I learn soooo much watching these lectures. I don’t see how any serious person of faith, like myself, can go without this information. It can either add nuance to your faith or help you towards deconverting. But facts are important in the spiritual journey, not just faith.
Absolutely love these presentations. John and Alejandro are both wonderful speakers and make the lectures very engaging. I love to see such a wholesome and well researched platform
As a former Christian I find these lectures very interesting. In 60 years of church attendance and Bible studies no one ever taught anything about the history of religions. How is one supposed to make an informed decision without it? Discovering this information for myself makes me believe this is purposely kept from believers in order to keep them in the fold. That is nothing but deceptive. I appreciate the openness and truth being presented.
Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2:38. Hell is real whether you believe in it or not. Jesus is reaching for you in these final hours ma’am. Turn and repent.
@@MartyRayProject I did repent and was baptized twice (when I was 12 and again when I was 26) and was baptized in “the Holy Spirit” when I was 25 (like all of those who think they received the infilling of the H.S. my brain released chemicals and I “spoke in tongues”) - made zero difference in my life even though I faithfully read my Bible, prayed, attended church and tried to do everything according to the Bible. Never had a spiritual experience, an answered prayer or a single moment of “blessed assurance”. Stuck with the mythology for almost 60 years even though I was sexually assaulted more than once, one daughter was sexually assaulted at 4 years of age, the other one at 13, my husband cheated on me, my younger daughter died at 39 and I have had many health problems including 12 surgeries. Learning the history of world religions was enlightening! Not one single thing in the Bible is true, unique, new, reasonable, possible or even historically accurate. It is all a myth! Rational thinking and a college education opened my eyes. (There is a reason Trump loves the uneducated.) I rejected the mythology at about 60. Now over 70 I am completely liberated and living in the real world - not a fantasy world. Wake up and smell the coffee! Set your self free! Cults will bleed you dry financially, emotionally and psychologically. Brainwashing is real and you are a prime example. Stop enriching conmen - do something constructive with it!
1 Timothy 4:10 - The New International Version (NIV) 10 That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.
Even though I am not a believer in spirituality, I believe that this channel is an amazing change in the game. Being a pastor and a historian, doing religion when it's time for religion and talking objectively when it's the time for it is mind boggling!! Well done!
Agreed. At worst it's no-strings outreach, at best a testament to a practical belief in true inclusiveness (not showboating lip-service, as is fashionable) through a project of collective curiosity. I suspect it works because of the personality involved & his own questioning nature, especially in specific areas of recurring personal interest to him.
@@mmccrownus2406 I think it's fair to differentiate between emotional/spiritual experiences and empirically verifiable experiences. And then you have the worst kind of truths... ...those pesky rational ones.
I agree about Plato being the source of the Christian concept of the immortality of the soul, but it’s not really in the NT. Paul thought there would be a general resurrection when we would get a new spiritual body that rise up and be with Christ.
@@ncarmstron facts. I don’t think for a second Paul was influenced by Plato. They were 100% following what Jesus told them. I do believe the Christian church has let Plato sneak in the back door
You will find there is no basis for the immortality of the soul anywhere in the Bible, either in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) or the Christian Bible (New Testament). The soul (ruach) also means breath - when you die/breath leaves your body, your soul dies with you. The concept of the immortality of the soul only came about by Christian thinkers having to legitimize and harmonize their beliefs with the larger Greek/Roman world surrounding them.
Plato as far as I can remember never addressed directly the Sacred/Sacrificial issues in archaic Greek antiquity. However Plato did address the migration of the soul. He did address the issue of God as the Demiurge and Being as nonexistence. Plato did address piety and wrote his texts in large part to show Socrates as pious in a new philosophical way. The progressive Western Catholicism with the great schism broke away from the Eastern Orthodox Religion. Not that Byzantium was without philosophy but as it developed after the 10th century it did not follow the rational progressivism of the West. After the fall of Constantinople the Western philosophical tradition moves to the West. The philosophical character of Western Christianity and its' Pagan influence mediated by Platonism finds its revival in the Renaissance. From that time until now Christianity has continued its Sacred/Sacrificial and progressive philosophical mold up to the present. The divestiture of Science and Politics from Religion and Philosophy although stark has never been completed entirely as our Ontotheological ground in modern Western Culture would attest. As the West becomes more Anti-Christian it becomes more Pagan. Wokeism and Environmentalism are Pagan style Sacrificial cults that because of their sacrificial character pick up themes that look Christian but are actually Anti- Christian and Tribal Archaic Ontotheologies.
Thanks for another great lecture. I've been trying to make the case for a while that Jesus is a synthesis of Moses and Socrates. The more you learn about the time period and influences, the more it seems like Paul essentially took Judaism and tweaked it just enough to make it palatable to Greco Roman minds. The Romans had already partially "cleaned up" Greek mythology in the direction that Plato suggested, removing the tendencies towards patricide among their gods at least. With them, the more primordial gods retired and the newer versions assumed their place. Jesus seems tailor-made to fit this mold. Almost makes me suspect that the "virgin/young woman" issue wasn't a mis-translation but a deliberate change to fit with Roman mythology of virgin births.
It was definitely deliberate. Some say it was because Mary was pregnant by Pantera, I'm pretty sure it was Celsus who stated such. It would be a great way to cover up her having sex before marriage.
@@dustinellerbe4125 To be clear, I'm not commenting on Mary's premarital actions, or whether any of these people existed. I'm saying that the character of Mary was a virgin because Matthew was obsessed with tying every part of Jesus's life back to lines from the Old Testament, whether they were in the context of prophecy or not. Since he was using the Septuagint, that line in Isaiah read that Immanuel's mother would be a virgin rather than the original young lady. This is part of the reason the Jesus people had so much trouble in Jerusalem. They were claiming that their guy had fulfilled prophecies that didn't exist in the Hebrew mythology. I can imagine the average second temple Jew responding to an evangelist with something like "Yeahhhh, that's a cool story, but really sounds more like a Greek legend. Our book, if you're really interested, is about our people being nearly destroyed every time we show any interest in shiny new gods. So how about you take this stuff down the road to the Gentiles. They'll eat it up."
@@paulrhome6164 I agree with you. I was offering an alternative hypothesis to what you stated. There is even further development in the gospel of Mary, I believe. It's been a while since I've studied on it. I think Justin martyr speaks on this topic as well. There are examples of God helping women to conceive in the OT, so it seems that could play a role in it as well.
In the analogy of the sun, the word "good" doesn't map neatly to our notion of moral good. There are different words in greek for good and all have different additional meanings like healthy, beautiful or noble. You would be hard-pressed in ancient greek to say something or somebody is morally good, yet neither healthy, not beautiful or otherwise competent in a non-moral sense.
Further, the list of what is good is largely arbitrary and based on opinion and self interest. The lack of effective definitions is most often what renders philosophy and logic useless.
