![Creedence Questions](/img/default-banner.jpg)
- 43
- 21 447
Creedence Questions
United States
Приєднався 26 жов 2022
Welcome to my corner of the internet, where I don't have much to teach you, but I do have much to discuss with you. Join the conversation by subscribing and commenting as we dive into Theology and Biblical Philosophy.
The Bible and Divine Revelation | Elden Apologist
Theology student discusses the theology of the Bible/Scripture while playing Elden Ring: Shadow of the Erdtree
www.youtube.com/@creedencequestions?sub_confirmation=1
Consider subscribing for more!
The Elden Apologist series entails talking about philosophy, apologetics, theology, and religion while playing FromSoftware games such as Elden Ring
0:00 Intro
0:48 The Bible
4:22 Inspiration
7:00 Importance
9:18 Divine Revelations
13:04 Outro
www.youtube.com/@creedencequestions?sub_confirmation=1
Consider subscribing for more!
The Elden Apologist series entails talking about philosophy, apologetics, theology, and religion while playing FromSoftware games such as Elden Ring
0:00 Intro
0:48 The Bible
4:22 Inspiration
7:00 Importance
9:18 Divine Revelations
13:04 Outro
Переглядів: 24
Відео
Theology Proper: The Study of God Himself | Elden Apologist
Переглядів 4919 годин тому
Theology student discusses the theology of God while playing Elden Ring: Shadow of the Erdtree www.youtube.com/@creedencequestions?sub_confirmation=1 Consider subscribing for more! Elden Apologist series entails talking about philosophy, apologetics, theology, and religion while playing FromSoftware games such as Elden Ring 0:00 Intro 0:44 The Bible 2:07 Creator God 5:11 Distinct Nature 9:55 Se...
Narrative Themes of Duality in Elden Ring: An Analysis
Переглядів 93121 день тому
#eldenring #lore #faith An analysis and discussion of religious, mythological, and otherwise narrative themes of Duality, twos, pairs, twins and more in the story of Elden Ring and Shadow of the Erdtree. www.youtube.com/@creedencequestions?sub_confirmation=1 Please sub to follow along for more if you enjoyed! 0:00 Intro 1:02 Light and Dark 3:00 Chaos and Order 4:43 Masculine and Feminine 6:58 T...
Discussing the Existence of God while playing Elden Ring | Elden Apologist
Переглядів 340Місяць тому
New Series potentially: Talking about philosophy, theology, and religion while playing FromSoftware games such as Elden Ring (Shadow of the Erdtree) Did you enjoy this format? Potential to change in the future. www.youtube.com/@creedencequestions?sub_confirmation=1
Theology Student Answers 12 Problems with The Chosen
Переглядів 1 тис.Місяць тому
Thanks to a commenter for leaving some of their objections with why they don't want to watch the Chosen and why they don't think it is a good Christian project. These are my rebuttals. www.youtube.com/@creedencequestions?sub_confirmation=1 Sub for more Chosen content!
Miquella: A False Christ Figure | Elden Ring: Shadow of the Erdtree Analysis
Переглядів 1,3 тис.Місяць тому
A brief discussion on Biblical and theological narrative themes around Miquella in the new Elden Ring: Shadow of the Erdtree DLC. www.youtube.com/@creedencequestions?sub_confirmation=1 Sub for more! 0:00 Intro 0:45 The Deceit 3:02 Free Will 4:23 Themes 6:04 Summary
Theology Student Reviews THE CHOSEN SEASON 4
Переглядів 3 тис.Місяць тому
www.youtube.com/@creedencequestions?sub_confirmation=1 Sub for more Chosen content! See timestamps below to skip to the JOHN conversation A review and detailed analysis of many of the things in season four of The Chosen, from a theological perspective. 0:00 Intro 2:20 First Episode 4:21 Ramah and Thomas 11:41 JOHN! 17:56 Rest of the season 22:47 Outro Thoughts
Theological Themes and Narrative Archetypes in Elden Ring: An Analysis
Переглядів 5 тис.2 місяці тому
A long analysis and discussion on religious, Christian theological, mythological, and otherwise narrative themes that are at play in the story of Elden Ring, to celebrate the release of the new DLC: Shadow of the Erdtree 0:00 Intro 1:30 Opening Cutscene 4:25 Limgrave 6:55 Liurnia 11:17 Underground 15:01 Caelid 16:10 Altus & Leyndell 19:40 Mountaintops 21:14 Haligtree 22:19 Mohgwyn 24:18 Frenzy ...
