Another great Hamercopia of Knowledge this evening. I give it 5 bags of popcorn. Thanks again to John and Leandro for giving us these free lectures. Can't wait for next week.
@@_CR_Jon usually does a fantastic job with his lectures but there are times when he tries to mix his far left wing political views into his lectures on religion and those are some real stinkers. Political views should really be kept out of the church in my opinion. Politics are way to divisive and the church should be a place where all people feel welcome.
@@ObjectiveEthics What of his views don't make people feel *welcome*? Even if someone disagreed or objected to what you call John's "far left wing political views" they aren't presented in a way that is unwelcoming or demands agreement.
He never thoroughly researchs ANYthing, but the subject matter is always interesting. Lucifer only appears in Genesis, where he has zero interaction with humans. Satan only appears in Job, where YVWH is the evil one.
Academic? Why? The Scripture can only be Spiritually discerned... not explained by man whose breath is in his nostrils. This is precisely the reason it is written in allegory. To keep it from the profane and ignorant.
It's interesting that the religious official appointed to argue against the sanctification of a candidate for sainthood was called *The Devil's Advocate*, a kind of nod to Satan's role in The Book of Job.
I personally side with the Bible’s OG villain: the snake of the Garden of Eden. We should, in fact, strive to know what is good and bad for us to do in order that we may perpetuate ourselves to the point, even, of becoming a planet hoping species; and therefore increasing our chances of living forever as a species-like the Gods we once imagined. All that it would require is that we learn to love ourselves as a species. Am I wrong in thinking the perpetuation of our species is the criterion by which should choose the rights and wrongs of how to live our lives?
This is open for discussion... I reject the claim and premise "Villains in the Bible". The traditional literary terms of- Antagonist, Protagonist, Villains, etc. seem to be at best inadequate, and at worst inaccurate. Using these terms, (especially "Villains") implies there are Heroes in the Bible, which is demonstrably false. (Yes, I'll get to Jesus too.) The word "villain" is defined and connected to the escalated and continuing malicious crime and acts of a character, integral to the plot. Not committing "a" crime, but significant, prolonged, and multiple crimes, necessary to fulfil the story's plot. Adam and Eve, Cain killing Abel, they are disobedient sinners, not criminals, because Mosaic Law hasn't been decreed yet and they were punished for their sins. The Serpent in Eden?- No, temptation, deception, and lying are immoral, but not illegal. Slavery?- No, because slavery was common practice and an accepted practice as part of the Law. (See Exod. 21:20-21) The Kings, such as Nebuchadnezzar, etc.?- No, they were following the Laws of the land they ruled over. Satan, such as in Job?- No, Satan and God were having a debate, and Satan had God's permission to do all he did, and followed God's restrictions. Who got punished?_ Job, not Satan. Jesus a hero?- No, martyr, yes. Pilot didn't find Jesus guilty, the Jewish authorities (Sanhedrin, Pharisees, etc.) found Jesus guilty of Blasphemies. Again, immoral, but neither a villain or hero. His crucifixion?- More martyrdom, but hero-ish elements in being the Savior of the world, but they were self-serving, not selfless. Satan, False Prophet, and Anti-Christ of Revelation?- No, again Satan and all are doing God's plan, and by God's direction. See, this all leads to what the Bible really is about and it has only 1 main character- God. Everyone else in the Bible is just a supporting character, or ancillary character. From a literary standpoint, there's only 1 "Villain" in the Bible, and (sorry) that's the God portrayed in it. I know people are going to flip out, but please, remain calm and present evidence why you can prove me wrong. I will weigh and honestly consider it... change my mind. FYI: John 3:16 doesn't help your case, it supports mine. Jesus is unnecessary for our salvation... no self-sacrifice, no elaborate ceremony, or grandiose event of yourself, to yourself... just forgive us. Isn't that what we are supposed to do? We just forgive those who trespassed against us? I'm willing and eager to hear your arguments. Change my mind.
I often get curious when it comes to the story of Jesus and the devil in the wilderness. The reason I am curious is because in this story abstinence or specific religious observance for certain practices through Jesus denying all of these pleasures, I believe this starts a trend of asceticism in sober rationalism. I feel as though anyone that has a silver rationalistic thought process traditionally will have a judeo-christian background. I believe that this is far different than other groups doing mystery cult at the time, and how Jesus was a medicine working through asceticism in this particular story. meanwhile in other sections of the gospels he uses substance to do his miracles. This all together produces a very human feeling to jesus' character both narratively and culturally. In my humble opinion, im so sad i missed this lecture, im 6 minutes in and im already titillated! thank you john and CoCT
Antiochus Epiphanes from the Books of the Macabbees! You thought Judas' guts spilling on the floor was gruesome? Read up how Antiochus dies in 2 Macabbees (trigger warning!).