From Plato's Protagoras: “Now the art of the Sophist is, as I believe, of great antiquity; but in ancient times those who practiced it, fearing this odium, veiled and disguised themselves under various names, some under that of poets, as Homer, Hesiod, and Simonides, some, of hierophants and prophets, as Orpheus and Musaeus, and some, as I observe, even under the name of gymnastic‐masters, like Iccus of Tarentum, or the more recently celebrated Herodicus, now of Selymbria and formerly of Megara, who is a first‐rate Sophist. Your own Agathocles pretended to be a musician, but was really an eminent Sophist; also Pythocleides the Cean; and there were many others; and all of them, as I was saying, adopted these arts as veils or disguises because they were afraid of the odium which they would incur.” From Plato's Theaetetus: “In the name of the Graces, what an almighty wise man Protagoras must have been! He spoke these things in a parable to the common herd, like you and me, but told the truth, his Truth, in secret to his own disciples.” Mark 4:33-34 "With many similar parables Jesus spoke the word to them, as much as they could understand. He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything." Mark 4:10-12: "When he (Jesus) was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that, "'they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!'" I don't believe in coincidence. If it quacks like a duck...
I don't doubt that the Holy Spirit spoke to certain "pagan prophets" with a revelation of truth suited to their understanding. The Hebrew prophets and scriptures are undoubtedly more reliable as a source of Truth, but sometimes the words of other sources are more understandable for our Western culture. Best to remember that any attempt to express God's infinite Truth in the words of any human language will result in a parable.
"What I tell you in the darkness, speak ye in the light; and what ye hear in the ear, proclaim upon the house-tops" Matthew 10:27. It wasn't a mystery religion. What he told his disciples in private he intended them to speak publicly to everybody. Hence the meaning of parables are recorded in the texts.
@@youngknowledgeseeker On the few occasions when the supposed meaning of the parables are provided, it is done within a false context and only in terms of other metaphors. For the disciples, who would have already received some training in how the allegory worked and were aware of the true context, this would have been enough. The key point to keep in mind is that magic is not real and "walking on water" or "raising the dead" never happen in this reality. Only someone intent on deceiving others would make claims of such "miracles". It is clear that the Christ/Jesus character appears to follow the pattern of the earlier Sophists and the clear "parallel" to the Sophist Protagoras suggests a further connection. If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck...don't try to tell me that it is not a duck.
When John gets to the most complex concept and then comes up with a Star Trek reference to help explain it, that's when I clicked the Like button. :) (22:33)
An obvious vestige of philosophy being effectively synonomous with any academic field is "philosophy" is still in the name of the highest degrees we hand out in most fields. Most "PhD" stands for Doctor of philosophy. A PhD in Physics is a doctor of philosophy in physics.
The Allegory of the Cave was the template for Judeo/Christianity/Islam. Mushroom management. Eratosthenes' discovery that potentially half of the world's land and gold were unconquered was and still is the motivation.
18:50 I don't think Plato was trying to be a religious reformer here. The context matters. The proposition that texts which are ill-fitting with the moral values of their society should be banned was part of something Plato wrote Socrates as constantly doing in his conversation with Thrasymachus. Wherein the latter would suggest a course of action or a way of things and the former would basically say "given ___, would ___ also be the case?" Socrates (again not necessarily these Socrates but as Plato was using him as a character in this dialogue) was taking anything Thrasymachus said and walking him to natural ultimate conclusions with that given line of reasoning. The idea being to say "Well if this course of action or idea about how things should be results in something we may not find acceptable than the core proposition must be unacceptable as well". Thrasymachus just really didn't want to backpedal on anything they had put forward. They were committed to stubbornly holding to a principle before they had thought it through. Admirable in respect to being consistent. Perilous in practice. I think he was showing Thrasymachus to be the accidental tyrant that arises when a person both has conviction of belief and power to impose it. He was trying to show how one person or even a few can't set up an equitable society lacking external input. How it ends up being absurdist at best and abhorrent at worst if one tries. It's a point his character's interlocutor doesn't seem to get. But it's directed at the reader.
I never understood it that way, but it seems plausible. If you read the Laws it becomes clear that if the Legislator deems something unfit for his people it is his duty to take appropiate measures to ban it. In order to keep souls pure. Yet, even if verses of Homer should be censored, that doesnt mean Plato is advocating for changing the sacrifices, liturgy or any other religious rite of any sort. Hence citing this part of the Republic as proof for religious reformation is very weak.
Thank you for explaining how Greek mythology got on with a thick brush onto writing the new testament because the new testament was written in Greek by the Greeks, Zeus and when did the Roma's get the letter J ?
If anything, the fact that there were so many diverse Christianities shows what kind of influence this "teacher from Nazareth" had... everyone from James the Judaizer to the Platonists to the Gnostics were out to "claim him" as their figurehead.
I agree the word religion is almost meaningless, specially in Eastern countries which are often considered "atheist" by western standards yet they believe all kind of stuff.
Are you aware of the teachings of Baha’u’llah? The Baha’i Writings make mention and praise of the Greek philosophers. Baha’i Writings encompass many, many topics and include the idea of “independent investigation of truth” and seeing truth wherever it may be found. Thanks! Appreciate the lectures.
Love your lectures. It may be too “religious” as a subject, but I’d love to hear you unfold the history and nature of Christian Saints. What, and who are they, what is the origin of the term “saint”? What qualified one to be a saint in the beginning and how was this developed by the church? What’s the difference between Catholic and Orthodox saints? It seems Polycarp was the first to be venerated to sainthood, after refusing to recant and being martyred by a local government official. You had to be martyred to be a saint in the early days and your remains were then venerated, as if they had magical properties for healing and later intercession. And there was money to be made by selling or leasing saint’s remains out to different churches. So the papacy took over the management of sainthood in the 8th - 9th century and instituted a system for identifying and declaring saints. How is it that the Archangel Michael was declared a saint when he was never human and never died and was not martyred? He seems to be the only non-human, un-born, un-martyred saint. None of the other archangels are referred to as saints. Lots of questions! All interesting.
Pessimistically viewed, there was a great deal of money to be made with Saints. What better way to sell some old bones or artifacts for ridiculous sums and then charge poor people to see or touch them than to claim it was once part or owned by a Saint. Obviously I don't put any credence to the whole process other than to recognize the dishonestly and greed of the whole thing.
plato was a polytheist, he viewed the gods' characteristics and attributes in the same way most Christians view their god today. the mythos are divine inspirational poems and allegories for us to learn from. where the good will find virtue and the wicked will find wickedness. the gods themselves are eternal everlasting beings of light incapable of corruption. perfect celestial beings in perfect harmony with the cosmos and nature. all good and all just. like darkness is the absence of light, evil is the absence of the gods.
What is the difference between Yod Heh Vav Heh (the Tetragramaton) and Jupiter. Perhaps the Gnostics were right in thinking the old Testament god is the evil demiurge.
youre asking the wrong question when you ask "would jesus have known diogenes?", what you should be asking is: "would the writers of the gospel have known diogenes?"
