Thank you so very much for the countless hours of time and effort that you dedicate to making this huge repository of religious history available to the masses here on RUclips. No mere words can adequately thank you for the broad impact they have and the assistance they provide to laypeople in understanding the history and underpinnings of the Christian Church. ✝️☦️
Mr Reeves...Thank you for excellent lectures. I am researching history and I America from Israel as a student in New York City. Could you do a lecture on Luther's writings with respect to Jews. Many nice Christians are unaware of what Luther said about us and how it affected the minds of so many in Europe. I respect your balanced view point on so many subjects. Thank You.
Dr Reeves thank you so much for these series. I've been binge watching them and I really love them. Correct me if this characterization is wrong but certain parishes and orders in the Catholic Church, at least in America, sell Mass cards which represent a Mass or prayers being said for the deceased which are intended to reduce their time in Purgatory. Are these not modern day de facto indulgences?
Yes depending on the cases you mean and the intention. Indulgences in general have not ended, though they can no longer be 'purchased' through alms. But they are still part of the system.
Ryan Reeves Interesting. I thought that the whole concept of indulgences was that they represented forgiveness of sins BEFORE they were committed. I disagree with the selling of "mass cards", but are those still "indulgences", since they represent PAST sin?
Was Luther's Bible the template for the King James version? I read he eliminated the Deuterocanonical Books, and wanted to eliminate James but was talked out of it.
+Johnnyc drums // No connection at all, I'm afraid. Luther does remove the Deuterocanonical Books from the OT, but the King James (or Authorized) Version actually has them in. If you ever look at an early edition they are in there. The KJV was produced through a line of English translations that include Tyndale, the Matthew Bible, and others. None (or very few) of the translators during the Tudor and Stuart periods would have read German or used Luther's Bible. Luther did have questions about James but did not suggest throwing it out. He did write a commentary on the book, after all. The comments he made about James (and other smaller epistles in the NT) must be read carefully. Luther's question is whether these books were included in the NT the same way the Deuterocanonical books were included after the OT. He says he is not sure James is original but in the end he really isn't sure. The strange thing is he says he thinks not but then he airs on the side of caution and writes a full commentary anyway. He also quotes from James extensively in his theological writings. The quote most people remember is that Luther said James is "an epistle of straw". But again context is key. He is saying it is straw the same way Paul says you can do good works to add to the work of Christ--but these works are straw. Luther (like all Protestants) was very concerned about adding works to the Christian life as an obligation for salvation. So he speaks negatively of James, but mostly for how people were using James in the Catholic world or as he had been taught James as a monk. So he thinks it's an 'epistle of straw' in the sense that he believes people trying to use James to add works to salvation will find these works useless. Great question. :)
Ryan Reeves ; A better answer than my question, however. The "epistle of straw" quote I could not remember, and didn't know about the other information. Thanks for responding so quickly. I can't "like" your comments at this time because You Tube is currently degraded in the comments section. They usually fix it within a short period of time.
My understanding of confession is that only mortal sin is necessary to confess to a priest and that direct confession to God is appropriate for venial sin.
+NoName // Yes that is true now. It was not true as of the time of Luther. At the popular level, and especially in the monastery, there was the desire to confess everything, every time.
This lecture on Luther is absolutely wonderful, as it separates fact from fiction and places the pieces correctly upon the board for the observer to see how this great ecclesiastical chess game was played out. Since Luther is historically one of the most important figures since Christ, an objective understanding of both him and his world is essential for anyone wishing to avoid the shit pile of fantasy and legend. Superb.
At the Diet in Worms, wasn't one of the key issues the fact that many German nobles & knights already had taken lands & property away from the Church & the monasteries, that they would have had to relinquish if Luther recanted? And that those knights, who had brought Luther to Worms, told Luther they'd kill him if he recanted?
+Wilson Dizard // Afraid there's no such evidence like this anywhere in the records. Luther went willingly at least, and besides a knight, etc. would be hanged by his toes if he interfered with the Emperor's imperial verdict.
