Видео

it is a book of stories.....the same as Tolkien, stephen king, hans christain anderson, j k rowling

So interesting and informative! Definitely subscribing to see what else you have. Thanks for sharing all this knowledge and research :)

bro presented the important things

God of Israel? So Israel has its own God.

SIX THINGS WE MUST KNOW ABOUT PAUL 1. Paul admitted having a regular messenger from satan? 2. Paul was made to take nazaren oath and shaved his hair for teaching against the Mosaic Laws by the Apostles. 3. Paul was not accepted by the Apostles, even fell out with Barnabas, they depart a thunder. 4. Paul admitted being troubled by thorn in the flesh many suspected immorality. Check late Bishop John Shirley Sponge in his RUclips. 5. Paul admitted lying and justifies lying, Romans 3:7. 6. Paul is a false prophet giving failed prophecy. Galatians 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a Gospel contrary to that we (originally) preached to you, let him be condemned to destruction...THIS PERFECTLY FITS PAUL, WHO DIED IN HUMILIATION.

It uses Josephus and Greek playwrights as its source.

F acts

Wow this is amazing now I need one for the other gospels

When i hear the term C.E. used i ma confident i am gunna hear some new age speculative nonsense. Proven right again

Thank you for this, but your analysis of which disciples are called first is incorrect. Philip and Nathaniel are not the first in John's Gospel

Amazing

Great video Although some interpretations are questionable aka korean jesus

Plenty of things about the shroud are debunking the previously held notions that it was a fraud. We know exactly what Christ looked like, and all the icons up to now are proving it. There was only one Jesus, and his race is irrelevant.

Good video

different interpretations of Jesus does not denote to different ideals of him. Hes the same person regardless the paintings and pictures

Some representations of Jesus are outright heretical and should be condemned.

You say people depict Jesus in their own likeness. Africans do it, Asians do it, Europeans do it. But you call the video Unlearning WHITE Jesus. It feels almost like, although Asians and Africans are doing the same thing, they are not to blame, but only Europeans and Americans are. I like the general point of your video, diversify the depictions of Jesus. I could even get behind that. But all of this feels like a lesson only for "white people", despite them behaving exactly the way everyone else does. Speaking of, concepts like "whiteness", and "brown middle easternness" didn't exist 2000 years ago. Some Middle Easterners would definitely pass as "white" in the US, some wouldn't. Some Europeans wouldn't pass as white in the US. I don't think applying these almost uniquely American concepts to a different region 2 millenniums ago is constructive. A lot of what you called "white depictions" of Jesus, like the Christ Pantocrator, show him with dark or black hair and brown eyes which is definitely a plausible look for a Middle Easterner of that time.

Transcend race

What is your cradle religion, prof Elder?

If you're more worried about his skin color than the red letter words of Scripture then you aren't a child of God and he doesn't know you.

He didn’t look like Cesare Borgia, sure we know that. But come on man He was a jew, do you seriously want to tell me jews aren’t white? Because that will really help get Ben Shapiro off being called a white supremacist

Jesus wasn't Caucasian, nor was he Black. You've only done a video on one, despite the existence of dangerous idiots on both sides. I don't need to know anything else about you.

Father forgive them, for they do what they do not.

1. There is no grand conspiracy to portray Jesus as white so that other races associate whiteness with divinity and authority. This is one of the most inane conspiracy theories I’ve heard in a good while. 2. The people of the Levant during Greco-Roman rule over the Mediterranean weren’t “brown middle easterners”, they were Levantines. Many of them had fair features, straight or wavy hair, and blue or green eyes, which you can still see in some from the region today, even despite the Arab conquest having suppressed most of these recessive traits. Consider Bashar Al-Assad and his family as an example. Did Jesus have blue eyes, wavy hazel hair, and fair features? Possibly, since others from that area and time period did also. Does that mean whiteness is divinized, or that divinity is white? No, that’s just stupid.