While this may be covered in this video, there does seem to be a clear dichotomy between Platonic notions of the "spirit" and "death" and Hebraic/New Testament notions. Platonic thought places exceeding value on "death" and the "spirit" departing the body/earth. The body and life in the body (aside from being a vehicle of learning or of completing a task) is to be longed to escape from. Whereas in the Hebrew Bible death is an enemy and bleak, at best it is a place to at least rest from a difficult and painful life. Good life in the body is celebrated and wished for. In the New Testament death is outright an enemy with absolutely no benefit. There is no higher state to acheive in death or at least peaceful rest. Life, embodied life on earth is the ultimate prize and goal. While both Platonist and NT thought believe in immortality, Plato believes it's inherent to all human beings however only in their spirit, whereas the NT believes human beings in their entirety are perishable and immortality will only be given conditionally and with the requirement of a body. It is interesting that Christian tradition (and much of pop culture on death) has seemingly embraced alot of the Platonic view of death and the "soul", but Biblical scripture does not seem to share the same view.
Life is very simple. Just follow God's will, and you'll be surprised surprised how God, Almighty operates and helps all those that lives to please The Almighty, God. Very simple. Love Your neighbor, as you'll love yourself
( Do Christians And Jews and "OTHER" non-Muslims go to Heaven? ) Quran 2:62 '' Those who believe (in the Quran) and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures) and the Christians and the Sabians->ANYAllah< Is The Protector Of Monasteries, Churches, Synagogues And The Mosques ) Quran 22:40 [They are] those who have been evicted from their homes without right - only because they say, " Our Lord is God " And were it not that God checks the people, some by means of others, there would have been demolished monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which the name of God is much mentioned. And God will surely support those who support Him. Indeed, God is Powerful and Exalted in Might. Note: Why did Allah protected Churches and Synagogues if they worship false Allah ? ( Why Are There So Many Different Religions In The World ? ) Quran 5 48 ''...... If God wanted He could have made all of you a single nation.( ie single religion ) But He willed otherwise in order to test you in what He has given you (ie Scriptures) therefore try to excel one another in good deeds. Ultimately you all shall return to God then He will show you the truth of those matters in which you '' >DISPUTE verb < not noun like other religions Islam mean "submission" to God ( The above verse saying is that God will not accept a religion from the >MUSLIM< and the Non-Muslims but total "submission" to God ) Question: How Can Muslim And the Non-Muslim "submit" to the God? Answer: Be kind to other human beings and Do not lie, Do not steal, Do not cheat, Do not hurt others, Do not be prideful and Do the charity work. Note: If you obeyed all the ABOVE Allah-God's moral laws "YOU" submitted to God.( ie Islam mean "submission" to God ) The only people who will enter Paradise those who '' Submitted to God '' ( ie by good deeds ) God does NOT accept your religion of birth but only ''Your Total'' Submission to Him. ( God Allows Interfaith Marriages And Eat Food From the Christian And Jew And Vice Versa ) Quran 5:5 ''This day [all] good foods have been made lawful, and the food of those who were given the Scripture (ie Christian and Jew) is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them. And [lawful in marriage are] chaste women from among the believers (ie Muslim ) and chaste women from among those who were given the Scripture (ie Christian and Jew) before you, when you have given them their due compensation, desiring chastity not unlawful sexual intercourse or taking [secret] lovers. And whoever denies the faith - his work has become worthless and he in the Hereafter will be among the losers.'' Note: > Only < Islam allows interfaith marriages (>14 hundredsSame God< but They are >ALL Corrupt< more or less, some more than others from their original foundational teaching. The older religion are MORE corrupted than newer religion. Question to Muslim and Christian: Does God / Allah only answer your pray ? And God / Allah does not answer non Muslim / non Christian pray? Did Allah '' Canceled '' all other religions Judaism and Christianity? Quran 5:48 '' And We have revealed to you [O Muhammad] the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture ( ie New and old Testament ) and as a criterion over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. >>>TO EACH OF YOU WE PRESCRIBED A LAW AND A METHODone nation>differ qualified < for to enter Paradise ) On the day of judgement God will ''NOT'' judge humanity bases on Sunni Muslim sect VS Shia Muslim sect ''NOR'' by Muslim VS non-Muslim >but< Doer of Goods VS Doer of Evils. '' YOUR " birth in the Muslim's family is NOT a > qualification < for to enter the Paradise. '' YOUR " religion / sect / foot long beard is NOT a > qualification < for to enter the Paradise. The > qualification < to enter Paradise is > Faith in God and Good Work
Wisdom seems to say that it is gullibility rather than faith, that asserts that dead people arise. People don't walk on waves. People don't get carried up to the clouds, even with five hundred witnesses. Christianity is an amazing con.
That doesn't hold water. It's possible that Luke & Matthew would independently decide to use stories where Jesus inverts ideas in Sirach, but it doesn't make sense for Luke & Matthew to have sentences that are word for word the same in that case. They both would have had to coincidentally changed Sirach in the exact same way. Not to mention stuff like the preaching of John The Baptist (in chapter 3 of both Matthew & Luke) which has word-for-word sections the same in both Gospels and no parallels in Sirach.
Apology is synonymous with the rationalization of literal bible readings when Plato's Apology is about the righteous suicide of criticizing murderous charlatans.
When a philosopher (plato) starts doing religion, because he is bored of doing philosophy, comes someone better in doing religion (Jesus' preachers) and they do a better job.
God is the Savior of all. 1 Timothy 4:10 - The New International Version (NIV) 10 That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe. 1 Cor 15:22 for even as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ all shall be made alive 1 John 2:2 New International Version 2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
So much of Hellenistic teachings are in Christendom or false religion,in Genesis it is said Adam became a soul, not that he received a soul Ez 18: 4 says ,the soul that is sinning shall die Plato influenced the belief in the immortal soul. The word translated soul ,nephish or psyke means breather,The word spirit is not the same as soul,translated from ruah or neuma,force or energy ,to die the energy is gone, resurrection is coming to life again, Most do not know the influence from Plato.
Remove all Greek Philosophy from the Bible, remove all human understanding and reasoning, is God still Triune? Explicitly Stated? If not, then you're using human reasoning and logic to come up with the Trinity.
Not only that but the idea of an "immortal soul" dissapears and becomes conditional and dependent on having a body. The idea of "going to heaven" is also removed, and earth becomes the hoped for destination of the saints.
The Good is not good for goodness sake. It is that thing which all beings strive for. By striving for the Good we participate in it and participation with divinity elevates us and makes us divine ourselves. Its not a god but a First Principle.
@@HamerToronto your immediate family members hardly count towards the spirit of my comment. My point is you are epistemologically arrogant. Intellectually immature (at least in this one domain) because of a childhood trauma or something of the sort. You are unwilling to steel man “literalists”. Instead you constantly simply assert that they’re a bunch of incoherent dummies. Just because they exist doesn’t mean they define the view. Just like your side has a bunch of incoherent dummies that don’t define yours.