Looking for BAD THEOLOGY in The Chosen | S1 Ep5
Переглядів 2834 місяці тому
Looking for BAD THEOLOGY in The Chosen | S1 Ep5
LEFT BEHIND - Is it any good? | The Christian book series that took the world by storm
Переглядів 1454 місяці тому
LEFT BEHIND - Is it any good? | The Christian book series that took the world by storm
Looking for DEMONIC MESSAGING in The Chosen | S1 Ep4
Переглядів 2144 місяці тому
Looking for DEMONIC MESSAGING in The Chosen | S1 Ep4
Dune 2, Jesus, and the Antichrist - A Brief Discussion
Переглядів 524 місяці тому
Dune 2, Jesus, and the Antichrist - A Brief Discussion
Watching THE CHOSEN until THE ANTICHRIST gets me | S1 Ep3
Переглядів 264 місяці тому
Watching THE CHOSEN until THE ANTICHRIST gets me | S1 Ep3
Do you believe in God? - The Jordan Peterson Problem
Переглядів 405 місяців тому
Do you believe in God? - The Jordan Peterson Problem
Watching THE CHOSEN Until I'm Corrupted | S1 Ep2
Переглядів 175 місяців тому
Watching THE CHOSEN Until I'm Corrupted | S1 Ep2
Watching THE CHOSEN until there's Blasphemy, Heresy, or the Antichrist | S1 Ep1
Переглядів 936 місяців тому
Watching THE CHOSEN until there's Blasphemy, Heresy, or the Antichrist | S1 Ep1
Christian Themes in The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe (Movie) - A brief theological discussion
Переглядів 206 місяців тому
Christian Themes in The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe (Movie) - A brief theological discussion
Is 'In The Beginning' a Mistranslation? Was there creation before Genesis 1:1?
Переглядів 217 місяців тому
Is 'In The Beginning' a Mistranslation? Was there creation before Genesis 1:1?
Is The Church Divided Against Itself?
Переглядів 107 місяців тому
Is The Church Divided Against Itself?
Is It Wrong to Watch The Chosen? Is it Theologically Sound? Is it a Problem for Christians?
Переглядів 329 місяців тому
Is It Wrong to Watch The Chosen? Is it Theologically Sound? Is it a Problem for Christians?
What are angels, demons, and ghosts? Sunday Theology Discussion
Переглядів 410 місяців тому
What are angels, demons, and ghosts? Sunday Theology Discussion
Nefarious: A Theological Analysis | Movie Review and Breakdown
Переглядів 55Рік тому
Nefarious: A Theological Analysis | Movie Review and Breakdown
Wonderful Video, love Elden Ring but I love Christ Lord more✝️
Very interested to hear your thoughts/analysis on SotE. Aside from some of the more obvious allusions like Enir-Ilim/Tower of Babel, the revelations from Ymir's questline about the Greater Will and the Fingers were really striking to me.
Great note on the Tower of Babel comparison. Otherwise tho, I was struggling to see much else to be analyzed from my specific perspective in sote. Ymir's point I thought really was just a reveal that the Greater Will is just a lovecraftian God, it dropped the mother of fingers there and then stopped all contact because it just doesn't care what's goin on in the lands between. Would love to hear if you think there's more depth to be explored than that
Personally i think it (like the darkness in DS but it is more obvious there) to be more complexe than frenzyed flame = bad . I see the frenzied flame as the destruction of the established order, chaos and obviously madness. But the point of the sewer is to show you the horrific aspect of the golden order(a bit genocidal) to make you think about their legitimacy and if they truly are better than chaos. Creating such structures :thesis antithesis ->your choice is quite common in fromsoft games my fav exemple is in ds1 where we are shown first the catacombs blighttown the hollow village(the bad part of the fire age) and then another mondo good part . It is the same here the beautiful leyndell and just after the horrific sewer. All of this to say that in DS or ER there is no such thing as good and bad but more complexe idea and the best one is more about opinion than objective good and evil. (And for my personal opinion on the subject i think Aldia says it very well : NO MATTER HOW GENTLE, HOW ECSIQUISIT, A LIE WILL REMAIN A LIE)
Completely agree, in my original video I try to point out that nothing is really good or bad in FromSoftware's work.
It feels, when you refer to the alchemical rebus as a Bamophet, and when you call marriage the traditional solution to this red king/ white queen dynamic, like I am listening to a religious scholar on team "Christian Jungian Psychology" just categorically disrespect practioners of the Ideologies that created Jung's work. I don't know how exactly it came to feel so partisan. I do know that this is the last of your videos I'm ever going to watch- I have seen the work of Christians in our world, and it reminds me of Marika.
I am sorry to have upset you with my view. I do hold a Christian perspective, thought I'm not a scholar yet. Unfortunately, humans of all kinds make mistakes pretty constantly, and I'm sorry to see that you have seen only the negative consequences of faux Christianity. On the topic of alchemy, I'm not sure respect is the right word, though I am very interested in the practices. It is the case that Alchemical ideas relate very closely to and evolved into the Occult practices - for more info on this in the same video game setting I suggest Max Derrat, who goes into more depth than I.
While I compared Miquella to a cult leader in the original base game instead of the outright Antichrist, I was one of the few that wasn't on Team Miquella then. I noticed the holes in the "savior" image Miquella projected, especially when the Bewitching Branch revealed he gained worship through mind control. I feel vindicated.
This was such a great in-depth analysis, I am surprised to see such a complex comparison with so many references to myths and alchemy. Keep up the good work!
