you think is wrong about islam. Thanks.
@@HD13POWER in chrisitianity we respect ideas, u can criticize everything for knowledge seek, u cant do that in islam. by the way muhammad was born in 7th century AD in saudie arabia, how did he know about jews history? archeologist and historians dont use quran because it very unreliable, it contadicts facts, and besides muhammad was an illiterate guy , thats why he married a 6 year old child
Fantastic series, his books are very good
Fascinating series of lectures.
Brilliant lecturer.
I always find it funny that when Christians try to picture their god as some absolute ultimate perfect thing it gets them tied into paradoxes, whereas if they were to say, yeah god isn't completely perfect, he's just really really good, and really really powerful (which I think they kind of subconsciously believe when they aren't thinking about it, even if they won't admit it), those paradoxes would go away.
I like this guy he isn't hateful like some atheists are plus he is educated in the subject.
I think that Monty Python and the Holy Grail was probably more historically accurate than the DaVinci Code. 😂
the davinci code was not based in truth, as the writers admitted.
@@jaimegutes4174 Neither is the bible
Wonderful wonderful statement" welcome to the study of Christianity" wow!!!!!
Imagine if "the God" could actually write a book that was clear in its theology and didn't have conflicting passages.
What is the reason behind Matthew 11:25, which Jesus said, thanking his God and his Father, that these things are hidden from the wise but reveal these to the babes. 1 Corinthian 1:20, says, The wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.
Enjoyable lectures.
I found Tracie Harris' kinda definition to be fitting for fundamentalist. "If you were willing to die for your beliefs, then you were a fundamentalist"
"Christianity is a religion of development." He basically says in his calculated manner that christianity is a false religion. That's what it is. If the truth wasnt there from the beginning, there can be no truth afterwards.
Svetoslav Yordanov
Bingo.
Christianity is absurdity masquerading as profundity.
It's the way around. The beginning was the right real story. Then people started to develop fairytales upon it in the span of time. 👍🏼
If I told you "I went to hospital and took an appointment"
You go to another person and say "He went to hospital while being tired and weak and then slapped a nurse and took an appointment" 😂
Such a typical reaction from someone who is not looking for the truth. If MY religion is wrong then all religions are wrong. If you all know I am in the wrong then you all are wrong. Childish.
I am a born Muslim who believes in Jesus. I have followed Dr Bart. We should be like him , always seeking Truth and not believing in something blindly. Christianity has been exposed to Greek and Romans’ interventions who were actually enemies of Christianity. Thus we must be careful in the scriptures left by them.
Thank you Dr. Ehrman....
CHRISTIANITY IS A RELIGION OF DEVELOPMENT .
"he created through jesus"
i can't believe that prophet of zod cartoon with jesus shaping adam is actually accurate to something. amazing.
They say charity begins at home , this is true in my case and literally in my home as I am a mentor for my landladys son and and a life coach for her. So I commend our speaker here for giving his money to charity. Faith hope and charity lives today in us who I like to call defenders of the faith .
Thank you for sharing all this great knowledge
Sidenote - The Next Emperor that came after Constantine, Julian was a traditionalist (hate that word pagan) and tried to dial everything back, but it was too late. Everyone knows Rome's history but after its sacking in 410, the remnants of the old priesthood blamed the abandonment of the gods as the reason why Rome fell. We understand that Rome would have fallen no matter what God or faith it had adopted, but I don't see having a Pantheon of gods as necessary divisive. The Romans were very practical people when it came to religion. They conquered a nation, they could welcome that nation's god into the Pantheon. You cannot do that with one God though, which means you have to suppress or convert the subject people.
Love these videos/lectures!!! ❤️
Bart's deep study on the field proves that Jesus is a messanger of God the Almighty. As other messanger, like Abraham or Moses, the main teaching of Jesus' is to convey message from the God, and give example in his life how to be a good people who will be loved by the God.
ishaq handri yet Bart, after all this study, is not convinced that a god exists
Wrong.
Bart shows the disciples of Jesus believed he was Messiah sent by God but after crucifixion, their belief was modified to Jesus was more than just a Messiah.
The theology kept on modifying over the decades till it reached at Trinity.
Belief is not proof ...it can be true or it can be false.