I find more and more that ancient documents are more literal than even literalists believe. Skeptics may congratulate themselves they are smarter than the ancient wisdom but they miss out on the life benefiting treasure to be gained by acknowledging the ancients knew better which is probably why the ancients passed it down. John Hamer you are missing out due probably to your pride. I do not say this as a criticism but as a fellow seeker. If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven
Plato studied in Egypt for thirteen years under the Horite priest Sechnuphis.. Plato was educated by a old priesthood that goes to pre dynastic Egypt. This is the same priesthood that Esau married into. Biblically this priesthood comes from Mt Ararat or Arrata. This is the Armenian Highlands. Historically these people are called Hurrians. Biblically they are called Horites. These are the Canaanites=Hurrians/Horites. Horites are the Shemsu Hor=Followers of Heru/Horus. Plato and Atlantis comes from the Edfu building texts. The temple of Heru of Edfu connects a priesthood that includes not just Plato but Akhenaten as well. The Aten is Heru of Edfu and Akhenaten is a Horite. The Horites are the mighty men of old. Shemsu Hor The God of Aleister Crowley and Thelema is Heru of Edfu. In the doctrine of Aleister Crowley Heru of Edfu is called Hadit. Also Ra Hoor Khuit. In Egypt this is Ra Heru Khuti. This is the Aten/Ra Horites=Hor/Horus/Heru + ites=followers of Horites are followers of Heru Abraham was a Horite. Job was a Horite Jesus is a Horite and he took a oath to be a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. Melchizedek/Jebusites=Hurrians=Horites=Canaanites
The separation in fields of study has led to the false belief of Evolution and the imaginary Geological Timeline-Both of which rely on the other forming a circular reasoning of stupidity
How is wealth bad? Would you teach that wealth is bad? To who? To homeless people? The demonization of wealth is for me one of the great faults of Christianity
to me it's its most salient point. wealth is wealth only in contrast to poverty. in our modern world, its associated with exploitation, also called usury (which all 3 major religions banned for centuries). most people who are wealthy don't make their wealth themselves. prior to the rise of capitalism, it was made primarily by slaves. some people say that individualism began with christianity, where you had to answer for your sins yourself. things like capitalism defy individualism by extracting wealth from wage labor, yet it still holds you individually accountable in a court of law. capitalism violates the justice of a true individualist system, where you can make all the wealth you want....under your own power. such systems, though (like maybe libertarian socialism) seek to decentralize state power (or eliminate it altogether) as well as decentralizing wealth via associational ownership. the goal is that labor should be in possession of its own products, and not sell their labor for less than the value of the products on the market. the workers are the owners in more democratic cooperatives. at least since aristotle, we've known that concentrated wealth is bad. he said "poverty is the parent of revolution and crime". it isn't money itself that is bad. it's the love of money for the sake of money that is bad, because money is a form of power (as is other things, like absentee property that allows you to make money off other people's need for shelter. Proudhon would have called it unearned income, and THAT is what every socialist has been against ever. merely owning something should not make you money, while the rest of us actually have to work for a living). i'm an ignostic humanist, but i've pretty much narrowed the entire point of sociology, religion, etc down to the question of the individual and how it relates to the other individuals within its society. we aren't self-made beings. we are the products of our upbringing, education, etc...the social context within which we grow massively influences us (religion is just an example of how western and eastern societies differ, why people in the east would follow taoism or shintoism instead of christianity). thus, the individualist must be understood within a social context (god is as much a social construct as the state). the logical expression of this is the anarchist notion of social individualism, where both capitalism and communism BOTH exist in extreme collectivism...communism being egalitarian, capitalism being hierarchical (both of those require collectives, capitalists wanting individual RULE in a private matter, economics, and communists sacrificing the individual with majority rule). social individualism says the both the collective (other individuals) AND the individual matter. the notion of christ saying "mind your own business" (remove the plank from your own eye before pointing out the mote in some else's) is also lost in capitalism, because business isn't a state of action, but a foundation where the owner is dependent on workers to make his wealth (often making him not busy) and the workers dependent on him for subsistence....survival. wealth disparities create dependence. it creates classes, and the usually means the wealthier is ruling the less wealthy. it depends on the state to uphold its practices via law, creating a privileged class. it also creates a different "test" for people, with the wealthier people never really having to worry about things like "thou shall not steal" the way a pauper might. whether you believe in a god or not, no human created the diamond mines, and if labor is the source of the right of property, then no human can lay claim to those mines. John Locke's labor theory of property was set after he established the commons (the earth as common property), and it was in the context of his necessity (personal property worked by himself). subsequently, Thomas Jefferson (a deist) reiterated, while claiming that people had a natural right to work the earth itself (being in favor of agrarian democracy). greed is the "sin" of wealth, and it is responsible for the destruction of both the earth and society.
By in large you have vast amount of knowledge. Sadly, I have to wonder about your definition of Christian. Your arguments all seem to have as you apriori that the Bible is a best myth and that the universe is best explained by "science" (i.e. evolution). I would love to have a couple of hours to question you.
I learn soooo much watching these lectures. I don’t see how any serious person of faith, like myself, can go without this information. It can either add nuance to your faith or help you towards deconverting. But facts are important in the spiritual journey, not just faith.
Amen, both concur and agree with this comment and notions, here!😊🙌
I used this lecture as basis to explain religion to my children. -- -- So much more advanced than their peers that attend church.
Thanks again for making these excellent talks freely available to the public.
Fantastic. Thank you. I am loving these lectures.
Absolutely love these presentations. John and Alejandro are both wonderful speakers and make the lectures very engaging. I love to see such a wholesome and well researched platform
As a former Christian I find these lectures very interesting. In 60 years of church attendance and Bible studies no one ever taught anything about the history of religions. How is one supposed to make an informed decision without it? Discovering this information for myself makes me believe this is purposely kept from believers in order to keep them in the fold. That is nothing but deceptive. I appreciate the openness and truth being presented.
Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2:38. Hell is real whether you believe in it or not. Jesus is reaching for you in these final hours ma’am. Turn and repent.
@@MartyRayProject I did repent and was baptized twice (when I was 12 and again when I was 26) and was baptized in “the Holy Spirit” when I was 25 (like all of those who think they received the infilling of the H.S. my brain released chemicals and I “spoke in tongues”) - made zero difference in my life even though I faithfully read my Bible, prayed, attended church and tried to do everything according to the Bible. Never had a spiritual experience, an answered prayer or a single moment of “blessed assurance”. Stuck with the mythology for almost 60 years even though I was sexually assaulted more than once, one daughter was sexually assaulted at 4 years of age, the other one at 13, my husband cheated on me, my younger daughter died at 39 and I have had many health problems including 12 surgeries. Learning the history of world religions was enlightening! Not one single thing in the Bible is true, unique, new, reasonable, possible or even historically accurate. It is all a myth! Rational thinking and a college education opened my eyes. (There is a reason Trump loves the uneducated.) I rejected the mythology at about 60. Now over 70 I am completely liberated and living in the real world - not a fantasy world. Wake up and smell the coffee! Set your self free! Cults will bleed you dry financially, emotionally and psychologically. Brainwashing is real and you are a prime example. Stop enriching conmen - do something constructive with it!