I am glad to see the interest in understanding how depicting Jesus matters for race relations! I'm really glad when I read that people recognize that Jesus was not white, but a brown middle eastern man. One of the main points of this video is that how Jesus is *imagined* matters both theologically and sociologically. That Jesus continually is depicted in a manner similar to Sallman's "Head of Christ" in art and film suggests that white Jesus is still implanted in the American imagination of him. Perhaps I did not make clear enough in the video, but my take towards the end of the video is that depicting Jesus in the guise of multiple different cultures (including white, euro-centric ones), rather than just or primarily the dominant one, is to our advantage. The reason I don't give white, eurocentric depictions a "pass" is because this is the dominant culture in America and when the divine is primarily depicted in the likeness of the dominant culture it can have and has had negative effects for minoritized persons. If you'd like to read and think more on this topic, Dr. Stephen Prothero's _American Jesus: How the Son of God Became a National Icon_ is a great book about Jesus in the modern, American context and Dr. Joan Taylor's _What Did Jesus Look Like?_ is really great about Jesus in the ancient context. Thanks for engaging!

Have you not read the descriptions by Pontious Pilate that describe Jesus as white? Also the writings of Lentulus describe Jesus as white skinned.

The problem is people have seen Him. Ie sister Faustina. That's your problem.

Letter of Lentulus

Every culture depicts him in their own way.

Jesus is jewish. now, what skin color of jewish people ? when christian italian artist leonardo da vinci, want to draw picture of Jesus, he go to jewish comunity in italy and jews is white with dark hair. so he draw jesus as white with dark brown hair. when christian african artist want to draw Jesus, he go to jewish comunity in africa, jewsnis black, so he draw black Jesus. when christian chinese artist want to draw Jesus, he go to chinese jewish (kai feng) community, so jews like chinese, so he draw chinese (yellow) Jesus. jews in america all over in hollywood, so Jesus is like Hollywood actor maybe, real face of Jesus like PRINCE OF PIECE painting by akiane kramarik, with her spiritual stories, almost white middle easterner and , for "standard' face of jesus, all follow old writing called "letter of lentulus"

Let God be true and every man a liar. Your racialist theories will go along with the rest of the chaff.

No one said Jesus was white, and no one is correlating whiteness as divine. This is just weird stuff you yourself are inserting. I've never heard this. Jesus was Jewish and looked no different to any other Jew of the time, "like a root out of dry ground there was nothing that should attract us to His majesty". Depicting Jesus as white associates whiteness with divinity as much as asians depicting Jesus as asian means asianness is divine. This is just weird racially obsessed theory with no basis in reality. ' Go cry about a topic that actually has relevance and actually exists..

I feel like you’re completely contradicting yourself. At first you said: “It (depicting ‘whiteness’ as divine) associates whiteness with authority.” Then you go on and explain how other cultures have depicted Jesus as their own race and show examples. So the Asians depict Jesus as Asian. Makes sense…but if we’re going to follow the logic of your first statement, does Asians depicting Jesus as Asian associate Asian-ness with authority? Does Africans depicting Jesus as black associate blackness with authority? Why do the other races/cultures get a pass, but white people don’t? I really don’t care what race Jesus was. To do so is pretty shallow IMO. He’s my savior, and that’s all that matters. I don’t need to “unlearn” anything except sin.

I am going to recommend your video to my students as a study assignment

At first clicking this video, I was in disbelief, how a biblical video with 8 views, got recommended to me as a non-christian. I am very pleased with the content, you are providing very useful informations about the historical and socio economic situation of the greco-roman world in which the new testament was set. Amazing video with high quality pictures and it definately deserves a lot more views.

Super appreciate your Greek content God bless!