I still like to think that Samson („little sun“) fits as a mythic story with my own fixation on modern catastrophism. When his „hair“ is cut (=non-active sun) he is turning the mill ((see also „Hamlet’s Mill“, where I probably got the idea from), but as soon as his hair grows (=active sun), he tumbles the pillar and brings down the house (= civilization ending solar eruption; maybe even Earth axis tumbling (if you believe in Earth Crust displacement), or at least magnetic field axis tumbling / destroying / reversing (periodical collapse / reversing of the geomagnetic field)). The other story where he burns the crops by sending foxes with flames bound to their tails also looks like some cosmic catastrophe myth to me… If we agree that biblical stories regularly are myths used to retroactively explain historic changes, I still tend to wonder wether some stories are much, much older than others, and therefore lost and acquired a multitude of interpretations. (I mean: technically speaking the interpretation of stories is always happening in the mind of the reader, and therefore infinitely variable, but of course there have to have been original (and intermittent) authors who were writing for original (and intermittent) audiences, thus my own catastrophist interpretations might only be of interest in times when the „end of the world“ currently is in demand again… (- or really seems around the corner, for whatever reasons.)
Question regarding Balaam, specifically as he first appears and is portrayed in Numbers: Why does Yahweh get angry with him? Balak wants Balaam to curse an approaching army which Balaam knows not the identity of, i.e. he doesn't know it's Israel. Balaam says he has to ask his god, Yahweh, if it's cool. Yahweh says, "No, they are a blessed people," so Balaam says to the messengers, "No." Then Balak tries again, but Balaam insists he can't do it because Yahweh said not to, yet in the middle of the night, Yahweh comes to Balaam and says, "Go with the men this time, but only do and say as I tell you to do and say," so Balaam goes with Balak's messengers. In the very next verse, Yahweh is angry with Balaam for going even though Balaam is doing exactly what Yahweh told him to do. Why? Then Yahweh sends an angel to try and stop Balaam from doing what He commanded Balaam to do. Then later on in Numbers, Balaam is killed along with some Moabite kings as if it's a good thing he was included, and then everywhere else in the Deuteronomy and the prophets and in the New Testament, Balaam is accused of divining against Yahweh, even though he never did such a thing nor intended to do so according to the only account of his story, which occurs in Numbers. How does Balaam come to be made the bad guy?
54:01 you don’t make friends with salad / I love how you are so in touch with pop culture. When I was raised Christian we weren’t allowed to consume any non-Christian media. Just goes to show how the overzealous types are completely out of touch with the real world
Also, about Cain and Abel... we have a mysterious etiology-like story about sacrifice which ends in the firstborn being killed, and the actions/motivation of God seem to make no sense. I have a suspicion this might have originally been a "molech" firstborn sacrifice story that somebody tried to later fix up. I have similar suspicions about Moses and firstborn Gershom, and the "bloody husband" story, but that's a rambling comment for another day.
Love you content. I was wondering if the word "Croesus' ever comes up in your studies of these ancient periods. If so, does this refer to a specific individual or could the term mean something like 'king' more generally? Much obliged for all that you do. As long as you make content, I'll watch.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Another great Hamercopia of Knowledge this evening. I give it 5 bags of popcorn. Thanks again to John and Leandro for giving us these free lectures. Can't wait for next week.
10000%
I don’t there any lecture from John that is less that is less than 5 popcorn bags
Flakes even though I've heard you say "hammercopia" several times over the past year it still makes me smile every time lol 👍
@@_CR_Jon usually does a fantastic job with his lectures but there are times when he tries to mix his far left wing political views into his lectures on religion and those are some real stinkers.
Political views should really be kept out of the church in my opinion. Politics are way to divisive and the church should be a place where all people feel welcome.
@@ObjectiveEthics What of his views don't make people feel *welcome*? Even if someone disagreed or objected to what you call John's "far left wing political views" they aren't presented in a way that is unwelcoming or demands agreement.
He always has fantastic scholarly level content. This channel should be bigger.
He never thoroughly researchs ANYthing, but the subject matter is always interesting. Lucifer only appears in Genesis, where he has zero interaction with humans. Satan only appears in Job, where YVWH is the evil one.
Good!! I have been anxiously waiting for a Real academic discussion about "the Holy spirit" - like - forever, really.
Academic?
Why?
The Scripture can only be Spiritually discerned... not explained by man whose breath is in his nostrils.
This is precisely the reason it is written in allegory.