1 Timothy 4:10 - The New International Version (NIV)
10 That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.
@@MartyRayProject prove it
@@MartyRayProjectOh man, you’re gonna be surprised when you find out the Aten is the one true god.
Blimey! A church where people can use their brains! I don't know of anywhere like this in the UK. Thanks for these lectures❤
It is always a pleasure to hear an intelligent and knowledgeable speaker and especially talking about such important facts about our Western culture.
Even though I am not a believer in spirituality, I believe that this channel is an amazing change in the game. Being a pastor and a historian, doing religion when it's time for religion and talking objectively when it's the time for it is mind boggling!! Well done!
Agreed. At worst it's no-strings outreach, at best a testament to a practical belief in true inclusiveness (not showboating lip-service, as is fashionable) through a project of collective curiosity. I suspect it works because of the personality involved & his own questioning nature, especially in specific areas of recurring personal interest to him.
Just cus were capable of having spiritual experiences doesnt mean theyre real
@@ChillAssTurtle ok, NPC
@@mmccrownus2406 spoken like a wannabe enlightened crystal mommy
@@mmccrownus2406 I think it's fair to differentiate between emotional/spiritual experiences and empirically verifiable experiences. And then you have the worst kind of truths... ...those pesky rational ones.
Awesome lecture. I Greatly appreciate the wisdom 🙏.
The concept of the immortality of the soul in the NT was an influence of Plato and Greek philosophy.
I agree about Plato being the source of the Christian concept of the immortality of the soul, but it’s not really in the NT. Paul thought there would be a general resurrection when we would get a new spiritual body that rise up and be with Christ.
@@ncarmstron facts. I don’t think for a second Paul was influenced by Plato. They were 100% following what Jesus told them. I do believe the Christian church has let Plato sneak in the back door
You will find there is no basis for the immortality of the soul anywhere in the Bible, either in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) or the Christian Bible (New Testament).
The soul (ruach) also means breath - when you die/breath leaves your body, your soul dies with you.
The concept of the immortality of the soul only came about by Christian thinkers having to legitimize and harmonize their beliefs with the larger Greek/Roman world surrounding them.
@@leamJG so what’s Jesus talking about the kingdom and heaven for
@@eugene3484 Jesus was an apocalypticist. He believed the kingdom was imminent as seen in Matthew 16:28
Great overview and history of philosophy.
I like that this is part of a thematic lecture series. (Reminds me of the evolution of my ciné-club in the late 90s).
Plato as far as I can remember never addressed directly the Sacred/Sacrificial issues in archaic Greek antiquity. However Plato did address the migration of the soul. He did address the issue of God as the Demiurge and Being as nonexistence. Plato did address piety and wrote his texts in large part to show Socrates as pious in a new philosophical way. The progressive Western Catholicism with the great schism broke away from the Eastern Orthodox Religion. Not that Byzantium was without philosophy but as it developed after the 10th century it did not follow the rational progressivism of the West. After the fall of Constantinople the Western philosophical tradition moves to the West. The philosophical character of Western Christianity and its' Pagan influence mediated by Platonism finds its revival in the Renaissance. From that time until now Christianity has continued its Sacred/Sacrificial and progressive philosophical mold up to the present. The divestiture of Science and Politics from Religion and Philosophy although stark has never been completed entirely as our Ontotheological ground in modern Western Culture would attest. As the West becomes more Anti-Christian it becomes more Pagan. Wokeism and Environmentalism are Pagan style Sacrificial cults that because of their sacrificial character pick up themes that look Christian but are actually Anti- Christian and Tribal Archaic Ontotheologies.
if we have Plato, Aristotle, then why do Westerners need the Jewish Bible? Everything seems to be completed without it, right?
Another great subject matter. Much appreciated.
Thanks for another great presentation,
Thanks for another great lecture. I've been trying to make the case for a while that Jesus is a synthesis of Moses and Socrates. The more you learn about the time period and influences, the more it seems like Paul essentially took Judaism and tweaked it just enough to make it palatable to Greco Roman minds. The Romans had already partially "cleaned up" Greek mythology in the direction that Plato suggested, removing the tendencies towards patricide among their gods at least. With them, the more primordial gods retired and the newer versions assumed their place. Jesus seems tailor-made to fit this mold. Almost makes me suspect that the "virgin/young woman" issue wasn't a mis-translation but a deliberate change to fit with Roman mythology of virgin births.
It was definitely deliberate. Some say it was because Mary was pregnant by Pantera, I'm pretty sure it was Celsus who stated such. It would be a great way to cover up her having sex before marriage.
@@dustinellerbe4125 To be clear, I'm not commenting on Mary's premarital actions, or whether any of these people existed. I'm saying that the character of Mary was a virgin because Matthew was obsessed with tying every part of Jesus's life back to lines from the Old Testament, whether they were in the context of prophecy or not. Since he was using the Septuagint, that line in Isaiah read that Immanuel's mother would be a virgin rather than the original young lady. This is part of the reason the Jesus people had so much trouble in Jerusalem. They were claiming that their guy had fulfilled prophecies that didn't exist in the Hebrew mythology. I can imagine the average second temple Jew responding to an evangelist with something like "Yeahhhh, that's a cool story, but really sounds more like a Greek legend. Our book, if you're really interested, is about our people being nearly destroyed every time we show any interest in shiny new gods. So how about you take this stuff down the road to the Gentiles. They'll eat it up."
@@paulrhome6164 I agree with you. I was offering an alternative hypothesis to what you stated. There is even further development in the gospel of Mary, I believe. It's been a while since I've studied on it. I think Justin martyr speaks on this topic as well. There are examples of God helping women to conceive in the OT, so it seems that could play a role in it as well.
In the analogy of the sun, the word "good" doesn't map neatly to our notion of moral good. There are different words in greek for good and all have different additional meanings like healthy, beautiful or noble. You would be hard-pressed in ancient greek to say something or somebody is morally good, yet neither healthy, not beautiful or otherwise competent in a non-moral sense.
It is not the sun who should adapt to our notion of moral good but the reverse.
Further, the list of what is good is largely arbitrary and based on opinion and self interest. The lack of effective definitions is most often what renders philosophy and logic useless.
I enjoy your talks so much
Excellent
From Plato's Protagoras:
“Now the art of the Sophist is, as I believe, of great antiquity; but in ancient times those who practiced it, fearing this odium, veiled and disguised themselves under various names, some under that of poets, as Homer, Hesiod, and Simonides, some, of hierophants and prophets, as Orpheus and Musaeus, and some, as I observe, even under the name of gymnastic‐masters, like Iccus of Tarentum, or the more recently celebrated Herodicus, now of Selymbria and formerly of Megara, who is a first‐rate Sophist. Your own Agathocles pretended to be a musician, but was really an eminent Sophist; also Pythocleides the Cean; and there were many others; and all of them, as I was saying, adopted these arts as veils or disguises because they were afraid of the odium which they would incur.”
From Plato's Theaetetus:
“In the name of the Graces, what an almighty wise man Protagoras must have been! He spoke these things in a parable to the common herd, like you and me, but told the truth, his Truth, in secret to his own disciples.”