Was hoping you'd make a video covering this, great work
It seems to be no coincidence that the significance of the biunity of pairs in relation to existence by an experience within "the lands between" (both metaphorically and literally) and our bodily connection to it through thematic motifs seen in Bloodborne is something that is of great concern to Miyazaki's understanding. The external orderly and objectifying participation of the male, and the undefinable, prenatal, prelinguistic encasing wisdom of the internal female is expressed well. I think it goes much deeper than an interesting motif but more as a reflection to an ontological narrative. And I should probably spare a long tangent on what I think may be a potential beginning point for this symbiotic duality that expresses itself in all cultures and forms of communion of ideas and concepts, but it seems that *God reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists*. One cannot exist without the Other. This concept can be extended to describe the nature of divine experience as an ever nurturing observer and participator to itself. The idea of biune polarity suggests a duality within a trinitary unity, where two contrasting principles coexist in harmony. The early division of ourselves can be noted by the humans' separating cut that does not usually remove them from the mother, but certainly forever from their anonymous twin. Replaceability is the ever-present invisible sibling of the Placenta’s inextinguishable trace; it enables her separated lover to be constantly involved with others, whose changing faces always appear in the same "place." The "mother" will be the first of these others who materialise in that certain place. Her bodily emanations and discharges, the pillow-like qualities of the womb- these are the first outer other substitutes; they introduce new levels of resonance into the encased experience bubble of itself. As the relationship between the egg and the non-egg prefigures all theorems of the organism in its environment. Later monadologies and system theories are merely exegeses of the egg dynamic. If the psyche is a historical element, it is because its progressive recasting and enrichments of the primitive spheric dual lend it a disposition towards what one thoughtlessly terms "growing up". The invisible other half is what lives on in him in her replacements. The incipient subject can, it seems, only develop with integrity if it is able to connect to the reserve of an intimately-partnered parallel life from which it receives nourishing, supportive and prophetic signs that assure it prosperity in attachment and freedom. The unification of the dual dynamic. The symbolically living body, then testifies to the possibility of leaving behind blood communions with the closest Placental Sibling in order to cross over to the world of breath, drinks and words-a dual feeding sphere of inwards and outwards with the comforting other, then, that will one day, hopefully develop into fellowships and reconciled societies. However the depiction of a chaotically feminine outer God "Formless Mother" and our early temporary communion of blood with the invisible placental mother, is very literally interpreted in an unbalanced form by Mohg's never to be birthed dynasty, reaching into the conceptless shape to harness its fluid for strength and nourishment when his existence is seen as an omen to order, yet is abused to an extent that can only be reconciled by a restoration of balance between order and chaos through the tarnished substituting the form of communion, killing Mohg as part of that unification. This division occurs because the biunity always has three parts, which in normal development are restructured and modernised: Endoderm: The innermost layer: Foetus, Newborn, Child, Mesoderm: The middle layer. : Placental/mother’s blood, Milk, Language, Father, cultural complexity Ectoderm: The outermost layer. : The Placental companion, The Mother, The Tree of Life Ultimately without that unification or a corruption of that other, as seen in Elden Ring, leads to an individualised modernity like stagnation, a lack of worthiness or purpose to exist or to be loved, persists from that corrupted Mother or Tree of Life/Erd Tree, to where characters cling onto the substitutes or an unbreakable alliance to the only *other* they align with, depending on the ending this unbalance can be reconciled by its unification with the child/tarnished and its mother substitute. Yet having all that divides and distinguishes through objectifying order and definition strips the value of that intimate half, can cause a desire to regress into the chaotic femininity of pre linguistic, prenatal oneness with all, through communion with the flame of frenzy.
Ok but serious counter point? Is this show still good for people to watch so long as they don’t take it anymore seriously than Dave and the giant pickle? A new Christian might go with friends after church and get a few things wrong because there’s a difference here in the expectations between a cartoon and a presumed well researched tv show but I do feel like if some Christians think the shows outright wrong the Dave and the giant pickle come back works
That was definitely not my most perfect analogy. i do actually think this show serves as a good introduction to the story of Jesus or an edifying entertainment for those that are already believers. Overall, The Chosen covers the full story of Jesus, many of his miracles and teachings and much of the content of the gospels, in a manner better than really any 'biopic' does. Its accurate enough to introduce people to a real historical character and truth, but, just like any biopic, if you want the absolute hard cold historical facts, you have to read the gospel accounts. I.E., the Chosen still has to be ultimately recognized as entertainment, not fact.
Mohg’s ending is already in the game as the dung eater questline
Hmm how do you consider DE's ending to be Mohgs?
@@creedencequestions It's not a perfect 1 to 1. But the dung eater's quest line is very pro-omen in that he wishes for everyone to become an omen. When the tarnished fulfills this, they're setting up omens as the default/core of the Elden Ring, i.e. omens become the normal state of life, regardless of the nightmares they experience. Mohg also is pro-omen and embraces his omen blood, though he seems to be more in favor of his dynasty assuming political control rather than expanding omen-ness. But the idea of "omens on top" is the same in both cases. Either way, I don't think Mohg should be seen as the inherently "best future" or "salvific path" out of the demigods. He created the bloody fingers and kidnapped the war surgeons, still perpetuating the cycle of violence like all the other demigods.
