Another fantastic Hamercopia of Knowledge this evening. Thank you once again for sharing your time with us tonight and delivering another wonderful lecture.
I always enjoy the images and iconography in Centre Place lectures. @30:12 The Rogier van der Weyden oil painting (Escorial Palace, Madrid c ~1460.) caught my eye. The red block wall was unexpected.
It seems to be that the Gospel of John was editorially open for a long time. It reminds me to the development of the Pentateuch, combining different traditions and adding comments.
Hi John! What do you think of the theory that the Beloved Disciple was James the Lesser? I saw somewhere that the story of "Doubting Thomas" was a reaction to both the "Gospel of Thomas" and to Docetism, stressing that Jesus was indeed a walking corpse, and not just a spiritual manifestation.
Another great lecture. I have questions! Why is James so little mentioned in the gospels? Wouldn't it have been more likely that Jesus entrust his mother to his brother James, rather than the unnamed disciple? How would you explain that James just pops up as leader of the movement in Jerusalem, with Peter as a sidekick, when Jesus had nominated Peter as the Rock?
@@KaijuOfTheOpera Paul was just some blow in hallucinator who never even met Jesus; one can understand why the "pillars" of the faith, including Jesus brother might have thought he was an upstart. He must have been very charismatic indeed!
I’ve heard other scholars propose that James, Jesus’ brother, did not believe Jesus was the messiah until after his death. Which does make me wonder what the Book of Acts says about James.
Its approach is to study the source material and figure out what makes sense (or doesn't) from there. They aren't dogmatic and might not have any kind of mandatory creed, based on what he says in these lectures.
This channel belongs to the Toronto Centre Place, a community outreach center of the Community of Christ, formerly the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints. Officially the CofC does not have a creed or a set doctrinal view in its approach to Christianity, but in general terms, the majority of members follow standard Chalcedonian Christianity for their views on faith, salvation, mysticism, and Jesus. The major differences are their approach to scripture (they still keep the Book of Mormon and their own version of the Doctrines of Covenants as scripture) and its interpretation, and their insistence on holding a more scientifically and historically accurate contextual understanding of Christianity. Also, unlike the LDS church ("Utah Mormons") they neither keep the KJV nor insist on its inerrancy. Specifically for the congregation associated with Toronto Centre Place, their views of mysticism are heavily influenced by medieval Catholic mystical writings.
Perhaps I'm missing something here, but the idea that John 2 is interjecting into the text of John 1 is just speculation. Or at least I haven't seen where Hamer presents evidence that this happened.
He makes a pretty decent case for it in this lecture. At least he presents why current biblical scholars believe the two authors theory. And not just in the last chapter, but by adding additions to the original author throughout the text. He explained that the proposed second author doesn’t seem to remove what the original author wrote, but adds new material here and there to make the gospel align more with his own beliefs. John Hammer also explained that two obvious different writing styles are evident in these cases.
So Jesus literally turned water into wine? This is one of the signs that he showed his disciples to "prove it". What a time to be alive. So some things were written in like 90. Can you imagine someone writing something from 90 years ago today. Seems like it must have been a pretty important subject to be written about for so long. It's just amazing the year count gets reset to BC and AD for all of Christianity. Thanks for the teachings. 🙏
Denial replaces intellectual curiosity in many of the religious. Or so it seems from how Christianity and Islam present today. Not in this church CentrePlace represents, however.
I hope this doesn’t come off wrong, but since John is often depicted in the early church art as beautiful and beardless, is it possible that in early Christianity, John and Jesus were thought of as at least possible lovers-in the sexual sense? Kind of like David and Jonathan have also been thought to have been by some?
The gospel of john was written by one who didn't use the information that those other (books) of Matthew Mark and Luke used without the exact same wording. The centurion was only named as an official the ("official's son healed.") That means the centurion
My pithy answer as to why Lazarus stops being referred to by name and instead by his relationship status is because of anti-gay sentiment of the early church (as evidenced by 1 Cor. and Romans). I don't think Lazarus was a historical person, necessarily, but I think the queer relationship fits with John's pre-existent divine androgyne Jesus who is maximally feminine and maximally masculine simultaneously. I think the original authorial intent was that Lazarus was always the loved and beloved one. Also Jesus + Lazarus probably is meant to echo both David + Jonathan and Orpheus + Eurydiche.