Mark 4:33-34 "With many similar parables Jesus spoke the word to them, as much as they could understand. He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything."
Mark 4:10-12: "When he (Jesus) was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that, "'they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!'"
I don't believe in coincidence. If it quacks like a duck...
I don't doubt that the Holy Spirit spoke to certain "pagan prophets" with a revelation of truth suited to their understanding. The Hebrew prophets and scriptures are undoubtedly more reliable as a source of Truth, but sometimes the words of other sources are more understandable for our Western culture. Best to remember that any attempt to express God's infinite Truth in the words of any human language will result in a parable.
"What I tell you in the darkness, speak ye in the light; and what ye hear in the ear, proclaim upon the house-tops" Matthew 10:27.
It wasn't a mystery religion. What he told his disciples in private he intended them to speak publicly to everybody. Hence the meaning of parables are recorded in the texts.
@@youngknowledgeseeker On the few occasions when the supposed meaning of the parables are provided, it is done within a false context and only in terms of other metaphors. For the disciples, who would have already received some training in how the allegory worked and were aware of the true context, this would have been enough.
The key point to keep in mind is that magic is not real and "walking on water" or "raising the dead" never happen in this reality. Only someone intent on deceiving others would make claims of such "miracles".
It is clear that the Christ/Jesus character appears to follow the pattern of the earlier Sophists and the clear "parallel" to the Sophist Protagoras suggests a further connection. If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck...don't try to tell me that it is not a duck.
When John gets to the most complex concept and then comes up with a Star Trek reference to help explain it, that's when I clicked the Like button. :) (22:33)
Is it just me thinking that Christianity was conceived in Alexandria and that Philo had at least something to do with it?
An obvious vestige of philosophy being effectively synonomous with any academic field is "philosophy" is still in the name of the highest degrees we hand out in most fields.
Most "PhD" stands for Doctor of philosophy. A PhD in Physics is a doctor of philosophy in physics.
The Allegory of the Cave was the template for Judeo/Christianity/Islam. Mushroom management. Eratosthenes' discovery that potentially half of the world's land and gold were unconquered was and still is the motivation.
Did I watch this lecture in reality? 🤔
Either way, good talk and discussion. Thanks.
18:50 I don't think Plato was trying to be a religious reformer here. The context matters. The proposition that texts which are ill-fitting with the moral values of their society should be banned was part of something Plato wrote Socrates as constantly doing in his conversation with Thrasymachus. Wherein the latter would suggest a course of action or a way of things and the former would basically say "given ___, would ___ also be the case?" Socrates (again not necessarily these Socrates but as Plato was using him as a character in this dialogue) was taking anything Thrasymachus said and walking him to natural ultimate conclusions with that given line of reasoning. The idea being to say "Well if this course of action or idea about how things should be results in something we may not find acceptable than the core proposition must be unacceptable as well".
Thrasymachus just really didn't want to backpedal on anything they had put forward. They were committed to stubbornly holding to a principle before they had thought it through. Admirable in respect to being consistent. Perilous in practice. I think he was showing Thrasymachus to be the accidental tyrant that arises when a person both has conviction of belief and power to impose it. He was trying to show how one person or even a few can't set up an equitable society lacking external input. How it ends up being absurdist at best and abhorrent at worst if one tries. It's a point his character's interlocutor doesn't seem to get. But it's directed at the reader.
I never understood it that way, but it seems plausible. If you read the Laws it becomes clear that if the Legislator deems something unfit for his people it is his duty to take appropiate measures to ban it. In order to keep souls pure. Yet, even if verses of Homer should be censored, that doesnt mean Plato is advocating for changing the sacrifices, liturgy or any other religious rite of any sort. Hence citing this part of the Republic as proof for religious reformation is very weak.
Amazing job on this 👍⭐
Are you familiar with the work of Russel Gmirkin? Follows the same track you express in this video.
Thank you for explaining how Greek mythology got on with a thick brush onto writing the new testament because the new testament was written in Greek by the Greeks, Zeus and when did the Roma's get the letter J ?
어떤쉽게 설명안되는걸 설명하기위해 Plato's Cave 를 이용했을까? 나간다고 끝이아니라 다시내려와야되는것까진 이번에 제대로 잡힌것 같은데 다른 아쉬운 부분들 있을지도?
If anything, the fact that there were so many diverse Christianities shows what kind of influence this "teacher from Nazareth" had... everyone from James the Judaizer to the Platonists to the Gnostics were out to "claim him" as their figurehead.
I agree the word religion is almost meaningless, specially in Eastern countries which are often considered "atheist" by western standards yet they believe all kind of stuff.
Are you aware of the teachings of Baha’u’llah? The Baha’i Writings make mention and praise of the Greek philosophers. Baha’i Writings encompass many, many topics and include the idea of “independent investigation of truth” and seeing truth wherever it may be found. Thanks! Appreciate the lectures.
See Pierre Grimes who wrote the classic, Philosophical Midwivery, that provides a Platonic approach to psychotherapy.
Mythological thinking cannot be superseded, because it forms the framework and context for all thinking. - Northrop Frye
Love your lectures. It may be too “religious” as a subject, but I’d love to hear you unfold the history and nature of Christian Saints. What, and who are they, what is the origin of the term “saint”? What qualified one to be a saint in the beginning and how was this developed by the church? What’s the difference between Catholic and Orthodox saints?
It seems Polycarp was the first to be venerated to sainthood, after refusing to recant and being martyred by a local government official. You had to be martyred to be a saint in the early days and your remains were then venerated, as if they had magical properties for healing and later intercession. And there was money to be made by selling or leasing saint’s remains out to different churches. So the papacy took over the management of sainthood in the 8th - 9th century and instituted a system for identifying and declaring saints.
How is it that the Archangel Michael was declared a saint when he was never human and never died and was not martyred? He seems to be the only non-human, un-born, un-martyred saint. None of the other archangels are referred to as saints.
Lots of questions! All interesting.
Pessimistically viewed, there was a great deal of money to be made with Saints. What better way to sell some old bones or artifacts for ridiculous sums and then charge poor people to see or touch them than to claim it was once part or owned by a Saint. Obviously I don't put any credence to the whole process other than to recognize the dishonestly and greed of the whole thing.
plato was a polytheist, he viewed the gods' characteristics and attributes in the same way most Christians view their god today.
the mythos are divine inspirational poems and allegories for us to learn from. where the good will find virtue and the wicked will find wickedness.
the gods themselves are eternal everlasting beings of light incapable of corruption. perfect celestial beings in perfect harmony with the cosmos and nature.
all good and all just. like darkness is the absence of light, evil is the absence of the gods.
i am a little bit confused about the sirach-jesus comparison they seem to be more in agreement than not if you read further
I would join the commune
So Jesus, a poor boy growing up in a Jewish village as the son of a carpenter, acquired a good working knowledge of Stoicism?
According to 20th century philosopher Dr Belinda Carlisle, Heaven is a place on Earth.
So ✡️ and ✝️ as we know them today came from Plato📚?
Isn't the Apology about the myth of Authority and logic of scientific discovery?