Love u man love ur debate, lecture full of fun and information, u r honest man
I seem to remember, while at school, being told that water could coexist in its three different states (solid ice, liquid water, and water vapour). I think it was called the triple point? That was 30 years ago and I may have got it wrong
It’s evident there is no supreme being behind any of these understandings. Logic doesn’t even play into a trinity teaching. A son is a son. How hard is that. He prayed to his father. How hard is that. Only conclusion is people love to argue and the Bible leaves way to much room for debate to be from god. Jmho
On your point, the entire bible (not just the NT) is an amalgamation of many religious ideas stolen from other mythologies and religions that neighboured the Jews. The entire concept of the messiah, the kingdom of god, judgment day, resurrection of the dead, hell, dualistic battle between good/evil etc were all stolen from Zoroastrianism.
If Jesus and God the Father are the same in attributes and power, why doesn’t Jesus know the hour or day of the end of this world.
Which He makes very clear in Matthew 24:36. Not even the angels in heaven know, just the Father.
If Jesus is the "son" of "god", who is the "mother"? Can't be Mary, since Jesus pre-existed
bart ehrman mention few great things we benefited this lecture 1) trasnscripts and development of diety of jesus was entirely different even before nicea agreement . 2) jesus was sent to Israel alone and to fulfill the comandment of his predacessors.same as muslims believe this affirms their case..
Great to listen to this yet again. But it was never argued that God was three beings. Rather "of one being with the Father". One God with two or three beings would not be a mystery or an anomaly but a contradiction.
I’d like to hear Bart and Jordan Peterson have a dialogue about the Bible. It would be
*f a s c i n a t i n g*
Actually, water can be in all three phases at once. It's called triple point of water (approximately 0°C and 612 Pa).
I'd like to have heard Dr Ehrman say something about Aquinas' thought on nature and person: one divine nature and three divine persons or, in the case of Jesus, one divine Person but two different natures.
Many of us do not care -- anymore.
Hello brother. Dont let media tell you that islam opresses women and they are terrorists and stuff.
Islam is fastest growing religion at record speed, and they are just trying to stop it. Please use your reason and brain, look all the scientific evidences that science is coming up to now, which have been said in Quran 1400 years ago. It is absolute truth, with not single bad thing in it. Peace.
Lmao at all!
@@jokerjoker2873, oh... Stop! You're as deluded as the Christians. No bad thing in the Quran?? 🤣 Quran 4:56 "Indeed, those who disbelieve in Our verses - We will drive them into a Fire. Every time their skins are roasted through We will replace them with other skins so they may taste the punishment. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted in Might and Wise." All the chapters I read until now have threats of hellfire and eternal punishment.
And Islam is not the fastest growing religion, right now atheism is growing inside Islam.
They have certainly disbelieved who say that God is Christ, the son of Mary. Say, "Then who could prevent God at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?" And to God belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and God is over all things competent.
+Logic First And there is nothing like unto Him.
Logic First: Another misleading name. There is no logic whatsoever in your post, just blind belief in the ridiculous that lacks evidence.
WTF are you talking about?
@@TonyTigerTonyTiger You are entitled to your opinion.
This is a church I could attend .... too bad I live more than 1000 miles away.
@Jimmy Cees UK, it would be great if he could come over here
A child with a bucket of sand when asked what's in the pail? replied the beach. I've always thought about God and Christ in this logic.
If Christ always existed, then in what sense is he the 'son'?
Lmao in the case of it not ever being a moment christ didn't exist. Could only mean, he was never created which also means, he is not the son but the father himself. Jesus Christ is the seed of no one in that case.
you right. if John's Jesus is the correct Jesus, then the label "son" is not the best label. the label "Word" is more appropriate i.e Father, Word, and the Holy Spirit
@@thagip2241 He was both, existing before time as the "word" (John 1:1) and existing in the flesh as "seed of David", Philippians 2:6,7,8. This speaks of Christ in both places; his "glory" in Heaven and his "humbling" on Earth. As far as his "seed", he is of the seed of David, the human aspect of the offspring of David through Mary's linage.
Basically, before He was flesh and blood, he was spirit. It was only after Mary gave birth to Him through being "overshadowed" by the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:35) that Jesus became flesh and blood.