Based on Mark 2 and 3, I think Levi is Didymus since Levi is the brother of James, the other son of Alpheus. It would make sense to call this guy named for the old priesthood, who is the brother of another disciple, a nickname of The Twin. That's my theory (and you have to discount the later gospel of Matthew conflating Levi with the character Matthew).
Read carefully, it is impossible the disciple whom Jesus loved was John, Jesus did not have a brother called John, it is not James the son of Zebedee, James and John (brothers sons of Zebedee) they were fisherman, as their father, It’s not the the other James, he was the son of Alphaeus, study like a workman as God told us to, and you will know the answer , and you will know that it was indeed one of Jesus brothers who “ testified “ ( doesn’t say wrote, Paul testified his gospel ( which is Gods gospel) to others that wrote it down) John 19:26 “When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home. So all those “ masters of Israel” forget there is only one master of Israel, and we need to listen to his words and do what he clearly says, don’t trust men, they are no help, Psalms 146:3 “Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.” Matthew 23:9 “And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.” 2 Timothy 2:15 “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” Joshua 1:8 “This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.” Same gospel was taught to Israel, but they got “:unleavened bread” no faith, James 2:10 “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” ( saved by grace alone)the true leavened bread came later…. Moses was a similitude of this, he transgressed once and didn’t get into the “ earthly promised land” Hebrews 4:2 “For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.” Hosea 12:10 “I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets.” James 1:22 “But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.” Romans 10:17 “So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” John 17:17 “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” Matthew 4:4 “But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” Revelation 1:3 “Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.”
The gospel of John is written by someone from Jerusalem (known to the high prist) I think he is Mark called "John". And his mother's name was Mary Acts 12:12 And when he had considered the thing,he came to the house of Mary the mother of John whose surname was Mark. (John 19:27 Here is your mother. From that time on this disciple took her into his home) where many were gathered together praying. Acts 1:12 Then the apostles returned to Jerusalem from the hill called the Mount of Olives, a Sabbath day’s walk[c] from the city. 13 When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James. 14 They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.
@@sparrowthesissy2186 I mean say that the writer of the Gospels was known to the high priest. At that time, everyone was Jewish. So I don't know what you are talking about.
I'm going to go out on a limb and take a wild guess that the words gospel of John might - at a stretch, be taken to indicate something along the lines of a chap answering to the name John wrote it rather than a chap answeing to the name Fred.
Sorry, I misread. You mean that the words “Τὸ εὐαγγέλιον κατὰ Ἰωάννην” “The Gospel according to John” indicate John write it. It does suggest that. But that title was tacked on later.
Another fantastic Hamercopia of Knowledge this evening. Thank you once again for sharing your time with us tonight and delivering another wonderful lecture.
I see what u did there
Hamercopia !! Love the neologism !! Let’s get it into the Oxford English Dictionary!!
i love these lectures so much, many times they help me relax before sleeping . ❤
Wonderful!
John Hamer: Cartographer extraordinaire, our mental maps of Biblical history are supercharged. Thank you!
❤ Many thanks to Dr Hamer, Leandro & the whole Center Place crew for this very informative lecture. I always learn a lot from these presentations.
Thank you guys 😊
Hey, can you do a lecture on the concept of the Messiah and how Christianity and Jewish religions view it.
Good suggestion!
Thanks John.
Thank you once again for another invaluable lesson! :-) :-)
Fantastic as always, i never mise an episode
Glad you enjoy it!
I always enjoy the images and iconography in Centre Place lectures.
@30:12 The Rogier van der Weyden oil painting (Escorial Palace, Madrid c ~1460.) caught my eye. The red block wall was unexpected.
Another good lecture. Thank you.
I wonder if in 2,000 years scholars will be asking "Who wrote the Gospel of John Hamer?" ?
Welcome back 🇨🇦
Great lecture! Thank you
Very enjoyable to see the process of deconstruction - makes so much sense!
1:16 pm. MST. Katherine Bridwell listening. Thank You John. Interesting. Kathy from Ft. Collins,Co. congregation
Great presentation as usual! Thanks!
I like to think the bit about Lazarus being the beloved disciple was aimed directly at the TH-cam comments section 😅
Will we see more lectures on gnosticism and their teachings? That would be more than amazing
It seems to be that the Gospel of John was editorially open for a long time. It reminds me to the development of the Pentateuch, combining different traditions and adding comments.
Wouldn’t there be more than one other refactor noted in the text?