Not being a Christian or a Jew I looked at the god of old Testament dispassionately. I wonder what isdi
What is the difference between Yod Heh Vav Heh (the Tetragramaton) and Jupiter.
Perhaps the Gnostics were right in thinking the old Testament god is the evil demiurge.
youre asking the wrong question when you ask "would jesus have known diogenes?", what you should be asking is: "would the writers of the gospel have known diogenes?"
While this may be covered in this video, there does seem to be a clear dichotomy between Platonic notions of the "spirit" and "death" and Hebraic/New Testament notions.
Platonic thought places exceeding value on "death" and the "spirit" departing the body/earth. The body and life in the body (aside from being a vehicle of learning or of completing a task) is to be longed to escape from.
Whereas in the Hebrew Bible death is an enemy and bleak, at best it is a place to at least rest from a difficult and painful life. Good life in the body is celebrated and wished for.
In the New Testament death is outright an enemy with absolutely no benefit. There is no higher state to acheive in death or at least peaceful rest. Life, embodied life on earth is the ultimate prize and goal.
While both Platonist and NT thought believe in immortality, Plato believes it's inherent to all human beings however only in their spirit, whereas the NT believes human beings in their entirety are perishable and immortality will only be given conditionally and with the requirement of a body.
It is interesting that Christian tradition (and much of pop culture on death) has seemingly embraced alot of the Platonic view of death and the "soul", but Biblical scripture does not seem to share the same view.
Interesting.
And now on to Esoterica
Life is very simple. Just follow God's will, and you'll be surprised surprised how God, Almighty operates and helps all those that lives to please The Almighty, God.
Very simple.
Love Your neighbor, as you'll love yourself
( Do Christians And Jews and "OTHER" non-Muslims go to Heaven? )
Quran 2:62
'' Those who believe (in the Quran) and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures) and the Christians and the Sabians->ANYAllah< Is The Protector Of Monasteries, Churches, Synagogues And The Mosques )
Quran 22:40
[They are] those who have been evicted from their homes without right - only because they say, " Our Lord is God " And were it not that God checks the people, some by means of others, there would have been demolished monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which the name of God is much mentioned. And God will surely support those who support Him. Indeed, God is Powerful and Exalted in Might.
Note: Why did Allah protected Churches and Synagogues if they worship false Allah ?
( Why Are There So Many Different Religions In The World ? )
Quran 5 48
''...... If God wanted He could have made all of you a single nation.( ie single religion ) But He willed otherwise in order to test you in what He has given you (ie Scriptures) therefore try to excel one another in good deeds. Ultimately you all shall return to God then He will show you the truth of those matters in which you '' >DISPUTE verb < not noun like other religions
Islam mean "submission" to God
( The above verse saying is that God will not accept a religion from the >MUSLIM< and the Non-Muslims but total "submission" to God )
Question: How Can Muslim And the Non-Muslim "submit" to the God?
Answer: Be kind to other human beings and Do not lie, Do not steal, Do not cheat, Do not hurt others, Do not be prideful and Do the charity work.
Note: If you obeyed all the ABOVE Allah-God's moral laws "YOU" submitted to God.( ie Islam mean "submission" to God )
The only people who will enter Paradise those who '' Submitted to God '' ( ie by good deeds )
God does NOT accept your religion of birth but only ''Your Total'' Submission to Him.
( God Allows Interfaith Marriages And Eat Food From the Christian And Jew And Vice Versa )
Quran 5:5
''This day [all] good foods have been made lawful, and the food of those who were given the Scripture (ie Christian and Jew) is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them. And [lawful in marriage are] chaste women from among the believers (ie Muslim ) and chaste women from among those who were given the Scripture (ie Christian and Jew) before you, when you have given them their due compensation, desiring chastity not unlawful sexual intercourse or taking [secret] lovers. And whoever denies the faith - his work has become worthless and he in the Hereafter will be among the losers.''
Note: > Only < Islam allows interfaith marriages (>14 hundredsSame God< but They are >ALL Corrupt< more or less, some more than others from their original foundational teaching. The older religion are MORE corrupted than newer religion.
Question to Muslim and Christian:
Does God / Allah only answer your pray ?
And God / Allah does not answer non Muslim / non Christian pray?
Did Allah '' Canceled '' all other religions Judaism and Christianity?
Quran 5:48
'' And We have revealed to you [O Muhammad] the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture ( ie New and old Testament ) and as a criterion over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. >>>TO EACH OF YOU WE PRESCRIBED A LAW AND A METHODone nation>differ qualified < for to enter Paradise )
On the day of judgement God will ''NOT'' judge humanity bases on Sunni Muslim sect VS Shia Muslim sect ''NOR'' by Muslim VS non-Muslim >but< Doer of Goods VS Doer of Evils.
'' YOUR " birth in the Muslim's family is NOT a > qualification < for to enter the Paradise.
'' YOUR " religion / sect / foot long beard is NOT a > qualification < for to enter the Paradise.
The > qualification < to enter Paradise is > Faith in God and Good Work
the materialistic explanation on love shows how lacking materialistic explanations are on metaphysical questions.
28:20 Holy Wisdom was created by the creator? A mere creature.
Wisdom seems to say that it is gullibility rather than faith, that asserts that dead people arise. People don't walk on waves. People don't get carried up to the clouds, even with five hundred witnesses. Christianity is an amazing con.
Your comment stinks of reddit. How’s that fedora coming along?
Anti-Homosexual Hell-Fearing Christianity is simply not compatible with platonism or neoplatonism for that matter.
Can someone explain to me how Plato believes in Christ when Christ was born after him?
I don't think the Church kept science alive. I think it oppressed it to make it conform to religious view (thus delayed knowledge)
Historians would disagree with you.
Sounds to e like Sirach IS the Q document...
That doesn't hold water. It's possible that Luke & Matthew would independently decide to use stories where Jesus inverts ideas in Sirach, but it doesn't make sense for Luke & Matthew to have sentences that are word for word the same in that case.
They both would have had to coincidentally changed Sirach in the exact same way. Not to mention stuff like the preaching of John The Baptist (in chapter 3 of both Matthew & Luke) which has word-for-word sections the same in both Gospels and no parallels in Sirach.
Apology is synonymous with the rationalization of literal bible readings when Plato's Apology is about the righteous suicide of criticizing murderous charlatans.
Philosophy in Greek , means
" Friend of wisdom" .
When a philosopher (plato) starts doing religion, because he is bored of doing philosophy, comes someone better in doing religion (Jesus' preachers) and they do a better job.
God is the Savior of all.
1 Timothy 4:10 - The New International Version (NIV)
10 That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.
1 Cor 15:22
for even as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ all shall be made alive
1 John 2:2
New International Version
2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
The word RELIGION comes from the Latin word REGULARE which means to REGULATE or to CONTROL.
So much of Hellenistic teachings are in Christendom or false religion,in Genesis it is said Adam became a soul, not that he received a soul Ez 18: 4 says ,the soul that is sinning shall die Plato influenced the belief in the immortal soul. The word translated soul ,nephish or psyke means breather,The word spirit is not the same as soul,translated from ruah or neuma,force or energy ,to die the energy is gone, resurrection is coming to life again, Most do not know the influence from Plato.