Rajeev Deshpande, The believing the report that Christ came "in the flesh" through the virgin birth is what save's,John 3:16, and he is, in this sense, the son. One either believes and is saved or refuses and is lost John 3:36.
In the context of current foundational mathematics theory it is not a problem, since some infinities can be 'proven' as bigger than others. I do think that this BS though and I am writing a paper on it at the moment.
He's the bastard child of genocidal Yahveh who raped a married woman without her husband's permission. That's what Christians would say
Great video!
Aw, I wanted to hear about women's role in early Christianity!
Jesus didn't become God, he did Father God's will. Jesus said himself that he could do nothing of himself. God raised Jesus from death. Jesus was/is always in subjection to Father God. Jesus is the only 1 found worthy to take the scroll out of the right hand of the 1 on the throne. The trinity doctrine is not found nor taught in the Bible. It is of man's imagination.
Ok, so God is one god. Jesus is another god. The Spirit is another god. Separate beings, yet ONE. Must be the new math.
The "ONE" in the Trinity is the divine nature (essence). The divine nature/essence is shared by 3 persons, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The 3 persons in the Trinity are one God because they come from the same divine essence. It's not the "new maths". The concept of the "essence" comes from Greek philosophy.
@@70AD-user45 This is the interpretation of Origen, btw. If you can get enough people to agree with it, we should be able to get someone to reinvent Arianism in about 20 years.
Now we know where common core was first invented lol
Wonderful!
The whole Christian argument is inane. 300 years after Christ some bishops who probably smelled decided who and what is God.
That certainly is easier than transforming some old pagan moon God into the one and only creator God that the Jews and Christians worship.
There were many hypothesis regarding relationship between Jesus and Yahweh ...
The Roman leader thought its unhealthy and bishops with different views should come together and debate and decide.
He did not wanted different sects ...its not good for political stability ...
Muslims also had similar differences and were killing each other for such kind of differences.
Groups like Mutazali, Ashari, Msturudi, Athari
These group differ in may points like
1. Can morals be derived from reason alone without Quran.
2. Whether Quran is created or uncreated word of God.
3. Do we have free will or not
4. Science and philosophy are un-islamic or not
And many more
ANSWER MAN
But the truth is there in no moon god in pagan society ,that might be upset you.
Timothy Mostad Moon symbol is not invited by Muslims , was not even popular until 1970s , many people don’t accept it.
Go and read before giving made up story...
Shafik Nawla u actually right, though those issues were not the main of the religion, they all still worship god almighty and didn’t not worship Mohammed, in the contrary Earlier Christian instead of following Jesus teachings they become around his life and worshiped him, there debates are the shape of Christians today and born of something Jesus didn’t teached
The best way to get your head round the Trinity is not to focus on the three individuals of the Trinity as being Gods, but to understand that true divinity is ONENESS. God is what arises from the unity of the three persons of the Godhead, or as I put it; THE ONENESS OF THE ONES BECAME THE ONE
A simple understanding of the reading of the book is all that is needed. One Almighty (the Father). Yahshua said this himself. The trinity concept is man-made and cannot be right.
Hahahaaa nice try but why cant u just say God is one period
over time it becomes more and more clear that the bible has mistakes errors contradictions and human adding even Christianity today not the real one
The new testament was not written during the lifetime of Jesus.
Jesus should had done that or should have had employed somebody else to do writings .
@Arif Hakyemez islam is false doctrine
If a perfect god cannot change he also cannot create a universe. Because by doing so he would either becaome more or less perfect!
12:53 so god is father of jesus and jesus is son of god but then god is the son and the son is the god. Dosent that make god the son of himself which also makes him his own father? How is this still not a paradox?
For an alternative view, see "The Missing Gospels" by Darrell L. Bock which has major excerpts from the primary documents.
John Romer suggests, in Testament: The Bible and History, that Constantine favoured the doctrine of the Trinity precisely because it created unity by tidying up the hierarchy above the emperor. No one could come along and claim to be the son of God and challenge his power.
I'm now really interesting into how the formation of Buddhism might be similar to the formation of Christianity. I don't know much about Buddhism, but it seems to me they might have some similarities in how they formed.
edit: I don't think they are in itself similar. But both originate from another religion (as far as I understand it) and Both have one or multiple human head-figures and both have originally anti-authoritarian tendencies.
