Відео

For your consideration, In John 8:44 Jesus tells the Pharisees that their father is the devil / a diabolos in Greek. It's pretty clear that Marcian had it right. Yahweh is the demiurge. What's wrong with believing in proto-orthodox Christianity. Just a simple question for a intellectual audience.

Nice!!!

Still pagan

Hey everyone, I wanted to drop a quick note to let you know I’ve got a UA-cam channel called We See Only Void Darkness is Light. I’m not here to push for likes, subscriptions, or anything like that-just putting it out there in case you’re interested. My content explores various aspects of philosophy, spirituality, and the mysteries of life, with an emphasis on discussion and exploration rather than preaching or fearmongering. If that sounds like something that might resonate with you, feel free to check it out. If not, no worries-just offering it up for those who might be curious. You never know what you might find unless you take a look. Have a good day. This is the name of the video I last uploaded you might be interested in since your atheist. The Atheist's Shadow and the Divine Light

The giant demonic toad described in Vox in Rama reminds me of Robert E. Howard's "The Black Stone"

@19:37 "this is the Jesuits; the anti-science people according to the atheists." I don't think it's fair to characterise this as an atheist myth. Obviously many atheists have latched into it to support their narratives but I learned this myth when I was a kid in the 90s. I learned it from my father who is and was a devout evangelical Christian. My dad didn't have any atheist friends and didn't read atheist books so I'm guessing this is either just a popular myth or it's a specifically anti-Catholic myth.

I was about to be convinced by a Canadian Israeli journalist who made a video analysing Constantine's triumphal arch which concluded that this Emperor tolerated Christians for political purposes.

Possibly "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" by Julian Jaynes would be of interest with respect to the difference in the classical mentality and the Christian. Carl Sagan created a video, set in a virtual re-creation of the Library of Alexandria, in which he theorized that slavery vitiated the strength of Greece because it made the philosophers reluctant to get their hands dirty in experimentation and led them to the idea that science research had to be with high-toned reference to pure introspection of truth in their ivory tower. Slaves did all the practical work which was beneath the free Greeks. [Edit: extreme examples of this disregard of utility are the binding of feet in China, and Vietnamese aristocratic ladies letting their fingernails grow to foot long length, curling around, to demonstrate that they never stooped to so much as chopping turmeric. ] The slaves were not free to do practical scientific experimentation so almost no one did. Perhaps Archimedes did. Maybe Sagan's video was part of his "Cosmos" TV series. [ Edit: Sagan does not argue about the immorality of slavery, he goes to the end and sees that it ruined Greece. Poetic justice. ] [Edit: A link to Sagan's presentation on the Great Library of Alexandria is vimeo.com/15107421?ref=fb-share&fbclid=IwY2xjawEYD5VleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHT7TrOjf2EX9snwyXBOCD4dXsurMUxka0HQUU7odCLz0axf_cgT7R1_RvA_aem_xC0ehAgbGpt19pagXHBFKg In the third part are found his ideas about slavery and ancient philosophy, mathematics and science. It is not very close to my memory of it as outlined above, sorry, but one may see for oneself in the video. Perhaps my idea that slavery robbed Greece of "hands-on" science came from elsewhere or maybe I have only imagined it. He did say that slavery was not good for Greek culture, and he attributed the failure of the Library to not putting its discoveries to practical use in reducing hard labour, but only using it to conjure magic tricks in support of mysticism, or to impress kings, or for toys. It occurs to me that with slaves there is less need to reduce hard labour. He does say that slavery was terribly immoral and that none of the Library's intellectuals ever challenged it or other social political injustice ] Edit: The Library may not have been destroyed by a mob. Here is a link to a blog by Richard Carrier on the fate of the Library which seems comprehensive compared to what little I had heard before www.richardcarrier.info/archives/29806 . Seems possible it was a Muslim warlord who ordered its destruction. Sagan's presentation of what the library was like and his dramatization of the terrible loss still seems imressive to me, though some of his conclusions about its lack of outreach and the bad effect of slavery may need re consideration in view of the new info in the blog. There are a lot of versions of both the library's fall and, on YT, several contrasting versions of the martyrdom of Hypatia so that Sagan may have been presenting a belief that was then considered correct. Archaeology etc have made great advances in the decades since Cosmos was produced. Maybe humanism is partly a transformation of consciousness as well as an ethical code. Maybe some Greeks who visited the Mysteries at Eleusis became more humanist than the generality. [Edit: I don't know whether Aristotle gave that a go. ] Aristotle is said to have believed that slaves were by their own nature inferior, which seems wrong since some slaves were captives who had been high level. Aristotle could have been captured and enslaved. He seems to have had a convenient blind spot which allowed him to ignore the suffering of the slaves. [ Edit: but here is a link (thanks to Quora for this www.quora.com/How-different-was-Greek-slavery-from-Roman-slavery?q=greek%20roman%20slavery) to what Aristotle wrote himself: sourcebooks.fordham.edu/ancient/greek-slaves.asp I don't understand him. He says barbarians are naturally too benighted for anything else. But he does not say anything that I find clear about Hellenes who may have been forced into slavery. ] He also promoted the common sense theory of geocentricity. I wonder whether Aristarchus, who had the right cosmology due to his practical observations, and from whose work Copernicus got his start, had also a better take on slavery than Aristotle. [Edit: But Aristotle and Ptolemy's geocentric model became dominant. Few heard of Aristarchus'. Also, Aristotle may be an example of the Swiftian Laputan separation from reality that Sagan referred to. Aristotle's physics had heavier objects falling faster which is wrong because they have more inertia to resist the stronger force which gravity exerts on them. Galileo, thousands of years later, despite being embedded in a science justified by authority and deeply Aristotelian, finally did an experiment. There is no record of Aristotle ever having done something so barbarous. As well as the obvious common sense perception that the Sun goes around us, Aristotle's physics said that things fall towards the centre of the universe. If the Earth were not the centre - mayhem would ensue. ref: The Galileo Project at Rice University. ] Thanks to Tim O'Neill for pointing out things about Darwin and the Tasmanians I didn't know. With help from Wikipedia I found www.utas.edu.au/library/exhibitions/darwin/hobart.html.

