HOWDY, FOLKS! Sorry about the confusion with this video. Someone gave me the wrong set of questions and timestamps for it. I've now fixed the questions, and if anyone cares to do new time codes for them, I can reinstate the chapters. The questions that were originally posted will be used in a future show.
Jimmy Akin is the reason I converted to Catholicism. When the question of "who has the valid authority to interpret the word of God" finally occurred to me - he was there with an answer, in the form of a Catholic Answers video. There are some truly talented apologists out there now - and we are lucky to have them.
1:48 For all or for many? 5:45 Disunity about pro multis translation? 7:11 Papal mistranslations ex cathedra? 8:25 Can anything good come from Nazareth? 11:45 Significance of the fig tree? 14:13 Benedictus Deus, choosing Heaven or Hell? 19:33 St. Juan Diego never existed? 22:43 Romans 14:21 28:48 Basic explanation of the Trinity? 30:57 Morality of sharing a copyrighted PDF? 33:56 Division of cremains? 36:26 Gossip in relation to envy? 39:23 I'll take ~What happened to Bro Code?~ for $500, Alex. 43:18 Is the Bible the word of God? 45:27 Jesus's education? 49:56 Expression of the Trinity in the prayer of collect? 54:54 Help Jimmy out :)
I love how this is a basic explanation for the Holy Trinity, it is almost an hour! But im grateful for you, jimmy for making this video, very well done!
Regarding good reasons to spread negative information about someone: the pastor of the church I grew up in discovered that a man who was supposed to come preach a week-long meeting had a woman on the side and was planning on leaving his wife and kids for this woman. I'm not sure what all he did in evidence gathering, but eventually, he decided that he had enough information to confirm it as true. When that happened, he canceled the meeting and called all the pastors he knew had scheduled this particular preacher so they could have the same knowledge and then decide for themselves whether or not they wanted to follow through with the meetings.
@@TJBowman-vr1co the title used to say saquatches up upon the ark of NOE, but then he switched it inta somethin other than that and he made a comment up atop the comment section of the page it’s pinned indeed for all to read so we can find out what it means
I've thought about this before. When it is said "for many", I sometimes would translate that as "a lot". All depends how you approach it. Ask a teenager how many people went to a concert and you may get the answer "humungous. how about "a boatload", etc etc. One doesn't exclude other interpretations.
The video doesn’t seem to match the description & timestamps. Can you link the correct video? The topics seemed very interesting & I’d really like to watch it.
The Chosen has a clever/imaginative interpretation of why Nathaniel confessed Jesus after He mentioned the fig tree. Are there not prophets associated with that kind of tree?
Regarding trinity : This only works in my opinion if being a person is not an attribute to an existence. Something like: An existence can be concious or not. A person needs to be conciousness to be person etc. etc. . The question is "What is a person and what is conciousness?" I guess.
I explain the Trinity by drawing three circles, labeled Father, Son, Holy Spirit, ala a Venn diagram. Then I move the circles to overlap into one circle labeled God. I use a layer for the God circle. Also, sasquatches built their own ark. It looked a mess, but floated.
@@Laredef54the Son is not a “created being”, that’s blasphemous. The Son is eternal and at some point in history took on flesh, but He existed even before the Earth came to be (see John 1).
@@henreeeef3214 I assume you're not Catholic, but the idea of Jesus as firstborn means that He is preeminent over creation, not that He is a created being. Christ is absolutely eternal, all persons of the Trinity are and this is what the Church has taught for the past 2000 years.
@@henreeeef3214 To begin with, the New Testament is literally a product of oral traditions passed down by the followers of Jesus, so saying you prefer scripture to tradition is equivalent to saying 'Rather than H2O, I prefer water'. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 also encourages believers to hold steadfast to the teachings of the early Church, so tradition is important even when one adopts the heretical (and ironically unbiblical) position of sola scriptura. Next, John 14:25 is not at odds with the Trinity. Christians believe that Jesus was both fully God and fully man: Philippians 2:8 speaks of Christ voluntarily humbling himself in His humanity, so John 14:25 is perfectly consistent with the deity of Christ. In that instance, the Father is greater not in essence, but position given that the Father was sat on His glorious throne where Christ soon joined Him at His right hand (Mark 16:19). This is the same Christ that declares in Revelation 22:13 that He is that the Alpha and Omega; beginning and the end; assuming for Himself titles that only God Himself is worthy of.
Would a possessed person be considered one being with two persons? If someone is filled with the holy spirit, is that person then for that time one being but two persons? If animals don't have souls, is it one being? I don't believe animals are persons. If a pig has a demon cast into it, is that pig one being and one person? I'm enjoying the episode. Thank you for this content.
Jesus' use of the term "many" denotes a particularity that emphasizes the necessity of personal response and faith. While God indeed desires the salvation of all, He respects the freedom of individuals to accept or reject His grace. Thus, by specifying "many," Jesus acknowledges the reality of human freedom and the requirement for personal response to His salvific work.