Please see the article ‘John and John Mark’ (1960) by Pierson Parker in JBL, volume 79. It is very possible that the ‘we’ who issued and endorsed the gospel of ‘John’ (in Ch 21) want the readers/audience to believe that it consists of the recollections and writings of John Mark. To me this is the most likely ‘presumed author’, the author the first audiences (likely to be in cities of the Province of Asia, such as Ephesus) would assume to be the author or source of the accounts. The preacher whom we today call John Mark is written up in the late 1st century/early 2nd ‘Acts’ and the details imply he was was likely rich and lived in Jerusalem in a large house, with gatehouse and servants at the time of Jesus’ preaching. Based on Acts his house was a probable site (and indeed also the later ‘traditional’ site) for the last supper, in the rich area of the Western Hill, and yet close to the Essene Quarter. If this supper occurred in his house, described as the house of his mother ( a Mary) he would be present as the male host, and lying beside the main guest, Jesus. Note that John Mark is simply called “John” twice in Acts 13:5 and 13:13 suggesting that even in the early second century this figure was known by either Mark or John. John Mark appears from Acts and Philemon and 1st Peter to have been well-known and thought to be ‘active’ in the Province of Asia (the likely place for ‘JOHN’s’ creation) . MARK is mentioned in three letters supposed to be by ‘Paul’ and and one forged to be by Peter (1Peter’).See the article by Pierson Parker (1960) ‘John and John Mark’ that vigorously defends this identification. This prominence in the churches of the Anatolian provinces would enable John Mark to be Papias’ ‘John the Elder’. From what Papias says, a highly esteemed personal disciple of Jesus who is not an apostle and yet who supposedly knew what the apostles such as Andrew and Philip had said. This John the Elder was still alive in Papias’ youth and yet was talking about what he had heard apostles like Philip and Andrew ‘had said’, when (all?) the apostles had themselves had apparently died.

Yes the Col 3:3-4 is a chiasm. And it's a legitimate chiastic structure. What you said is a stretch regarding C & C' is not at all. C) is hidden C') is revealed Since antithetical ideas are common place in Hebrew parallelism. In other words, contrasting ideas is part & parcel with Hebrew parallelism. This should jog your memory. The proverbs are saturated with antithetical parallelism. e.g. "but" cola (lines): Proverbs 10:4 Poor is the one who works with a negligent hand, but the hand of the diligent bring riches. An example from the NT: 10 I appeal to you regarding my child, Onesimus , whom I fathered during my imprisonment. A) 11 Formerly he was / useless / to you, A) but is now / useful / to you and to me.

Hello! Quick question: Which Bible translation would you recommend for academic/scholarly studies? Thanks!

Is this an African version of Arabic?

The New Testament is the New Law or Covenant which God has promised before Jesus was born

To the so called negroes aka israelites of the bible the chosen ones

I subscribed!

I watched Bert ehrman and James tabor. And now I’m trying to figure out the contradictions in the Bible’s. Lol

Let's get rid of the Erasmus pronounciation of Greek, once and for all.

Comment only Jesus is a greek name but Maria ( mother) is a hebrew a lineage of Judah is also a hebrew .The god gave his name to Moses is YHWH in hebrew name and Jesus is a false Messiah.who created the name Jesus in antioch, turkey ,the first christian is apostle Saul alias Paul with the help of Gamaliel are both pharasee member. The Messiah saying to pharasee and Saducee is a " Generation Viper" or "Serpent" in Mathew 23:33, Mathew 12:34-36,Mathew 3:5-7. Jesus is a Fake Messiah and he is not a son of Maria ( his son name is connected to YHWH ).

I am a bit surprised that this fellow isn't familiar with the theory that the Gospel of John was written by John the Presbyter (a.k.a. John the Elder). It's a theory most recently proposed by Richard Bauckham (but first alluded to by Eusebius), professor of New Testament Studies at St Andrews University in Scotland, in his groundbreaking book "Jesus and the Eyewitnesses." The main evidence he gives is that we know that John the Elder was formally a Jewish priest (Ignatius and Polycrates says he wore the priestly plate on his forehead), was from a family of some status and lived in Jerusalem, so he would have been known by Caiaphas's family and been allowed to come into their home. John the Elder's family probably owned the home that Jesus and his disciples had the Last Supper, and as the owner of the home (or representative of the family that owned it) he would have had the right to dine next to Jesus as per Jewish custom. There is a lot of patristic evidence that John the Elder was different from John the Apostle (even Pope Benedict accepted this). He is mentioned as being separate by Papias and still being alive when John the Apostle died. Papias also states that John the Elder was a disciple of the Lord and was a direct eyewitness of Jesus' ministry. Also, like the Apostle, John the Elder resided, taught and died at Ephesus, having a tomb that's different from the Apostle's.

In the "list about the Beloved Disciple" (at 5:53), the second item is John 18:15-18, but there we only find references to "another"/"that"/"the other" disciple. The love is (conspicuously?) missing so why is this disciple nevertheless identified as the beloved disciple?

Excellent work ! An unbyased and clear view. Wish there weere more works like that to make true comparisons. Congrats and greetings from Brazil.