The Greater Will is Yahweh, parasitic, capricious, and bloodthirsty.
I'd urge you to reconsider that take. You'll find YHWH in the Bible to be unlike that at all, if you truly read it. (Not saying you haven't read it, but that you should read more carefully, and see if what you find to be capricious really is)
Christ died for our sins, he was buried and rose again the 3rd day; according to the scriptures
Pretty good well though out video , you missed some elements here and there but still pretty cool
My two cents: "how else do you abide for" well, we dont. Thats the point. Its the acceptance of not knowing. Ofcourse we cant say there is no god, the honest answer would be: we dont know if there is a god because there is no evidence for god existing.
The general crux of my point is that I believe that there is evidence all around us, even without the evidence regarding the claims of Jesus of Nazareth. In any event, as a human having been born on earth in this time, are you truly content being confident in being able to know nothing about the nature of the universe? The human soul searches for meaning, and in the things you love and enjoy you are seeing reflections of that true meaning which is out there attempting to reveal itself to you. Glimpse a greater truth: you are NOT insignificant and random in the universe. True, you are but a small speck in a large space, but that is only due to the majesty of the God who created it. He loves you, and you are to be a piece of his plan. We know this because Jesus tells us this, and it rings true in the hearts that are open to it.
Well personally i have experinced god and the evidence for me is my personal life. I do understand that it means nothing when coming to proving gods exsitance but Ill tell you why science proves he exists. The many theory b4 the big bang theory is that the universe was always there i.e eternal. but that was proved wrong with the big bang theory which states that something came from nothing but we know that in this world there nothing that can happen without a cause. This means that there must be an uncaused cause that caused the universe into creation. This also mean that this cause is outside of space, time and matter. Now we cannot go around looking at a building/ painting and say there was no builder/painter and say this building just existed forever. The intelligent design of the universe is so present that there must be an intelligent creator. Also the probability of the universal constant of being exactly right for our universe is exist is so low that its impossible for it to have happened randomly.
sick vid
It’s actually sad how the majority of people are arguing over Protestant and Catholic views within the show. I think it’s ignorant to attack the Catholics when they technically make up the majority of Christians (consisting of over 1 Billion members). Of course the show is going to have some Catholic leaning messages. It’s also sad seeing people with such an anti-Catholic attitude when they truly do not understand 99% of what they believe. I think the real issue at hand is the Mormons who are a big part of the production of this show. Say what you want about the differing beliefs of Catholics and Protestants (I still believe both are devote followers of the true gospel), but the Mormons are the biggest group of heretics that have been slowly taking over the west for the last two hundred years. It’s time to address the issues they present to the faithful and how they’ve caused millions of fall astray of Christs true message.
I agree with most of this. The LDS are complicated, and I agree it's heretical. I've known several of them, though, and they are often really good people. They're just victims of maybe a cultish environment. All that said, having people of an extant faith or belief working on a show does not harm or hurt the show unless it affects the writing and messaging, so I'm still unsure it's applicable to the Chosen.
Woah, how in the world did UA-cam recommend the exact video I needed at this moment. Peace and blessings, brethren!
Miquella is both Griffith, and your archtypical Dark Messiah, except instead of wanting to bring about some world of like, fear and death and all that, he wants to bring about peace, love, and order, through basically stripping away free will
Keep in mind that as a student of Golden Order fundamentalism, Miquella would be deeply familiar with the Law of Causality, which imposes a form of deterministic order upon the world. Going even further, Golden Order fundamentalism was developed in large part by Radagon, who trained in Carian astrology, and so it is highly likely that Miquella was aware that before Radahn came along, the stars had the power to control fate, and even now, fragments of starlight can usurp the will of mortals. He may have been casual about removing free will because he might not have believed free will existed to any significant degree to begin with, and decided that people were better off having their wills steered by a god who loves them rather than far off stars like Astel who don't care one way or the other.
This is an interesting perspective
Thank you for addressing these claims in such a clear common sense way. I personally couldn’t relate to any of the 12 complaints on the show which did not make sense to me.
I'm strongly opposed to any bio-pic of Jesus.. Bio-pics in general are really unfair to their subjects, giving a false sense of familiarity, actually more false than true even some of the subjects words are used.. And obviously with regard to the Lord Himself, any degree of falsification is a very big problem, possibly even sinful.. Jesus was undoubtedly a skilled preacher, teacher and story teller.. but I would think He was also a lot more apocalyptic, other worldly and uncompromising than portrayed in the Chosen.. In His earthly life, only those called by the Father partially understood Him. (as He says). To everyone else He probably seemed a lunatic or a dangerous fanatic.. As is to be expected, because the Kingdom is radically different and opposed to this world.
Perhaps, but a biopic can still be a good thing. As an introduction for unfamiliar people or for beautiful art for those that are already believers. It's not for everyone, and if you find it to be a vice then I support your choice to not watch.
@@creedencequestions Hey, that's one of the most measured responses I've gotten to any of my comments, so thanks.. I do phrase my opinions a little strongly because that seems to be necessary in the current rhetorical atmosphere throughout the culture.. I guess what I really think is that bio-pics should be taken with a very large grain of salt, and if people want to know about Leonard Bernstein, Reagan etc etc and of course Jesus they really should read into primary sources.