+oggi mog 500 years before Jesus, Siddharta Gautama was a well-documented prince. The religion around him was a very young, almost crude Hinduism; before the majority of their sacred texts and philosophical developments (which many may have happened as a response to Buddhism). The religion was mostly devoted to preserving order, and at the time a lot of people were basically 'defecting' from that order by swearing asceticism and living as hermits. Basically the Buddha was one of these - almost the equivalent of an atheist (though his words were something along the lines of "don't care") and he developed a philsophy of what basically amounted to a really good pain management program. After he died, a bunch of different sects sprang up in internal argument, some more like the Hindus in rituals, devotions, philosophy etc, some more radical compared to the society the Buddha came from.
His philosophy's agnosticism made it compatible with other religions, and opened the way to a lot of esoteric beliefs that developed in the millenia after his death. Some think he was God, some think he was like a god (a god in the pyramid theory Ehrmann talked about before), some think he was a man with something spiritual to the point of supernatural about him, some think he was just a man. Some think Nirvana is just a mindset, some think of Nirvana in a language sort of like what's used to describe platonic ideas, some think of it like heaven.
I kind of recommend Reasonable Doubt's podcasts on Buddhism, if you're coming from a western secular point of view.
A better example would be the Reverend Sung Yung Moon, head of the Unification Church..
I, my kids and our love for each other exist at the same time.
What else you got?
But, you are not the same. You predate your child and your love for your son comes after you and your child into existence
There is a time point in the past where your children could not exist! If you have a son and you have a father and a grandfather, you can go on to till first human ! The most logical thing is that God has no son or family, all humans, including Jesus, (Everything, including the universe created by God) were created by God!
God has no partners!
@@volkan5353 👍👍👍
I must dispute the claim of Constantine being a christian. He played the Christians, first his troops at the Milvian Bridge and then at Nicaea. There are NO christian symbols on his arch in Rome nor on his coins.
God could not say Jesus is my download on Earth so he said He is my son
If christians saw Jesus as a prophet of god among other prophets of god then the problem is solved. I believe many wise sages have been just as jesus was, and it has been totally misinterpreted by all his followers.How about we stop arguing over who is right and who is wrong and start thinking about the morality of the actions of those who may be such prophets?
Slickest idea that Christianity came up with was, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." Great lead in for Constantine and other Roman Emperors...
God was in Christ reconciling the World unto himself....Christ is God
Don't be stupid. Listen to the lecture
Very informative video
Good that we could clarify that God, Christ and the Holy Spirit are one and the same. Now we can start thinking about even more important topics. Like who would win in a fight Batman vs Spider-Man!
Replacing one group of fictional superheroes to obsess over for another is one is a bad idea I think.
Perfect cannot change over time? What if circumstances for what is perfect also change over time and whatever is perfect changes accordingly
How can God be both the Father and the son? Different and yet the same? Both eternal? The son the creator? Etc. => Avatar
So this confusion did not starts today. It strarts Way back in time.
Do you wants to tell me Christians of today dont know how it all began. After all this confusion now and then what makes them to still hold on to this conflicting ideas (fictions), called Three in One God (Trinity).
which bus with no wheels?
They don't have conflicting ideas you do, you have the idea of your doxy and no idea of theirs, yet you think their doxy is wrong without ever lookingf at your own, to paraphrase Bart Ehrman don't question what others believe question what you believe.
@@shonagraham2752 Seeing that a lot of atheist did believe in Christianity (or some religion) at one point, they did criticize what they believed in and are simply showing their findings lmao
100% human and 100% divine is logically impossible, as the attributes that humans bear are contrary to the attributes ascribed to divinity. Such a concept would make Jesus a 'squared-circle.'
To be honest this is not true! You are judging this with the mentality of a XXI century person. In antiquity things were not this way. It was perfectly fine to be a god and and a human or vice versa. According with greek mithology gods could even interbreed with humans at some point. They saw no problem with this. You can also see this in Roman Empire starting with Augusts emperaror! What happened is that when Christians were faced with the problem of how to classify Jesus they saw no problem at all in creating the Trinity!!
ramses4321 In antiquity it was possible to be a *demigod*, which is not what trinitarians are proposing Jesus was. They aren't claiming Jesus was merely partially divine or human, they believe he was 100% both, which as I said, isn't just paradoxical but logically impossible. To fully bear the attributes of 'God' would mean Jesus was all-knowing, all-powerful, all-present, etc. while simultaneously being a human who isn't any of these things: limited in knowledge (doesn't know when the end will come), admits on several occasions to not being inherently powerful ("by myself I can do *nothing*"), and had to walk from place to place.