Hello, is there a way I can send you a video with an interpretation of Mark 13 to get your opinion on it? It's not an atheistic interpretation, but I would really like to hear your thoughts.

I will have to read the book to see if the arguments are fleshed out any better, but after listening to the first half of this interview I already am concerned about a number of dubious claims about the supposed continuity and persistence of Christian practices/ideology and the supposed radical "otherness" of Greek/Roman culture. I think a lot of this has to do with a lack of class analysis. "The primal Christian revolution" as he calls it, is as simplistic an idea as "the" Enlightenment. And trying to trace a continuous line from that quasi-event through to his own "suspicion of superstition" is just bizarre. Where is this "primal Christian revolution" located historically? The Jesus movement was not itself "Christian", rather it was one variety of Messianic Judaism. In what way is "Christianity" (understood as some single essential ideological kernel or impetus or something) the precursor to "suspicion of superstition"? Was it Paul disparaging pagan idolatry? Or was it ancient priests advocating for monolatry (the follow up would be which priests)? Something else? Are you actually claiming that in some significant way someone somewhere in the long proto-Judeo-proto-Christian-post-Pauline-Christian lineage (which was anything but a single continuous line) can actually be credited with the invention of "suspicion of superstition"? This sounds actually preposterous. Then you claim it is common to presume that the Greeks and Romans were "just like us". But no one is saying that and who is this "us" anyway? It is just a straw man claim to make the counter that they were "totally different" from "us" (again, who is "us"?) sound more plausible. It should be obvious that they were both very different but also not unintelligibly so. To take the example of torturing slaves to extract testimony. The logic for this makes perfect sense in the context in which they lived and the practice was also contested and considered inhumane by contemporaries as well. Again we live in a world where "we" are putting circular saw blades attached to buoys in the Rio Grande to severely injure and kill migrant families (both the migrants and the Gov of Texas ostensibly identifying as "Christian"). And if you go to dinner in Paris you set the baguette on the table instead of your plate and if the bread is facing "down" it is bad luck.

Just going through these videos now. This was about as cool a taped conversation I have seen about a UA-cam personality whom I have watched before traveling toward truth and attempting to be as disinterested as possible along the way and go where the evidence suggests. Lesson learned. Be open enough to see where the trail leads even if not where you wanted it to go.

Wish this kind of information and conversations with academically qualified individuals was so much more readily available decades ago. Only grateful now for better late than never considerations. Subscribed.

👏🏾👏🏾💙 great episode.

Since atheists dont have spirit, what animates you?

3:30 what is he saying--there is a group of manuscripts called the apocrypha of Jeremiah which is an apocalyptic text?

The big date in The Roman Calendar close to Christmas was 1 January when the consular year began. That's why we have two holidays so close together nowadays.