Thank you for taking my question.
Thanks for sharing!
Excellent, ty.👍
Hi John!
What do you think of the theory that the Beloved Disciple was James the Lesser?
I saw somewhere that the story of "Doubting Thomas" was a reaction to both the "Gospel of Thomas" and to Docetism, stressing that Jesus was indeed a walking corpse, and not just a spiritual manifestation.
listening now good job john
They're back.....not like the Gremlins the "new batch" but like in a good way.
Another great lecture. I have questions!
Why is James so little mentioned in the gospels?
Wouldn't it have been more likely that Jesus entrust his mother to his brother James, rather than the unnamed disciple?
How would you explain that James just pops up as leader of the movement in Jerusalem, with Peter as a sidekick, when Jesus had nominated Peter as the Rock?
Because these authors are at odds with James and so was Paul.
@@KaijuOfTheOpera Paul was just some blow in hallucinator who never even met Jesus; one can understand why the "pillars" of the faith, including Jesus brother might have thought he was an upstart. He must have been very charismatic indeed!
Check out John's lecture on James the Just ( Brother of Jesus ).
The stories indicate that Jesus' brother James did not believe in the movement until the resurrection.
I’ve heard other scholars propose that James, Jesus’ brother, did not believe Jesus was the messiah until after his death. Which does make me wonder what the Book of Acts says about James.
What's the topic of the next lecture please?
Your answer, dear Center Place, would be much appreciated
Look at the Lecture series under the Playlist. Upcoming lecture are listed there as “Upcoming”.
Dude where is the Calvin's theocracy in geneva video? I was so excited for that
Look under the Lecture series in the Playlist section. That’s usually where I find what I’m looking for.
Hi!
Could anyone explain what church this is and its view on faith, salvation, mysticism and Jesus?
Best
Mikael
liberal group
@@M-i-k-a-e-l best to go to their website for that information
Its approach is to study the source material and figure out what makes sense (or doesn't) from there. They aren't dogmatic and might not have any kind of mandatory creed, based on what he says in these lectures.
This channel belongs to the Toronto Centre Place, a community outreach center of the Community of Christ, formerly the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints. Officially the CofC does not have a creed or a set doctrinal view in its approach to Christianity, but in general terms, the majority of members follow standard Chalcedonian Christianity for their views on faith, salvation, mysticism, and Jesus. The major differences are their approach to scripture (they still keep the Book of Mormon and their own version of the Doctrines of Covenants as scripture) and its interpretation, and their insistence on holding a more scientifically and historically accurate contextual understanding of Christianity. Also, unlike the LDS church ("Utah Mormons") they neither keep the KJV nor insist on its inerrancy. Specifically for the congregation associated with Toronto Centre Place, their views of mysticism are heavily influenced by medieval Catholic mystical writings.
Tap the icon and look under the playlist. It’s a remarkable church who’s members prefer scholarship to apologetics.
Perhaps I'm missing something here, but the idea that John 2 is interjecting into the text of John 1 is just speculation. Or at least I haven't seen where Hamer presents evidence that this happened.
Because the book ends twice.
He makes a pretty decent case for it in this lecture. At least he presents why current biblical scholars believe the two authors theory. And not just in the last chapter, but by adding additions to the original author throughout the text. He explained that the proposed second author doesn’t seem to remove what the original author wrote, but adds new material here and there to make the gospel align more with his own beliefs. John Hammer also explained that two obvious different writing styles are evident in these cases.
So Jesus literally turned water into wine? This is one of the signs that he showed his disciples to "prove it". What a time to be alive. So some things were written in like 90. Can you imagine someone writing something from 90 years ago today. Seems like it must have been a pretty important subject to be written about for so long. It's just amazing the year count gets reset to BC and AD for all of Christianity. Thanks for the teachings. 🙏
Denial replaces intellectual curiosity in many of the religious. Or so it seems from how Christianity and Islam present today. Not in this church CentrePlace represents, however.
I hope this doesn’t come off wrong, but since John is often depicted in the early church art as beautiful and beardless, is it possible that in early Christianity, John and Jesus were thought of as at least possible lovers-in the sexual sense? Kind of like David and Jonathan have also been thought to have been by some?
The gospel of john was written by one who didn't use the information that those other (books) of Matthew Mark and Luke used without the exact same wording. The centurion was only named as an official the ("official's son healed.") That means the centurion
The disciple he loved is clearly meant to represent the reader
How is it so clear? Can you explain?