Great videos! So it sounds like If the Church had just found some way to appease Luther they could've potentially saved themselves 500 years of division? Instead they excommunicate the guy and give him an audience with some of the most powerful people in Europe?! Why was the Church so threatened by Luther if he wasn't all that threatening to begin with (I mean I get that they wanted to make an example of him, but to whom was he to be an example?) Was Luther expressing a growing sentiment among catholics?
You will find your answers in the video. Many opposed the indulgences, even Frederic the Wise. Many were also opposed to a very wealthy church that owned a lot of land. Many nobles wanted to get more influence by competing with the church on matters of state, jurisdiction etc. So, the church had many enemies and opponents already. Something was brewing for a long time.
Luther didn’t believe in a global fall of the Church, but rather he believed only the Western church had degenerated. Many of the earliest reformers and proto-reformers made reunion with the East a primary goal and not creating their own new theological systems.
Yeah, sometimes quick is good sometimes it skims only the surface. Thankfully I have about 50 more on Reformation elsewhere that goes very slowly through all the details. :)
Ryan Reeves understandable, I think I'm just use to a longer format.i honestly blame dan carlin.I can see the upside of your format though, I'm assuming it allows you to get videos out quicker. Thanks for the heads though up I will listen to them all.
It was people like Jan Hus and the Hussites, Luther and the protestants that served the cause and eventually lead to the reality that I've been brought up as an atheist in a 80% catholic Slovakia. The catholic church of that era was a dictatorship and a tool of scrupulous raw power hungry "monsters". I find it difficult to understand the mindset of a religious person (unlike a spiritual person which I can understand and these two deserve the right to be distinguished and be looked upon as two very different states of mind!). Especially with knowing what we know now about the history plus after the enlightenment and with all the progress we've had in the 20th century and needless to mention the milestones we've crossed so far in the new millennium. I'm glad that the age of the catholic tyranny was resisted and essentially defeated same as feudalism was. Never the less I am finding it shocking that there are still wast numbers of people who cling to religion with such a devotion...but like Voltair never said and I quote " I disapprove with what you have to say..but I defend to the death your right to say it". Where "say" is interchangeable with "think" or "believe" for my purposes here. ;) But it wasn't an easy journey. My mother's family almost casted her out just because she wasn't following their catholic faith, and even to this day they look at her with descent just because of their faith...needless to say she does look at them the same way..because of their faith :D Thankfully I can look at it and have a laugh about it..and this is mostly because the days of catholic dictatorship were challenged by people like Hus or Luther,the protestantism was born and enlightenment managed to rise from the ashes of the thought decay of the ancient greek civilisation..well, here we are now entertain us. Thanks for the video(s)..I just became a fan ;)
Religious people are spiritual people, bad distinction. You just don't like organized spirituality. It's good that you recognize that without Christianity you would be a waste. And I say Christianity and not just Protestantism. Whether Orthodox, Catholic or Protestant we Christians have ups and downs. Some are better at certain things. What I want you to realize is that we dominated the world and it wasn't a coincidence. Until this day Christianity is the biggest most influencal and most beneficial religion in the world. So what I would like you to do is to stop and think for a second. Could it be that Christianity is true? And if so what are the consequences going to be? Rest assured we have denominations for a reason. You might identify with the Protestant point of view like me. Look up InspiringPhilosophy, Trey Smith and William Lane Craig all on RUclips. You won't regret it. By the way, I am a former Occultist.
This would imply only that the Western church had degenerated to dictatorship. . Jan Hus, Luther and Wycliffe held Orthodoxy in high regard. Proto-reformers made reunion with the East a primary goal, but unfortunately later ones like Calvin redirected the movement it into creating their own new theological systems.
ORCA ViP - Video Production One thing I will say is that the Enlightenment mostly affected politics, social essence/ethos, amd how they interact with each other. The technological developments, scientific developments, and moral developments came from religious or theistic people.
The reformation did not belong to Luther. He was an excommunicated Catholic, did not agree with peasants and churches reforming their services and there were several church people burned at the stake or otherwise eliminated long before Luther. He had the benefit of the printing press. These posted stories can be so misleading and full of misinformation.