I like that recent children's movie "Inside Out." The girl is the whole, is a being. Her differing emotions, Happy/Sad/Mad/disgust/fear etc are different persons. One cannot do anything without the others and so on. It is not a perfect analogy, and it may not have even been the intention behind the Hollywood based developers, but it is a simple enough way to understand the Trinity.
Meat sacrificed to an idol would be sacrificed to a demon wouldn’t it? In that case we shouldn’t eat it. How come people would be vegetarian if they did not eat sacrificed meat. Didn’t anybody have chickens or goats or just went hunting?
Pretty sure that Trinity logic is flawed @JimmyAkin. If some people are airplane pilots, while other people are not airplane pilots, it doesn't follow that some people may be multiple airplane pilots. Just because 'people' is a categorical superset of 'pilots' much like 'beings' are a categorical superset of 'persons'. You'd have to add some logic to show why it's the kind of superset which allows multiples.
@@Fred-t2w the problem wasn't that it didn't go into detail, it was that it was at best an incomplete argument presented as a complete one. It was either missing an entire premise or it was incorrect, and that has nothing to do with how basic it is.
Sure he does. God watches over the Church and ensures it doesn't fall off a cliff. In the 1960's the Catholic Church, the Pope, Magisterium alone got right regarding birth control pills. Virtually ALL other organizations got it wrong. Science vindicated the Pope decades later.
HOWDY, FOLKS! Sorry about the confusion with this video. Someone gave me the wrong set of questions and timestamps for it. I've now fixed the questions, and if anyone cares to do new time codes for them, I can reinstate the chapters. The questions that were originally posted will be used in a future show.
Thanks! Appreciate the quick fix
Jimmy Akin is the reason I converted to Catholicism. When the question of "who has the valid authority to interpret the word of God" finally occurred to me - he was there with an answer, in the form of a Catholic Answers video.
There are some truly talented apologists out there now - and we are lucky to have them.
Love the explanation of the Trinity!
I started binge listening to these videos thank you
1:48 For all or for many?
5:45 Disunity about pro multis translation?
7:11 Papal mistranslations ex cathedra?
8:25 Can anything good come from Nazareth?
11:45 Significance of the fig tree?
14:13 Benedictus Deus, choosing Heaven or Hell?
19:33 St. Juan Diego never existed?
22:43 Romans 14:21
28:48 Basic explanation of the Trinity?
30:57 Morality of sharing a copyrighted PDF?
33:56 Division of cremains?
36:26 Gossip in relation to envy?
39:23 I'll take ~What happened to Bro Code?~ for $500, Alex.
43:18 Is the Bible the word of God?
45:27 Jesus's education?
49:56 Expression of the Trinity in the prayer of collect?
54:54 Help Jimmy out :)
what happened to bro code is wild 😭
@@Nathan-nb6yk 😂
Thanks so much, RebeccaLynne! I've added the codes and instated the chapters! God bless you!
@@JimmyAkinYou're welcome!
I love how this is a basic explanation for the Holy Trinity, it is almost an hour! But im grateful for you, jimmy for making this video, very well done!
Excelente programa amigo Jimmy.
Thank you, Jimmy!
Great episode, Jimmy !❤ always love all your videos
Regarding good reasons to spread negative information about someone: the pastor of the church I grew up in discovered that a man who was supposed to come preach a week-long meeting had a woman on the side and was planning on leaving his wife and kids for this woman. I'm not sure what all he did in evidence gathering, but eventually, he decided that he had enough information to confirm it as true. When that happened, he canceled the meeting and called all the pastors he knew had scheduled this particular preacher so they could have the same knowledge and then decide for themselves whether or not they wanted to follow through with the meetings.
I’ve heard that sitting under the fig tree was an idiom for learning the Jewish faith? Not sure if that’s accurate, but would add another layer.
I admit to scrolling back and forth through the episode, but I did not find anything about Sasquatches on the Ark.
April fools or maybe even April’s hoe (mixed April-hangar (youngling’s Dagger))
What does that have to do with anything?
@@TJBowman-vr1co the title used to say saquatches up upon the ark of NOE, but then he switched it inta somethin other than that and he made a comment up atop the comment section of the page it’s pinned indeed for all to read so we can find out what it means
@lucidlocomotive2014 ah ok. I thought it was something completely random and potentially insulting. God Bless.
Jimmy how do I submit questions and/or support you? Love all the content and God Bless!
I've thought about this before. When it is said "for many", I sometimes would translate that as "a lot". All depends how you approach it. Ask a teenager how many people went to a concert and you may get the answer "humungous. how about "a boatload", etc etc. One doesn't exclude other interpretations.
I would love to support you as much as possible. I am already subscribed to your channel and often like your videos. How do I subscribe to videos?