So whoever thought up this 'Trinity' idea certainly didn't think it all the way through. They are basically calling Jesus a 'squared circle'.
Harold Staiti It's not just 'unique' but paradoxical. You can't be all-knowing, but limited in knowledge at the same time. You can't be tempted, while inherently being impervious to sin. The attributes that make you 'fully human' are precisely why you're not God. Same goes for Jesus, if he was indeed fully human.
Harold Staiti That's the problem though. When attempting to explain or grasp how any of those paradoxes, it all falls apart. I mean, when it comes to the God of the OT, as king Solomon put it, "But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven *cannot* contain you; how much less this house that I have built!" (1 Kings 8:27) But "somehow" this is true and not true at the same time, as Jesus was confined to the human frame. God cannot be tempted (James 1:13) but "somehow" this is true and not true at the same time, since Jesus was "in all points tempted like as we are." It's not a matter of what's comforting, but rather basic logic. The parsimonious explanation would be... Jesus =/= God... and Jesus himself seemed to support that with his teaching.
Harold Staiti Depends on one's level of understanding 'scripture', the early Church (up til Nicaea) and formal logic. I seriously don't see a solid case for trinitarianism on any of those three.
THE ERRORMAN ( EHRMAN) IS A TRUTHFULL AND RIGHTEOUS MAN !
PUN INTENDED !
He didn't mention dynamic monarchianism, which is probably the answer to the conundrum (and is scriptural to boot).
In the beginning of the lecture proper, Ehrman describes a dilemma: Jesus is said to be both 100% human and 100% God. Is this really a paradox? As it would be if someone said he was 100% human and 100% bowl of petunias? Or is it really not a paradox, as it would not be, if he were said to be 100% human and 100% college professor? How is he sure "deity" is in the category of bowl of petunias in stead of college professor? Or, really, "human" for that matter. I could see that, for a deity, being a human is more like a profession, disguise, or avatar, than being a change in essence, unless you ban such by fiat: a human, by definition, is something not inhabited by a god. Not that I would disagree with his main premise....
Sorry, Doctor E., if you're reading. I'm sure you get this question all the time. I'm sure every paradox you bring up is questioned somehow. I agree with you, basically always, as the paradoxes usually are blatantly obvious, and only questioned by someone performing some really impressive rationalization....
Jesus son of Mary is the messenger of God
Arius had it right, no doubt about it.
Jesus, who is Gods only begotten Son (first creation); ‘voluntarily’ took on the mission to bring back to humanity, what was lost in the garden of Eden - perfection.
Adam and Eve, originally created to live forever - lost it by sinning.
The process of Jesus birth, faithfulness and then sacrifice, enabled proof to be laid out, that a perfect human could remain faithful to God! Thus, all mankind regained an opportunity to live forever.
The prophets before were waiting for a messiah and Jesus ‘knew’ he was that.
The Garden of Eden wasn’t perfect; a perfect garden would not allow any sinning. In order for sin to occur, something with the potential to sin had to exist, and perfection would be inconsistent with the potential to sin.
Why exactly does a human have to perfect to remain faithful to God? Did Paul not remain faithful to God, for example?
41:00: Theologians thought that a human consists of 3 elements: body, soul and spirit. What's the difference between soul and spirit again? How did they know (to suggest) Jesus had a human soul, but a divine spirit, and not a divine soul and a human spirit? Don't tell me they were just making it up.
Roughly, soul was form and spirit was breath or the spark of life. Jews didnt believe in an invisible soul.
The non believer will always question God and feel that he or she has the right to judge the very God that he or she denounced.
Wow, I'm sure Germany regrets not having you around in the 30's.
Bart loses me when he brings up Paul’s Epistles. According to the People if The Way, Paul was not to be trusted in Preaching about the Christ. Paul taught quite a different message than the Christ.