I never thought that the argument it “adds to the Bible” was particularly strong. It’s art. The nature of adapting Biblical material necessitates artistic and fictional input. I do understand it may make some people feel weird to see a Jesus portrayed who does not fit their own notions/views so I personally don’t like Jesus portrayals. But there’s nothing wrong with the Chosen in that regard. My main issues with the Chosen are about the structure of the show itself. As well made and entertaining as it is, I find the pacing to be inconsistent and typically too long. The acting is good but the transitions between the humor and serious moments are somewhat clunky (mostly because the humor/jokes and set-up scenes are made up and the serious moments are actual Bible scenes). Also personally I don’t like the fake accent they speak with. I find it unnecessary and doesn’t really accomplish the point of adding to the setting of Middle East. I have a lot of gripes with the show and don’t like it. I can recognize it as well-made though.
Very interesting. I never herad of the movie or show. but still very interesting.
The only problem for me is that we don't add or take anything from the Bible yet The Chosen clearly does. It's a TV show after all.
Your comment is self defeating, I think. Nobody adds or subtracts from Scripture, The Chosen is a TV show. It's not the Bible, just based off of it.
@@creedencequestionsThat is if it was just a regular TV show for entertainment. The Chosen clearly tries to represent the Bible and identify itself as a medium of evangelism, hence misrepresenting it.
@@creedencequestions I finished the entire season 1 and it was a "great show" as a conventional story-driven TV series. The music, acting, and just overall execution were highly entertaining, to say the least, however, I am not sure whether such an exaggerated and performative media is a healthy way of preserving the biblical truth. It's just like those mega-churches' flashy band music and "passionate" prosperity sermons. It confuses people and gives a false understanding/perception of the gospel and Christ himself. I just don't see a solid need for Christians to lure unbelievers with these kinds of acts which is actually tremendously harmful.
Hello! If I may offer a new perspective, the Chosen is not evangelism. It's entertainment or art. And yes, art can be used to bring our souls closer to God which is what I believe the Chosen is doing. But it should never replace the Bible. And the creators never intended it to be so. For true knowledge of the Bible and what really happened, we look to the book itself. The Chosen tries to point to the Bible as faithfully as it can but it also has to be a great TV show. The Bible is not written to be a TV show and it isn't as easy to adapt it into one as the Bible can be used to make a painting. This is why the creators have to weave in their imagination into it to interpret the Bible into the visual format. As to why we should even try to adapt the Bible into a visual format, first because God gave us creativity to use. Bezalel is the first man to have been said to be filled with the Spirit of God and God commanded him to use the artistry given to him to make a beautiful tabernacle. He also created the psalms and parables which are so creative in telling truths. He created stories throughout the Bible to show His glory and grace. It only makes sense to me that as we find ways to make art, we use that as well to glorify God. Secondly, its the language of many of this world, so why not use it to speak about God to them?
@@therealmacben5031 Thanks for the passionate reply. My point is you cannot make up Bible stories any way you want. Psalms and parables are words of wisdom and praise that glorify God, not an exaggerated or modified description of a factual event. We should prioritize the Biblical truth over art. You cannot fill the gap of knowledge regarding a factual matter with creativity and call it an art for the same reason why the golden calf was regarded as sinful by God. I do not know the intention of the creators and it frankly doesn't matter. I fully comprehend your perspective, however, I believe the word of God is sufficient and I just cannot compromise the fact that The Chosen misrepresents Jesus.
Excuse me, I'm German. You're speaking too slowly for me. Please speak faster. It's too boring for me. With such important things, you should pick up the pace to underline the importance.
I can only assume this is sarcasm of the highest order. Let's assume that I actually speak at the speed where you are intended to playback the video in 1.5 speed to receive the proper experience. 😂
@@creedencequestions german culture is all about effiency. to translate what he is saying into english "bro speak faster, i write three essays on the movie in the same time"
@@creedencequestions 🤣🤣🤣If you love Jesus like me you are the best.
And you and every Protestant is lying to themselves. You are not trusting the Holy Spirit. You are trusting yourself and only yourself. If any of you trusted the Holy Spirit you would all be orthodox.
Based on your other comment, are you referring to orthodoxy or catholicism? The pope, while I believe he is christian and likely a very repentant and God driven man, should not be the head of the church. You say that protestants trust in themselves (they are 1 person), but the catholic church also trusts in one man's interpretation (the pope), how are you all any different from them? Either protestants shouldn't trust in themselves (therefore neither should the catholic church trust in the pope), or protestants are correct in their beliefs and interpretations, and so is the pope. The argument that protestants shouldn't trust their interpretation through the holy spirit (a common catholic argument) literally makes the pope a protestant. ☦
This is an interesting take. The Bible teaches a great deal about the Holy Spirit and what individuals need to believe in order to be saved, but it doesn't teach anything about the perpetual institution of orthodox practices and rules. In fact, I'd argue that Jesus' teaching largely discourages this format.