Thank you both.

Wow colorado wow rebecca wow

The audio here is 😘👌

Kipp Davis is the bomb. Like, all the bombs: nuclear, hydrogen, atomic. And the lesser bombs like car and grenades. But mostly truth and love bombs.🥰🥰🥰

Kipp is my favorite. Very smart.

Good discussion. One issue is the assumed explanation for apocalyptism is being a response to the Problem of Evil. That's one way to explain it but wasn't apocalyptic literature already popular in Babylon?

Great conversation. Jewish apocalypticism of the time period makes sense of Jesus and the rise of Christianity. As the religious millieu of the ANE and the Canaanite pantheon, the Baaal cycle and the enuma elish + epic of gilgamesh make sense of the rise of YHWH worship and Hebrew Bible mythmaking, and as the search for a better theodicy than blessings for good behavior/curses for bad behavior led to the rise of apocalypticism during the Babylonian captivity as Israelites were exposed to Babylonian and Persian religions and cosmologies while they searched for an answer to why God's Chosen People kept getting conquered, made captive and/or occupied. . .

*Jesus is clearly speaking to the disciples and gives a timeframe for when the Son of Man would come.* "Jesus sent these twelve out, charging them, saying: Do not go into the way of the nations, and do not go into a Samaritan city. *But rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.* And going on, proclaim, saying, The kingdom of Heaven has drawn near" (Matthew 10:5-7) “Truly I say to you, ***you will not finish going through the cities of Israel until the Son of Man comes”*** (Matthew 10:23); For the *Son of man* shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; ***and then he shall reward every man according to his works.*** Truly I tell you, ***some who are standing here will not taste death*** before they see the *Son of Man* coming in his kingdom (Matthew 16:27-28) Truly I tell you, ***some who are standing here*** will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God (Luke 9:27) Truly I tell you, ***this generation will certainly not pass away*** until all these things have happened (Mark 13:30) *He says that the coming of the Son of Man will be accompanied by:* The sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken. Then will appear the sign of the *Son of Man* in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the *Son of Man* coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. Truly I tell you, ***this generation will certainly not pass away*** until all these things have happened (Matthew 24:29-34) There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea. People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken. At that time they will see the *Son of Man* coming in a cloud with power and great glory. When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near. When you see these things happening, you know that the kingdom of God is near. Truly I tell you, ***this generation will certainly not pass away*** until all these things have happened (Luke 21:25-32) He also falsely prophesied to the high priest, the Sanhedrin and Nathaniel. *Jesus falsely prophesied to the high priest and the Sanhedrin* Jesus also falsely prophesied to the high priest and the Sanhedrin (assemblies of either twenty-three or seventy-one rabbis appointed to sit as a tribunal) You will see the *Son of Man* sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and ***coming on the clouds of heaven*** (Matthew 26:64) (Mark 14:62) Except the high priest and the Sanhedrin never saw Jesus sitting at the right hand side of God, or coming on the clouds of heaven, or any such thing. *Jesus falsely prophesied to Nathaniel* Jesus also falsely prophesied to Nathaniel when he declared, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel.” Jesus said, You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You will see greater things than that. He then added, ***“Very truly I tell you, you will see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man*** (John 1:50-51) *Nathaniel never saw any such thing. Neither did anyone else.* ------------------------------------------------------------------ Also look up: Watch *Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet, Historical Lecture - Bart D. Ehrman* *"End Times - Evil Bible .com"* *"The End of All Things is At Hand - The Church Of Truth"* *"ex-apologist: On One of the Main Reasons Why I Think Christianity is False (Reposted)"* *"Jesus the Apocalyptic Prophet - History for Atheists"* (Tim O'Neill is a former Christian and is familiar with most of the Biblical scholarship. He's been studying the scholarship and history for decades) *"Jesus’ Failed Prophecy About His Return - Black Nonbelievers, Inc."* Also, how cognitive dissonance possibly explains early Christianity. *“The Rationalization Hypothesis: Is a Vision of Jesus Necessary for the Rise of the Resurrection Belief?”* - by Kris Komarnitsky | Κέλσος - Wordpress *"February 2015 - Escaping Christian Fundamentalism"* - Isaiah 53 *"Jesus and the Messianic Prophecies - Did the Old Testament Point to Jesus? - The Bart Ehrman Blog"* *"Did Jesus Fulfill Prophecy? | Westar Institute"* *"Jesus Was Not the Only “Prophet” to Predict the Destruction of the Temple - Escaping Christian Fundamentalism"* *"What Do the Apostles’ Deaths Prove? Guest Post by Kyle Smith. - The Bart Ehrman Blog"*

Kipp at his best! Thanks mate, brilliant interview

I had so much fun. Thank you, Tim, for the kind invitation, and the very stimulating conversation.