The problem is, Luther's reformation was, in fact, only half a reformation. It should have continued past him but it did not. As a result, much of the corrupt Catholic practises carried over into the Protestant Church. The reformation is hailed as the best thing since sliced bread but at best it represents just half a loaf. If you want to see what I mean, just take a long hard look at the Church of England. It is a faux church in almost every respect. A good friend said to me once, "A scholar is someone who thinks he knows all that is important but does not. An atheist is someone who believes himself important and doesn't think. It is amazing how often the two are one and the same."
Maxwell Garrison My "ideal" conception of the Church is of no consequence and would be as useless to anyone as yours. All that matters concerning the Church is what Christ said and ordered as laid out in His Word. The Church is in a mess because men insist on trying to improve on that which God has laid down. Sin makes them do this. They insert themselves between God and man and pretend to have the authority of God to do so. However, when you question their right to behave in this manner and ask them why they fail to live up to the standards set down by God for the office they have taken for themselves, they become angry and throw you out of their fake Church. In other words, they become Pharisees and since they rely upon themselves rather than the Spirit of God to lead the Church -- which is the model set forth by Christ -- their church is powerless and soaked in worldliness. Slowly, church tradition begins to take precedence over obedience to the Word of Christ. The memory of the true Church fades with time and the people come to accept the new model. Truly, all end up in a ditch and once there, the devil has a field day because it is the power of the Spirit of God that keeps the devil at bay, not the faux power of self willed men pretending to be holy.
NoName No. The beauty of it is that neither you, or I, or anyone else has a need to figure anything out. Jesus has done that for us. We just have to stop rebelling and accept it. For us, that is the hard part. In fact, it is not possible for us to do it alone. Yet, it can be done.
Thank you so very much for the countless hours of time and effort that you dedicate to making this huge repository of religious history available to the masses here on RUclips. No mere words can adequately thank you for the broad impact they have and the assistance they provide to laypeople in understanding the history and underpinnings of the Christian Church. ✝️☦️
I just can't stop watching your videos!
Great work!
Everybody should understand these great facts so we can be educated on our spiritual heritage.
I love history, your work is greatly appreciated
Mr Reeves...Thank you for excellent lectures. I am researching history and I America from Israel as a student in New York City.
Could you do a lecture on Luther's writings with respect to Jews.
Many nice Christians are unaware of what Luther said about us and how it affected the minds of so many in Europe.
I respect your balanced view point on so many subjects. Thank You.
These videos are thoroughly helpful and much appreciated
Dr Reeves thank you so much for these series. I've been binge watching them and I really love them.
Correct me if this characterization is wrong but certain parishes and orders in the Catholic Church, at least in America, sell Mass cards which represent a Mass or prayers being said for the deceased which are intended to reduce their time in Purgatory. Are these not modern day de facto indulgences?
Yes depending on the cases you mean and the intention. Indulgences in general have not ended, though they can no longer be 'purchased' through alms. But they are still part of the system.
Yep indulgences still exist. Just look at Televangelism as another example. "Healing" people through donations?...:(
Ryan Reeves Interesting. I thought that the whole concept of indulgences was that they represented forgiveness of sins BEFORE they were committed.
I disagree with the selling of "mass cards", but are those still "indulgences", since they represent PAST sin?
Was Luther's Bible the template for the King James version? I read he eliminated the Deuterocanonical Books, and wanted to eliminate James but was talked out of it.
+Johnnyc drums // No connection at all, I'm afraid. Luther does remove the Deuterocanonical Books from the OT, but the King James (or Authorized) Version actually has them in. If you ever look at an early edition they are in there. The KJV was produced through a line of English translations that include Tyndale, the Matthew Bible, and others. None (or very few) of the translators during the Tudor and Stuart periods would have read German or used Luther's Bible.
Luther did have questions about James but did not suggest throwing it out. He did write a commentary on the book, after all. The comments he made about James (and other smaller epistles in the NT) must be read carefully. Luther's question is whether these books were included in the NT the same way the Deuterocanonical books were included after the OT. He says he is not sure James is original but in the end he really isn't sure. The strange thing is he says he thinks not but then he airs on the side of caution and writes a full commentary anyway. He also quotes from James extensively in his theological writings.