To keep it from the profane and ignorant.
@@allthingsfrench1391 I think that you are on the wrong channel….
Mulțumim!
Thank you for your support!
I love how often John, unironically, says that the end of the world didn’t happen.
Another awesome Centre Place lecture! Please never stop making these, I learn so much from each one
It's interesting that the religious official appointed to argue against the sanctification of a candidate for sainthood was called *The Devil's Advocate*, a kind of nod to Satan's role in The Book of Job.
Fantastic lecture! honestly if I was a theist, I'd like to think Center Place is where I'd land.
You don't need to be theist to join the church from what I understand
Thank you!!,again ,Sir!! I wish you good last week!!👌👍☺️✌️🇫🇮✴️☀️🍀
I liked the excursion on Tyre and Carthage.
Great lecture! Happy belated Thanksgiving!
Excellent as always, ty👍
Kind of ironic how the villains tend to be less villainous than heroes.
I personally side with the Bible’s OG villain: the snake of the Garden of Eden. We should, in fact, strive to know what is good and bad for us to do in order that we may perpetuate ourselves to the point, even, of becoming a planet hoping species; and therefore increasing our chances of living forever as a species-like the Gods we once imagined. All that it would require is that we learn to love ourselves as a species. Am I wrong in thinking the perpetuation of our species is the criterion by which should choose the rights and wrongs of how to live our lives?
Might be easier to make a video on "Not villains of the Bible". At least it would be a shorter episode.
Hahah. The content would be the same as "Who is Yahweh".
Great topic and lecture. Thank you.
Wish I had watched it in real time because I would have asked: "Why why whyyyyyyyyy Delilah???"
thank you
This is open for discussion...
I reject the claim and premise "Villains in the Bible". The traditional literary terms of- Antagonist, Protagonist, Villains, etc. seem to be at best inadequate, and at worst inaccurate. Using these terms, (especially "Villains") implies there are Heroes in the Bible, which is demonstrably false. (Yes, I'll get to Jesus too.) The word "villain" is defined and connected to the escalated and continuing malicious crime and acts of a character, integral to the plot. Not committing "a" crime, but significant, prolonged, and multiple crimes, necessary to fulfil the story's plot. Adam and Eve, Cain killing Abel, they are disobedient sinners, not criminals, because Mosaic Law hasn't been decreed yet and they were punished for their sins. The Serpent in Eden?- No, temptation, deception, and lying are immoral, but not illegal. Slavery?- No, because slavery was common practice and an accepted practice as part of the Law. (See Exod. 21:20-21) The Kings, such as Nebuchadnezzar, etc.?- No, they were following the Laws of the land they ruled over. Satan, such as in Job?- No, Satan and God were having a debate, and Satan had God's permission to do all he did, and followed God's restrictions. Who got punished?_ Job, not Satan. Jesus a hero?- No, martyr, yes. Pilot didn't find Jesus guilty, the Jewish authorities (Sanhedrin, Pharisees, etc.) found Jesus guilty of Blasphemies. Again, immoral, but neither a villain or hero. His crucifixion?- More martyrdom, but hero-ish elements in being the Savior of the world, but they were self-serving, not selfless. Satan, False Prophet, and Anti-Christ of Revelation?- No, again Satan and all are doing God's plan, and by God's direction. See, this all leads to what the Bible really is about and it has only 1 main character- God. Everyone else in the Bible is just a supporting character, or ancillary character. From a literary standpoint, there's only 1 "Villain" in the Bible, and (sorry) that's the God portrayed in it.
I know people are going to flip out, but please, remain calm and present evidence why you can prove me wrong. I will weigh and honestly consider it... change my mind. FYI: John 3:16 doesn't help your case, it supports mine. Jesus is unnecessary for our salvation... no self-sacrifice, no elaborate ceremony, or grandiose event of yourself, to yourself... just forgive us. Isn't that what we are supposed to do? We just forgive those who trespassed against us? I'm willing and eager to hear your arguments. Change my mind.
I often get curious when it comes to the story of Jesus and the devil in the wilderness. The reason I am curious is because in this story abstinence or specific religious observance for certain practices through Jesus denying all of these pleasures, I believe this starts a trend of asceticism in sober rationalism. I feel as though anyone that has a silver rationalistic thought process traditionally will have a judeo-christian background. I believe that this is far different than other groups doing mystery cult at the time, and how Jesus was a medicine working through asceticism in this particular story. meanwhile in other sections of the gospels he uses substance to do his miracles. This all together produces a very human feeling to jesus' character both narratively and culturally. In my humble opinion, im so sad i missed this lecture, im 6 minutes in and im already titillated! thank you john and CoCT
at 22:40 what is that painting of Judas and the Devil called? or who painted it?