What I've always found interesting -- and I'm a non-theist -- is how Tertulian, and, of course others, down to this day and I'm sure beyond, who have made a career of saying "God can't....." "God can't be his own son" etc. To which my answer has always been, HE'S GOD. He can do whatever he wants!
If you have this all powerful, all knowing being who created the universe and everything in it (yet who screwed up humanity so badly that they failed before getting out of the starting gate, and he had to punch control/alt/delete time and time again, but that's another topic), who IS the Alpha and IS the Omega, if this being wants to beget himself and exist as the same being in two different places at the same time, then he very well can. He's GOD!
And the first time you bring up the word 'can't' in relation to this God, then why call him God? Quantum physics shows that on and off can be the same, two different particles can be in two different places at the same time and pop in and out of existence. If particles can do it, and the God who supposedly created those particles cannot, then he either isn't God, or he's still on his learner's permit and HIS father better take his car keys away before he hurts someone else.
+swordnquilstarskgrem Replying to myself "One particle can be in two different places at the same time".
swordnquilstarskgrem: "HE'S GOD. He can do whatever he wants! "
Except be morally perfect.
It's an un-evidenced assertion about an intelligent magic entity that is allegedly responsible for the creation of the universe through magic. Of course it's going to get around any paradox by making an appeal to magic, that's the very nature of the claim.
Can a god create a burrito so large that even it can't eat? If you answer no, well it's a god so it can do anything. If you answer yes, well it's a god so it can do anything, how can it be limited even by itself?
The entire presumption is based upon an appeal to the supernatural, i.e. an appeal to magic. Thus, any claims about limitations can be refuted by appealing to the same.
11:55 modalism is the current belief of the United Pentacostal Church and other apostolic "oneness" denominations.
Modalism is false
I am a little confused. Where does it state anywhere in the Bible that Jesus is God? I can't find it anywhere. So there is really no problem to figure out. Jesus is not God, but God is God. Dilemma solved.
it's mainly in John and then various other parts are used in terms of prophecy from the OT. But it mainly comes from the theology which followed on from the gospels themselves.
In a sense what you are saying is the jewish & islamic view on it, that Jesus was a prophet of some sort. But the christians in a way created a theological problem for themselves and then set out to try and solve it.
It’s kind of cute how Tertullian used logic to examine supernatural mysteries.
Wow, he just likened Dan Brown to Monty Python. Lol, Smh.
You should be teaching how God became... Man!
The Bible make the claim that only God is perfect, and the Bible says that Jesus was perfect. If both these statements are true, Jesus is God because he is perfect and only God is perfect.
Isn't that what he said took place in the debates at the Council of Nicea?
Again I admire your knowledge of the gospels. But what you told your audience about Constantine and his mother Helena is a bit disappointing for those who have read the dubious biography of Eusebius of Cesarea and the legend of his mother Helena in the Legenda aurea.
Too bad god didn't explain the concept of superposition to anyone back then 'cause that would have instantly solved the trinity dilemma with actual physics instead of hand waving.
Mason Glaves .. What a lovely god ,who loves us .. Leaves us in this big mess & lost in a doctrine which salvation depends on !!!!! This is a satanic god then
@@hassanm2357 actually it is. The "god of this age" is evil. And the Bible belongs to this world. It's written that God created and YHWH gave shape. Maybe there's a creator and there's a shaper. That would kind of fit on the 'emptiness' of matter. Jesus teachings were about praising the Father, the soul creator, and to not to love the things of this world.
Also, behind the whole idea of gravitational astrophysics you can find the Jesuits, plus it's built upon ideas rather than evidence. Plasma cosmology seems the way to get to the truth. Or as far as our limited human mind allows us. Plus, without getting rid of ego it's impossible, that should be the number one priority; "the pride of life"
our understanding of the word God or elohim let us make man in our....
I have never heard someone not be able to pronounce "blog", but that's hilarious. Fun 3 videos!
And jesus have confirm will comes after him go a mesenger WHO is recognise jesus..
Constantine did NOT convert to Christianity in 312, not until he was on his death bed. He did make Christianity the state religion prior to converting at the end of his life.
where was this word trinity BEFORE the NICAEA convention in 325 c e sir ?. I think trinity might had been incorporated in the Mathew's gospel in the 4th century only .