The quote most people remember is that Luther said James is "an epistle of straw". But again context is key. He is saying it is straw the same way Paul says you can do good works to add to the work of Christ--but these works are straw. Luther (like all Protestants) was very concerned about adding works to the Christian life as an obligation for salvation. So he speaks negatively of James, but mostly for how people were using James in the Catholic world or as he had been taught James as a monk. So he thinks it's an 'epistle of straw' in the sense that he believes people trying to use James to add works to salvation will find these works useless.
Great question. :)
Ryan Reeves ; A better answer than my question, however. The "epistle of straw" quote I could not remember, and didn't know about the other information. Thanks for responding so quickly. I can't "like" your comments at this time because You Tube is currently degraded in the comments section. They usually fix it within a short period of time.
Wonderful commentary
Have you done any videos on Erasmus?
My understanding of confession is that only mortal sin is necessary to confess to a priest and that direct confession to God is appropriate for venial sin.
+NoName // Yes that is true now. It was not true as of the time of Luther. At the popular level, and especially in the monastery, there was the desire to confess everything, every time.
+Ryan Reeves I was unaware of that. Thanks for the response.
This lecture on Luther is absolutely wonderful, as it separates fact from fiction and places the pieces correctly upon the board for the observer to see how this great ecclesiastical chess game was played out. Since Luther is historically one of the most important figures since Christ, an objective understanding of both him and his world is essential for anyone wishing to avoid the shit pile of fantasy and legend. Superb.
Ryan Reeves are you Catholic or Protestant?
Ceasar Nero His chuckles during this lecture indicate that he is a devout Catholic
Very interesting.Thank you.
Awesome, thank you!!!
At the Diet in Worms, wasn't one of the key issues the fact that many German nobles & knights already had taken lands & property away from the Church & the monasteries, that they would have had to relinquish if Luther recanted? And that those knights, who had brought Luther to Worms, told Luther they'd kill him if he recanted?
+Wilson Dizard // Afraid there's no such evidence like this anywhere in the records. Luther went willingly at least, and besides a knight, etc. would be hanged by his toes if he interfered with the Emperor's imperial verdict.
Great videos! So it sounds like If the Church had just found some way to appease Luther they could've potentially saved themselves 500 years of division? Instead they excommunicate the guy and give him an audience with some of the most powerful people in Europe?!
Why was the Church so threatened by Luther if he wasn't all that threatening to begin with (I mean I get that they wanted to make an example of him, but to whom was he to be an example?) Was Luther expressing a growing sentiment among catholics?
You will find your answers in the video. Many opposed the indulgences, even Frederic the Wise. Many were also opposed to a very wealthy church that owned a lot of land. Many nobles wanted to get more influence by competing with the church on matters of state, jurisdiction etc. So, the church had many enemies and opponents already. Something was brewing for a long time.
Luther didn’t believe in a global fall of the Church, but rather he believed only the Western church had degenerated. Many of the earliest reformers and proto-reformers made reunion with the East a primary goal and not creating their own new theological systems.
"" When Legend becomes fact! , Print the Legend".... Scott Eyman.....
I'm a fan of your work but I'm starting to realize you barley scratch the surface on these issues.
Yeah, sometimes quick is good sometimes it skims only the surface. Thankfully I have about 50 more on Reformation elsewhere that goes very slowly through all the details. :)
Ryan Reeves understandable, I think I'm just use to a longer format.i honestly blame dan carlin.I can see the upside of your format though, I'm assuming it allows you to get videos out quicker. Thanks for the heads though up I will listen to them all.
It was people like Jan Hus and the Hussites, Luther and the protestants that served the cause and eventually lead to the reality that I've been brought up as an atheist in a 80% catholic Slovakia. The catholic church of that era was a dictatorship and a tool of scrupulous raw power hungry "monsters". I find it difficult to understand the mindset of a religious person (unlike a spiritual person which I can understand and these two deserve the right to be distinguished and be looked upon as two very different states of mind!). Especially with knowing what we know now about the history plus after the enlightenment and with all the progress we've had in the 20th century and needless to mention the milestones we've crossed so far in the new millennium. I'm glad that the age of the catholic tyranny was resisted and essentially defeated same as feudalism was. Never the less I am finding it shocking that there are still wast numbers of people who cling to religion with such a devotion...but like Voltair never said and I quote " I disapprove with what you have to say..but I defend to the death your right to say it". Where "say" is interchangeable with "think" or "believe" for my purposes here. ;) But it wasn't an easy journey. My mother's family almost casted her out just because she wasn't following their catholic faith, and even to this day they look at her with descent just because of their faith...needless to say she does look at them the same way..because of their faith :D Thankfully I can look at it and have a laugh about it..and this is mostly because the days of catholic dictatorship were challenged by people like Hus or Luther,the protestantism was born and enlightenment managed to rise from the ashes of the thought decay of the ancient greek civilisation..well, here we are now entertain us. Thanks for the video(s)..I just became a fan ;)
Religious people are spiritual people, bad distinction. You just don't like organized spirituality.