It's always really cool when two different content creators I follow team up. Great stuff

What a haven of sanity. Thank you both very much. I hope you get on Dr. Kipp Davis not just once more but on a regular basis.

This was very enjoyable, informative, and stimulating. It's great to hear a real conversation, with the two participants playing off of each other and making new connections.

Hopefully this will be the first time Purple Pill Philosophy get to know about this magnificent man, thanks for having him here Tim! (Glad to know you still haven't left)

Oh, wow. I'd forgotten all about this channel. Love Kipp; he's a great 'get' for an interview, on this topic particularly. Really interested to see this! Thank you.

Paulogia sent me

So much hate against atheists ...sounds a bit ironic

Sorry but how does 'bulge of the earth ' translates to a globe? (11:11) e.g. cut a soccerball in halve and BOTH parts form a bulge. And did the 'average joe ' also accept the earth being a globe? And what did their priests tell them? Any evidence of this? Wouldn't telling 99% from the western population that the earth was flat (or at least not a sphere) continue the myth? For most of them, what the scientists believed, was not important or even known! Btw the church still believed that Earth was the center of the universe..or is that also a myth? Btw even if everything is true the christianity still participated in things like the Spanish inquisition and 'fun' like witch hunts and killing of 'heaithens' To mention just a few So sure, this is one thing..but it doesn't make centuries of christianity any more humane

Christian mob 😀😀😀😀😀😀😀 fake Christians kill, real Christians don't. Why not just say, the murderers or the mob. Or the mob acting has Christians. Saints lived, they are Christians, anything else is just, a human being.

She has nothing to do with the library of Alexandria that came later after it was the caesareum.

I am here because of Aron Ra being wrong. I do agree with you... that's why I am your new subscriber. I shouldn't listen to one atheist channel but many view points.

Elevated as a rationalist and feminist martyr, Hypatia has received a glossy shield of apologistic protection. She is a bipedal sacred cow. In the same way, everyone ignores Galileo's falseness and backstabbing and receives the interpretation of the inquiry into his science from biased sources. As well, the violence of the Alexandrian monks was not necessarily approved by the best elements in the local church. (See The Sayings of the Desert Fathers, editor Benedicta Ward.)

Bro, you've gotta fix the hissing audio!

Do you think 1 Thessalonians 2 13 to 16 is authentic I think it is but what do you think

Lovely stuff, Ken. Scholarly, meticulous, skeptical, rigorous. Yet this place draws us with some unexpected joy. Jung reminded us, after all, of the reality of ever-present Myth.

This is absurd, the people didn't understand difference is the reason they were violent against each other. It was the same reason that persecuted Christians in early days. People hated what they didn't understand.

I was disappointed to hear Hutchings repeat the tired trope that Athiests want to reject Christianity because they want to sin. 58:05. It cast a shadow over what was otherwise a very good historical discussion.

Good on you mate!

Rationality rules is God awful m.ua-cam.com/video/zpS03Unvxq0/v-deo.html

I am here fresh off your collab with @Paulogia and am very interested into delving into history. Like another commenter stated: I am surprised that the UA-cam algorithm has not recommended your channel sooner (reworded), as I watch a variety of Atheist channels, along with channels that delve into the histories of religion, i.e. @ReligionForBreakfast.

Came here from Paulogia. Subscribed!

Can i suggest to have a look at what Alessandro Barbero says on the topic? He's a reputable Italian historian, he probably wouldn't agree with you. As an Italian, the church did condemn Galileo for heresy and told him to retract what he was saying because it was going against what was the church's stance. Maybe the translations you are reading are not accurate, I don't know.

Tim O'Neill, Greetings from Mexico. I'm a Some College (around 6 years of uni but no concetration....) Generalist, no-degree, half Irish, half Puerto Rican, funny guy who just discovered you existed from your recent Paulogia effort. I too dislike all the misinformation scattered about. As a qualifying calling card--- you mentioned Gallileo. I think he got in trouble bacause in his dialogues he made an ass out of the current Pope. I look forward to more of your 'sarcastic' corrections. Jim Mexico Retired, I'm 71 Atheist since I read the bible at 12.

Here from Paulogia, I look forward to exploring your channel!