That seems anything but clear
It wasn’t me.
😅 thanks, I needed that!
My pithy answer as to why Lazarus stops being referred to by name and instead by his relationship status is because of anti-gay sentiment of the early church (as evidenced by 1 Cor. and Romans). I don't think Lazarus was a historical person, necessarily, but I think the queer relationship fits with John's pre-existent divine androgyne Jesus who is maximally feminine and maximally masculine simultaneously. I think the original authorial intent was that Lazarus was always the loved and beloved one.
Also Jesus + Lazarus probably is meant to echo both David + Jonathan and Orpheus + Eurydiche.
What was the name of Thomas’s twin?
He is said to be Jesus' twin.
@@junramos2002 thanks, i did not know that.
Based on Mark 2 and 3, I think Levi is Didymus since Levi is the brother of James, the other son of Alpheus. It would make sense to call this guy named for the old priesthood, who is the brother of another disciple, a nickname of The Twin. That's my theory (and you have to discount the later gospel of Matthew conflating Levi with the character Matthew).
I thought exactly the same thing 😅
Ooooo i hope the bacchae is discussed
The gospel of john never was written by the one who knew the other writer's
Martin Mary Brown Ronald Harris Charles
The gospel's are not written the same based on that reason
It's written by who it says wrote it. John. The Baptist.
Headless John, because..
Read carefully, it is impossible the disciple whom Jesus loved was John, Jesus did not have a brother called John, it is not James the son of Zebedee, James and John (brothers sons of Zebedee) they were fisherman, as their father, It’s not the the other James, he was the son of Alphaeus, study like a workman as God told us to, and you will know the answer , and you will know that it was indeed one of Jesus brothers who “ testified “ ( doesn’t say wrote, Paul testified his gospel ( which is Gods gospel) to others that wrote it down)
John 19:26
“When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.
So all those “ masters of Israel” forget there is only one master of Israel, and we need to listen to his words and do what he clearly says, don’t trust men, they are no help, Psalms 146:3
“Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.”
Matthew 23:9
“And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.”
2 Timothy 2:15
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”
Joshua 1:8
“This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.”
Same gospel was taught to Israel, but they got “:unleavened bread” no faith, James 2:10
“For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” ( saved by grace alone)the true leavened bread came later…. Moses was a similitude of this, he transgressed once and didn’t get into the “ earthly promised land”
Hebrews 4:2
“For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.”
Hosea 12:10
“I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets.”
James 1:22
“But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.”
Romans 10:17
“So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.”
John 17:17
“Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.”
Matthew 4:4
“But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.”
Revelation 1:3
“Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.”
Hard to believe
Nathanel isn't on the list of the 12 apostle list because the 12 apostle list was never written by the writer
The gospel of John is written by someone from Jerusalem (known to the high prist)
I think he is Mark called "John".
And his mother's name was Mary
Acts 12:12
And when he had considered the thing,he came to the house of Mary the mother of John whose surname was Mark.
(John 19:27 Here is your mother. From that time on this disciple took her into his home) where many were gathered together praying.
Acts 1:12
Then the apostles returned to Jerusalem from the hill called the Mount of Olives, a Sabbath day’s walk[c] from the city. 13 When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James. 14 They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.
The anti-Jewish sentiment throughout John makes it extremely unlikely to be from a temple priest.
@@sparrowthesissy2186
I mean say that the writer of the Gospels was known to the high priest.
At that time, everyone was Jewish. So I don't know what you are talking about.
The writer of John didn't get written the same as the gospels of the other one's because the writer of John saw how they repeated themselves
John, bro. it was John. guess who wrote luke. LUKE. I like to think the Church fathers knew what was going on.
You could watch the video and find out why basically no serious historians think that’s true.
Guess who wrote Acts. Also Luke, I learned that on this YT channel
I'm going to go out on a limb and take a wild guess that the words gospel of John might - at a stretch, be taken to indicate something along the lines of a chap answering to the name John wrote it rather than a chap answeing to the name Fred.
Could you specify which words? As I recall it, neither a John nor a Fred are mentioned as writing anything.
Sorry, I misread. You mean that the words “Τὸ εὐαγγέλιον κατὰ Ἰωάννην” “The Gospel according to John” indicate John write it. It does suggest that. But that title was tacked on later.