It's good that you recognize that without Christianity you would be a waste. And I say Christianity and not just Protestantism. Whether Orthodox, Catholic or Protestant we Christians have ups and downs. Some are better at certain things. What I want you to realize is that we dominated the world and it wasn't a coincidence. Until this day Christianity is the biggest most influencal and most beneficial religion in the world. So what I would like you to do is to stop and think for a second. Could it be that Christianity is true? And if so what are the consequences going to be?
Rest assured we have denominations for a reason. You might identify with the Protestant point of view like me. Look up InspiringPhilosophy, Trey Smith and William Lane Craig all on RUclips. You won't regret it. By the way, I am a former Occultist.
This would imply only that the Western church had degenerated to dictatorship. . Jan Hus, Luther and Wycliffe held Orthodoxy in high regard. Proto-reformers made reunion with the East a primary goal, but unfortunately later ones like Calvin redirected the movement it into creating their own new theological systems.
ORCA ViP - Video Production One thing I will say is that the Enlightenment mostly affected politics, social essence/ethos, amd how they interact with each other. The technological developments, scientific developments, and moral developments came from religious or theistic people.
The reformation did not belong to Luther. He was an excommunicated Catholic, did not agree with peasants and churches reforming their services and there were several church people burned at the stake or otherwise eliminated long before Luther. He had the benefit of the printing press. These posted stories can be so misleading and full of misinformation.
Do a video on the history of the King James Bible. It would be a great help to refute KJV Onlyism.
That one is coming up very soon!
Ryan Reeves Awesome! Thank you.
Religious folks.
The problem is, Luther's reformation was, in fact, only half a reformation. It should have continued past him but it did not. As a result, much of the corrupt Catholic practises carried over into the Protestant Church. The reformation is hailed as the best thing since sliced bread but at best it represents just half a loaf. If you want to see what I mean, just take a long hard look at the Church of England. It is a faux church in almost every respect.
A good friend said to me once, "A scholar is someone who thinks he knows all that is important but does not. An atheist is someone who believes himself important and doesn't think. It is amazing how often the two are one and the same."
What then is your concept of an ideal Church, or what you believe ecclesiologically and doctrinally to be the ideal Church!
I mean ?
Maxwell Garrison
My "ideal" conception of the Church is of no consequence and would be as useless to anyone as yours. All that matters concerning the Church is what Christ said and ordered as laid out in His Word.
The Church is in a mess because men insist on trying to improve on that which God has laid down. Sin makes them do this. They insert themselves between God and man and pretend to have the authority of God to do so. However, when you question their right to behave in this manner and ask them why they fail to live up to the standards set down by God for the office they have taken for themselves, they become angry and throw you out of their fake Church.
In other words, they become Pharisees and since they rely upon themselves rather than the Spirit of God to lead the Church -- which is the model set forth by Christ -- their church is powerless and soaked in worldliness.
Slowly, church tradition begins to take precedence over obedience to the Word of Christ. The memory of the true Church fades with time and the people come to accept the new model.
Truly, all end up in a ditch and once there, the devil has a field day because it is the power of the Spirit of God that keeps the devil at bay, not the faux power of self willed men pretending to be holy.
+InTheNameOfJustice Looks like you've got it all figured out then.
NoName
No. The beauty of it is that neither you, or I, or anyone else has a need to figure anything out. Jesus has done that for us. We just have to stop rebelling and accept it. For us, that is the hard part. In fact, it is not possible for us to do it alone. Yet, it can be done.