1:19:45 theophoric names (history was likely different than the authors let on)
Antiochus Epiphanes from the Books of the Macabbees! You thought Judas' guts spilling on the floor was gruesome? Read up how Antiochus dies in 2 Macabbees (trigger warning!).
Where does the character of Lucifer come in?
Thanks, we have your question and we'll give it to John tonight (Oct 22) for our second episode of "Let There Be Answers."
I still like to think that Samson („little sun“) fits as a mythic story with my own fixation on modern catastrophism.
When his „hair“ is cut (=non-active sun) he is turning the mill ((see also „Hamlet’s Mill“, where I probably got the idea from), but as soon as his hair grows (=active sun), he tumbles the pillar and brings down the house (= civilization ending solar eruption; maybe even Earth axis tumbling (if you believe in Earth Crust displacement), or at least magnetic field axis tumbling / destroying / reversing (periodical collapse / reversing of the geomagnetic field)).
The other story where he burns the crops by sending foxes with flames bound to their tails also looks like some cosmic catastrophe myth to me…
If we agree that biblical stories regularly are myths used to retroactively explain historic changes, I still tend to wonder wether some stories are much, much older than others, and therefore lost and acquired a multitude of interpretations.
(I mean: technically speaking the interpretation of stories is always happening in the mind of the reader, and therefore infinitely variable, but of course there have to have been original (and intermittent) authors who were writing for original (and intermittent) audiences, thus my own catastrophist interpretations might only be of interest in times when the „end of the world“ currently is in demand again… (- or really seems around the corner, for whatever reasons.)
🫡John Hamer 💪🏽💪🏽💪🏽 ... ✌🏽❤️
So, the Serpent was sent by Sophia to bring Gnosis to Man so he could break from the gilded cage created by the Demiurge?
Question regarding Balaam, specifically as he first appears and is portrayed in Numbers: Why does Yahweh get angry with him? Balak wants Balaam to curse an approaching army which Balaam knows not the identity of, i.e. he doesn't know it's Israel. Balaam says he has to ask his god, Yahweh, if it's cool. Yahweh says, "No, they are a blessed people," so Balaam says to the messengers, "No." Then Balak tries again, but Balaam insists he can't do it because Yahweh said not to, yet in the middle of the night, Yahweh comes to Balaam and says, "Go with the men this time, but only do and say as I tell you to do and say," so Balaam goes with Balak's messengers. In the very next verse, Yahweh is angry with Balaam for going even though Balaam is doing exactly what Yahweh told him to do. Why? Then Yahweh sends an angel to try and stop Balaam from doing what He commanded Balaam to do. Then later on in Numbers, Balaam is killed along with some Moabite kings as if it's a good thing he was included, and then everywhere else in the Deuteronomy and the prophets and in the New Testament, Balaam is accused of divining against Yahweh, even though he never did such a thing nor intended to do so according to the only account of his story, which occurs in Numbers. How does Balaam come to be made the bad guy?
Thanks, we have your question and we'll give it to John tonight (Oct 22) for our second episode of "Let There Be Answers."
54:01 you don’t make friends with salad / I love how you are so in touch with pop culture. When I was raised Christian we weren’t allowed to consume any non-Christian media. Just goes to show how the overzealous types are completely out of touch with the real world
Also, about Cain and Abel... we have a mysterious etiology-like story about sacrifice which ends in the firstborn being killed, and the actions/motivation of God seem to make no sense. I have a suspicion this might have originally been a "molech" firstborn sacrifice story that somebody tried to later fix up.
I have similar suspicions about Moses and firstborn Gershom, and the "bloody husband" story, but that's a rambling comment for another day.
Love you content. I was wondering if the word "Croesus' ever comes up in your studies of these ancient periods. If so, does this refer to a specific individual or could the term mean something like 'king' more generally? Much obliged for all that you do. As long as you make content, I'll watch.
Thanks, we have your question and we'll give it to John tonight (Oct 22) for our second episode of "Let There Be Answers."
@@centre-place You guys are really doing a fantastic job. Thanks for all your effort.
22:28 the spirit dies in material form.
Most of the characters seem to be unsavoury without picking out the obvious ones.
Hey, Jude, don't make it bad ♬
Take a sad song and make it better ♪
Causeway?
Yes, that's it!
❤😊
curious but the devil never killed anyone unlike the 'holy' others
There is no 'Devil' in the Bible.
So much is the man passing on his sins. I am eve I am responsible for his sins even if I am not but can he stop killing kids
Where does the God of the bible fit into this? The worst