It is a sweet jacket though
Thank for the education
The video doesn’t seem to match the description & timestamps. Can you link the correct video? The topics seemed very interesting & I’d really like to watch it.
@@bethmcmullan7686 Awesome. Thanks for letting me know!
What happens at the Ressurrection when the ashes are all over the place?
The Chosen has a clever/imaginative interpretation of why Nathaniel confessed Jesus after He mentioned the fig tree.
Are there not prophets associated with that kind of tree?
Thought you were going to go for another Wizard of Oz reference but nice changeup to Princess Bride. 😊
Regarding trinity : This only works in my opinion if being a person is not an attribute to an existence. Something like: An existence can be concious or not. A person needs to be conciousness to be person etc. etc. . The question is "What is a person and what is conciousness?" I guess.
I explain the Trinity by drawing three circles, labeled Father, Son, Holy Spirit, ala a Venn diagram. Then I move the circles to overlap into one circle labeled God. I use a layer for the God circle. Also, sasquatches built their own ark. It looked a mess, but floated.
@@Laredef54 It's just a Venn diagram tp attempt to explain the Trinity to children. Not everything has to be from the Bible, anyway.
@@Laredef54the Son is not a “created being”, that’s blasphemous. The Son is eternal and at some point in history took on flesh, but He existed even before the Earth came to be (see John 1).
@@henreeeef3214 I assume you're not Catholic, but the idea of Jesus as firstborn means that He is preeminent over creation, not that He is a created being. Christ is absolutely eternal, all persons of the Trinity are and this is what the Church has taught for the past 2000 years.
@@henreeeef3214 To begin with, the New Testament is literally a product of oral traditions passed down by the followers of Jesus, so saying you prefer scripture to tradition is equivalent to saying 'Rather than H2O, I prefer water'. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 also encourages believers to hold steadfast to the teachings of the early Church, so tradition is important even when one adopts the heretical (and ironically unbiblical) position of sola scriptura.
Next, John 14:25 is not at odds with the Trinity. Christians believe that Jesus was both fully God and fully man: Philippians 2:8 speaks of Christ voluntarily humbling himself in His humanity, so John 14:25 is perfectly consistent with the deity of Christ. In that instance, the Father is greater not in essence, but position given that the Father was sat on His glorious throne where Christ soon joined Him at His right hand (Mark 16:19). This is the same Christ that declares in Revelation 22:13 that He is that the Alpha and Omega; beginning and the end; assuming for Himself titles that only God Himself is worthy of.
Would a possessed person be considered one being with two persons?
If someone is filled with the holy spirit, is that person then for that time one being but two persons?
If animals don't have souls, is it one being? I don't believe animals are persons. If a pig has a demon cast into it, is that pig one being and one person?
I'm enjoying the episode. Thank you for this content.
Nice
The time stamps don’t match up - can you fix?
The echo echo echo ❤
Did you say Bob the Archangel?
Jesus' use of the term "many" denotes a particularity that emphasizes the necessity of personal response and faith. While God indeed desires the salvation of all, He respects the freedom of individuals to accept or reject His grace. Thus, by specifying "many," Jesus acknowledges the reality of human freedom and the requirement for personal response to His salvific work.
Is this icon of the trinity approved by the church?
It is a nice jacket
Hi
I like that recent children's movie "Inside Out."
The girl is the whole, is a being.
Her differing emotions,
Happy/Sad/Mad/disgust/fear etc are different persons.
One cannot do anything without the others and so on.
It is not a perfect analogy, and it may not have even been the intention behind the Hollywood based developers, but it is a simple enough way to understand the Trinity.
Great episode, but not a sasquatch to be found.
Meat sacrificed to an idol would be sacrificed to a demon wouldn’t it? In that case we shouldn’t eat it. How come people would be vegetarian if they did not eat sacrificed meat. Didn’t anybody have chickens or goats or just went hunting?
Pretty sure that Trinity logic is flawed @JimmyAkin. If some people are airplane pilots, while other people are not airplane pilots, it doesn't follow that some people may be multiple airplane pilots. Just because 'people' is a categorical superset of 'pilots' much like 'beings' are a categorical superset of 'persons'.
You'd have to add some logic to show why it's the kind of superset which allows multiples.
It was a basic answer.
@@Fred-t2w the problem wasn't that it didn't go into detail, it was that it was at best an incomplete argument presented as a complete one. It was either missing an entire premise or it was incorrect, and that has nothing to do with how basic it is.
The pope don't have infallibility. What fools. To suggest such a thing.
You obviously do not know what papal infallibility. Based on your grammar, you do not know much.
Sure he does.
God watches over the Church and ensures it doesn't fall off a cliff.
In the 1960's the Catholic Church, the Pope, Magisterium alone got right regarding birth control pills.
Virtually ALL other organizations got it wrong.
Science vindicated the Pope decades later.