@@creedencequestions I'd argue that it definitely is not the wisest use of our time, i'm eastern orthodox but I believe that scripture is god breathed. If god breathed it, it must be true. In context it's easy to understand scripture, especially if you humbly ask god to reveal it in the way he intended it
@@creedencequestions what Bible is that? You mean the liturgical book compiled by the Orthodox Church meant to be used in tandem with liturgy and oral tradition of the church? Yes I’m sure that’s what you mean. You actually have no right to tell me or any other Christian what the Bible teaches. This is a part of the prideful Protestant attitude I was talking about. The providence of God through his church gave us the Bible. It didn’t just fall out of the sky. By being a Protestant you reject that and instead follow a tradition of higher critical thinking which is more commonly called Marxism. Learn church history abandon your pride and actually follow Christ. If any of you actually cared about what the Bible was teaching you wouldn’t pick and choose. You would come to church.
@@vytrvat the pope is the first Protestant. You don’t know church history at all. The current pope is an outright heretic. Orthodox has the original decentralized authority found in the Bible. No one person can decide anything. The church decides as guided by the Holy Spirit and we have the proof that that has been happening for the last 2000 years. Protestants and Rome have created the atheist west and in turn the Soviet Union . Protestantism and Rome have done nothing bought bring destruction.
The Roman Catholic Church left the church in 1054. Orthodox Catholics have the one true church started by the apostles and Christian himself.
Do you think the apostles would care about whether someone was in a church that they started, or whether someone believed the essentials of the faith that Jesus taught?
@@creedencequestions I definitely think Paul and the apostles would care. This is discussed many times and they took teaching and succession very seriously. Theology was absolutely crucial. When someone says they follow Jesus that could mean 10,000 different things. Not every “Christian “ is a trinitarian. So yes it absolutely matters.
Here are my 2 cents of the points. 1. Yes, this sentence was poorly made. It doesn't agree with basic biblical principles. It could be argued that in that specific moment, Nicodemus was (in the show) being saved, was literally made alive, a new creature, in that specific moment, would you really say that a new belivers heart cries out anything other than "Jesus is my Christ, He is my Lord, He is my Savior"?? Really? So I could also see that point being made. Whatever the case may be, this is not repeated throughout the show, as if this was the messagem being conveyed. So, the series as a whole IS NOT trying to argue/defend that "being a Chrsitian" means listening to your heart. If someone says that, they're crazy or never watched the whole show. In summary of point 1, yes, the sentence sits badly and the scene would be better without it (or with a better/biblical sentence). But it has reasonable doubt (as showed above), and if it didn't, it's one thing, that doesn't by itself disqualify the rest of the show. 2. Stupid argument. Doesn't deserve an answer. 3. John did actaully doubted, as seen in the Bible and in the show (when he asked his disciples to confirm Jesus' identity). If these people were willing to let go of their pride and give up their fictional notion that the first century people where long-bearded monks with halos on their head, they would not have trouble understanding the obvious and correct things the Chosen is trying to show. The show does depict John being Jesus' prophet very clearly, specially in 4x1. 4. "It's too funny" L.O.L. The guy who commented this probably never realized the jokes in the Bible and even on the Gospel accounts. (That is, if he reads his bible) 5. Kind of a fair point (very kind of). But it's such a small thing to be annoyed by. Like, dude the series has 32 episodes already. They preach a very good message agains prosperity gospel, against triumphalistic gospel, against easy-believism, against ecumenical sources of salvation, it preaches purity in relationships. It's well scripted, well filmed, well acted, it's funny and insightful, it teaches true things about history, jewish culture, etc. What kind of shows/movies do these people watch that they thing The Chosen is so bad? 6. Apparently not, huh? If it was, there wouldn't be a 12 point comment like this. 7. Doesn't portray drunkeness. Also a stupid argument. 8. Yeah, aslo stupid arguemnt. Seems he's running out of things to criticize. I guess if it isn't in the Bible it didn't happened and it couldn't have happened. (insert clown meme) 9. (...) Jesus was hunger, Jesus cried, Jesus was afflicted, Jesus got distressed. This guy (and many others who criticize the show) has made an idol of a picture he has in his head of how Jesus was in His ministry, and he isn't willing to give up that idol to waht the Bible and Logic says. He is the one that has a corrupted view of Jesus. 10. ... 11. ... 12. Yes, they do one or two things about Mary that goes beyond what they should. It's no mistery that there's a catholic in the roundtable discussion. Yes, Roman Catholicism is blasphemous. But The Chosen is not doing that. Creedence, while you are doing videos looking for heresies in The Chosen, I am looking for good argument/criticisms against The Chosen and have not found them it yet.
I'm really also looking for good arguments against it, and I feel the same way as you. Great evaluation
How is Roman Catholicism blasphemous? I think the issue you should be focusing on is the fact this show is heavily produced by Mormons. They are truly heretics. I really hate this division between Protestants and Catholics when Protestants don’t understand 99% of their beliefs.
I definitely think there's a connection between the Nephilim and the Fire Giants - there is in-game text that flat out states that the art of smithing and forgery originated with the giants, and the ability to harness fire, which is the very thing that's deemed heretical by the Golden Order. So you're spot on with that analysis!