Remove all Greek Philosophy from the Bible, remove all human understanding and reasoning, is God still Triune?
Explicitly Stated? If not, then you're using human reasoning and logic to come up with the Trinity.
Not only that but the idea of an "immortal soul" dissapears and becomes conditional and dependent on having a body.
The idea of "going to heaven" is also removed, and earth becomes the hoped for destination of the saints.
The Good is not good for goodness sake. It is that thing which all beings strive for. By striving for the Good we participate in it and participation with divinity elevates us and makes us divine ourselves. Its not a god but a First Principle.
I'd be willing to bet that you wouldn't talk about "literalists" to their faces the way you talk about them behind their backs, Mr. Hamer.
No, I will. To their faces, I've called literalists in my immediate family "idolaters."
@@HamerToronto your immediate family members hardly count towards the spirit of my comment. My point is you are epistemologically arrogant. Intellectually immature (at least in this one domain) because of a childhood trauma or something of the sort. You are unwilling to steel man “literalists”. Instead you constantly simply assert that they’re a bunch of incoherent dummies. Just because they exist doesn’t mean they define the view. Just like your side has a bunch of incoherent dummies that don’t define yours.
I find more and more that ancient documents are more literal than even literalists believe. Skeptics may congratulate themselves they are smarter than the ancient wisdom but they miss out on the life benefiting treasure to be gained by acknowledging the ancients knew better which is probably why the ancients passed it down. John Hamer you are missing out due probably to your pride. I do not say this as a criticism but as a fellow seeker. If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven
Plato studied in Egypt for thirteen years under the Horite priest Sechnuphis.. Plato was educated by a old priesthood that goes to pre dynastic Egypt.
This is the same priesthood that Esau married into.
Biblically this priesthood comes from Mt Ararat or Arrata.
This is the Armenian Highlands.
Historically these people are called Hurrians.
Biblically they are called Horites.
These are the Canaanites=Hurrians/Horites.
Horites are the Shemsu Hor=Followers of Heru/Horus.
Plato and Atlantis comes from the Edfu building texts. The temple of Heru of Edfu connects a priesthood that includes not just Plato but Akhenaten as well. The Aten is Heru of Edfu and Akhenaten is a Horite.
The Horites are the mighty men of old.
Shemsu Hor
The God of Aleister Crowley and Thelema is Heru of Edfu.
In the doctrine of Aleister Crowley Heru of Edfu is called Hadit. Also Ra Hoor Khuit. In Egypt this is Ra Heru Khuti. This is the Aten/Ra
Horites=Hor/Horus/Heru + ites=followers of
Horites are followers of Heru
Abraham was a Horite.
Job was a Horite
Jesus is a Horite and he took a oath to be a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.
Melchizedek/Jebusites=Hurrians=Horites=Canaanites
I'd argue that Plato was a proto fascist. His politics add an insidious aspect to his philosophical prescriptions.
1st century Israel = 21st century Korea
You have to know that .
Seoul's a lovely city
The separation in fields of study has led to the false belief of Evolution and the imaginary Geological Timeline-Both of which rely on the other forming a circular reasoning of stupidity
How is wealth bad? Would you teach that wealth is bad?
To who? To homeless people?
The demonization of wealth is for me one of the great faults of Christianity
They literally demonized themselves... Christianity.
to me it's its most salient point. wealth is wealth only in contrast to poverty. in our modern world, its associated with exploitation, also called usury (which all 3 major religions banned for centuries). most people who are wealthy don't make their wealth themselves. prior to the rise of capitalism, it was made primarily by slaves. some people say that individualism began with christianity, where you had to answer for your sins yourself. things like capitalism defy individualism by extracting wealth from wage labor, yet it still holds you individually accountable in a court of law. capitalism violates the justice of a true individualist system, where you can make all the wealth you want....under your own power. such systems, though (like maybe libertarian socialism) seek to decentralize state power (or eliminate it altogether) as well as decentralizing wealth via associational ownership. the goal is that labor should be in possession of its own products, and not sell their labor for less than the value of the products on the market. the workers are the owners in more democratic cooperatives.
at least since aristotle, we've known that concentrated wealth is bad. he said "poverty is the parent of revolution and crime". it isn't money itself that is bad. it's the love of money for the sake of money that is bad, because money is a form of power (as is other things, like absentee property that allows you to make money off other people's need for shelter. Proudhon would have called it unearned income, and THAT is what every socialist has been against ever. merely owning something should not make you money, while the rest of us actually have to work for a living).
i'm an ignostic humanist, but i've pretty much narrowed the entire point of sociology, religion, etc down to the question of the individual and how it relates to the other individuals within its society. we aren't self-made beings. we are the products of our upbringing, education, etc...the social context within which we grow massively influences us (religion is just an example of how western and eastern societies differ, why people in the east would follow taoism or shintoism instead of christianity). thus, the individualist must be understood within a social context (god is as much a social construct as the state). the logical expression of this is the anarchist notion of social individualism, where both capitalism and communism BOTH exist in extreme collectivism...communism being egalitarian, capitalism being hierarchical (both of those require collectives, capitalists wanting individual RULE in a private matter, economics, and communists sacrificing the individual with majority rule). social individualism says the both the collective (other individuals) AND the individual matter. the notion of christ saying "mind your own business" (remove the plank from your own eye before pointing out the mote in some else's) is also lost in capitalism, because business isn't a state of action, but a foundation where the owner is dependent on workers to make his wealth (often making him not busy) and the workers dependent on him for subsistence....survival.
wealth disparities create dependence. it creates classes, and the usually means the wealthier is ruling the less wealthy. it depends on the state to uphold its practices via law, creating a privileged class. it also creates a different "test" for people, with the wealthier people never really having to worry about things like "thou shall not steal" the way a pauper might.
whether you believe in a god or not, no human created the diamond mines, and if labor is the source of the right of property, then no human can lay claim to those mines. John Locke's labor theory of property was set after he established the commons (the earth as common property), and it was in the context of his necessity (personal property worked by himself). subsequently, Thomas Jefferson (a deist) reiterated, while claiming that people had a natural right to work the earth itself (being in favor of agrarian democracy).
greed is the "sin" of wealth, and it is responsible for the destruction of both the earth and society.
@@jeromyrutter729 another christian slave 🤦♂️
Play dough and Christianity ...
Oh! Yes, you have my attention 👍
Doesnt teach well, very negative, negative negative. Has nothing to teach. Giggles a lot.
I’ll bet you never giggle.
Are you saying that Plato was a fascist? Bcos Christianity is pure fascism. Isn't Plato's Republic a handbook for fascism as well?
By in large you have vast amount of knowledge. Sadly, I have to wonder about your definition of Christian. Your arguments all seem to have as you apriori that the Bible is a best myth and that the universe is best explained by "science" (i.e. evolution).
I would love to have a couple of hours to question you.