Finally some good fucking lore content again. Everyone is so wrapped up in attempting to create a fully functioning, diegetic canon that can be neatly summarised in a Wiki, that everyone forgets to think about what it all actually MEANS. What the inspirations are, what the point of all of it is. I always thought the inspiration taken from Norse mythology was vastly overstated, to be honest. Judeo-Christian themes are so much stronger here than any others, and while Norse mythology clearly serves as a reference point for a lot of aesthetic choices, thematically it seems much more concerned with a solid mix of the aforementioned Judeo-Christian tradition, Japanese traditional mythology (as well as Japanese buddhism) and modern, existentialist philosophy a la Sartre, Camus and maybe even some of the older stuff like Kierkegaard. Some small piece of constructive criticism: I really wish that you would've edited out all of the mouth-clicking sound and long pauses you take between breaths. It's sadly kinda distracting from what you're actually saying, and the mouth-clicking is some sort of anti-ASMR that makes listening a lot harder. No shade meant by this, just maybe something to watch out for for your next upload
Not that John the apostle lives forever, but there was this rumour.
You know, people dunk on Miquella and call his methods reprehensible...but how is he doing anything different from what the player is doing? We go around and butcher practically anything and anyone with any sort of authority in the lands between (and most of its wildlife) with nothing but our own lust for power and craving for violence as justification. Hey, if we want we can even curse the land or destroy it altogether on nothing but a whim. Suddenly Miquella taking extreme measures to ensure peace in the land via forcefully pacifying its inhabitants don't seem so "villainous" any longer. I mean Ranni, Miquella's supposed "good" counterpart plans to remove any semblance of order from the Lands Between in the name of "freedom" when this is guaranteed to cause even more chaos and warfare until there's no one left or some other tyrant takes the helm and everything's back at square one.
When comparing Miquella to Jesus in Shadow of the Erdtree, my main takeaway was that sacrifice is pointless without love. And because Miquella lacked love, all that he did was only done to glorify himself, or in other words he tried to "save himself."
My thing when it comes to Rhema is ppl who say “My Jesus would have brought her back” think that God will do anything they ask. And no it’s HIS WILL BE DONE. There are things that we want that we don’t get. We don’t understand now what he’s doing but we will. Nothing says that he would have done every miracle and everything ppl asked.
I agree with this. We don't know for a fact what Jesus would do. The only discussion is whether Jesus performed all available healing with those who asked during the time he was on earth.
He the anti Christ of Elden Ring
I think Miquella's curse of nascency is more than just being young looking forever. A lot of lore analysis type of content creators think it's directly relating to him starting things and never being able to finish them, which directly runs into an unfortunate circumstance considering Malania being cursed by the god of rot. Another thing about this game that is so interesting is the direct comparisons to Christianity so consistently, in regards to Marika more than anyone else. Its a thing that's even more interesting given the Japanese history around Christianity.
Honestly I feel a lot of the connections to western religions (especially Christianity) are more aesthetic than meaningful, to encourage the fantasy vibe, even in Elden Ring. Just because Marika is stated to give "grace" and is crucified doesn't mean she's a stand in for Jesus. Same with the healing church in Bloodborne, etc.
miquella the glorious would never do such things!
You mean Miquella the Mohglester?
Miquella's actual curse is Nascency, nothing they plan, nothing they do, every comes to fruition, they can never complete any task, they are always "becoming" but never arrive, they are the most powerful entity in the setting, but never can they achieve any goals, only start them.
Marika's "other half" Radagon was as completely seperate person she fused with try and create the Alchemic Rebis, the Divine Hermaphrodite, wikipedia "Rebis", the problem is that Radagon was no Sulfur, he was Pyrite, fools gold, Miquella does this in reverse, to try and recreate it fully with Radahan, him being the masculine Sulfur
This is a great note and topic for discussion
6:48 the problem of evil does not apply to Miquella because he is never claimed to be an all powerful god and he also never created the universe. If the god of the bible is all powerful and it created the universe, then it would not have created one where gratuitous suffering was unavoidable. I think the take away here is that Miquella's kindness is not kindness at all because it comes in the form of compulsory subjugation. Just like how the god of the bible's love is not love at all, because it comes with the threat of eternal torture if denied. If you love someone, you let them go. You don't throw them into a pit of fire. I'd have to say Miquella comes out on top here, at least he doesn't torture us for eternity
I take your point but I still think Miquella shows that the lack of free will is necessary for true life to take place. Free will necessitates both evil and good. As a note, God doesn't torture anyone for eternity, they are disinherited and left to the inheritance of the devil. You can't inherit paradise without understanding it, otherwise it would be completely worthless, and God has presented us with ample evidence to understand and accept his gift.
You seem unaware but "Satan" is a title and used in ways such as "the satan" meaning the opposer, as in a member of the angels that god has taken on this role to give god some pushback
I'm well aware. It seems like you're referring to Heiser's work. This use of Satan is most probable in the book of Job, but Heiser also states that Jesus and the NT writers use 'satan' and 'devil' differently in the NT and it refers to one singular primary adversary, the 'ancient serpent who is the devil and satan' from Revelation who will be cast into the pit at the end of days.
@@creedencequestions tbh I’m just referring to original meaning as written in the scriptures. I would say Christianity just poorly copied, just like how Islam extremely poorly copied because their writer couldnt even read. You’re using Jewish texts, so for understanding those you prob want to ask the Jews
The first red flag we should have seen was when his name changed from "the Unalloyed" to "the Kind" They turned him into a different character, I'm telling you
I thought of this, do you think they mistakenly changed from unalloyed or did miquella intentionally change his title to 'kind'
@@creedencequestions considering all the things they changed in the lore to make the "promised consort" reveal, I wouldn't be surprised if they changed it
@@genesischaparro8954 The bewitching branch and the kamikaze-ing haligtree soldiers are still in the base game which hinted at Miquella's true nature. But I agree the whole dlc seems a little jolting
I came to Catholicism through Peterson, and I think Peterson is right on one point. I think belief in God is not a mere "yes or no" answer. Faith is almost never perfect, and most people, me included, can't believe all the time, or be always aligned with God. I think that reducing belief to a mere "do or don't" is damaging to the faith, where it becomes a mere membership card. Another point of faith is that faith comes in many forms, people are different, and trying to force everyone to adhere to the same practices just won't work (that's why we Christians keep splitting), I agree that the faith in Christ is fundamental, but trying to make everyone conform to the same identical beliefs and practices is a self-defeating game, as history has proven again and again. What's the solution then? I think it could be possible to develop a more flexible approach to Christianity, something that allows people to come to him in steps and in different ways, so to not lose the stability of religion but also not to make it all about stagnant rites and empty vows.
I agree that conforming to the same practices is unnecessary. The only adherence is what the gospels tell us we need to do, and they do tell us that every person needs to believe in and accept Jesus himself as their savior and as the son of God. Beyond that it gets more flexible.
@@creedencequestions it's the "accepting Jesus" part that people think is so simple, but really isn't. It's the most difficult part in my opinion, as it's anything but mere lip service. Developing a personal relationship with Jesus, understanding his teachings and putting them into practice is a lifelong journey, and not all people can get "there" immediately, I sure haven't.
@@jacopoarmini7889 You can jump in with full faith first, and then work on developing afterwords. Jesus doesn't require perfect followers, just willing ones.
Just explain to me how you can say that this doesn't contradict scripture. If it is not in the Bible and you make up all these people who are not in the Bible and you then put them in the Bible then that is the definition of a false gospel message. Just because someone makes a series about the Bible and throws out a disclaimer that say's we are just saying that this is plausible, well if you accept that then you would have to be okey with someone else coming along and throwing out their disclaimer but yet they want to do exactly what Dallas is doing and they make Peters wife having an affair with his brother or worse she is a Nymphomaniac and sleeping with all of the disciples. That is on par with Dallas inventing this character called Lilith and making her an alcoholic and having her get raped and just everything that is wrong with this woman, and Peter he turns him into a Jew hater by him selling out his fellow Jews . What if someone writes in Peter's roll as being a homosexual do you think any of this would be okey to God. Listen to the reasoning and tell me if it doesn't sound familiar. Dallas is trying to give background to the people that God chose not too but he doesn't care because he doesn't honor God. But this new producer comes along and say's try to understand we just want to show the world of 2024 that the people of the Bible have the same troubles in their lives as the people in our times do, and to include everyone and not be judgmental we want to show the people outside of the church that Jesus loves them too and we wanted to show homosexuals of today that even back then this was an issue of them being judged and we wanted to show that Jesus loves them and would pick them for disciples also. I mean he picked people who were thieves and people who were addicts and hung out with ex prostitutes so why not a nympho who sleeps with all of the disciples. Sin is sin so it doesn't matter according to you and Dallas or do you guys get to play God and only Dallas can say what is plausible. Do you not see what is wrong with this ? God is going to judge anyone who adds or takes away from His commands. But that is only what the Bible say's not what Dallas says. And you talk about the three sidekicks that Dallas has to talk about the show. Are you kidding me you have a catholic priest who pray to dead people and who took God's 2nd commandment and through it out so that they could write their own commandments a short part of the 2nd commandment. You shall not make for yourselves any graven images of anything on the earth in the earth under the sea in heaven under heaven and ect. ect ect. So again you think that this guy here we should listen to anything catholic priest say, God gave a prophecy to Daniel about the roman church they wrote their own Bible not a Translation difference but a different Bible so that they could leave out things that they thought God got wrong. And if you do't know what I am talking about just ask me and I will show you were it is in their bible. And try to sound a little less like an ANTI-SEMITE Jews were the first and only Christians until they were preached to , but there are still many Messianic Jews in the world that still believe that Jesus is the Messiah.
There's a whole lot of stuff in your three comments, and half of it makes no sense but I'm going to my best. I have no idea what your referring to with Simon Peter's wife for example, but ok. Anyway, what you're missing in all 3 of your comments is that Dallas never claims that The Chosen is Scripture. Nobody is trying to add to or change or remove from Scripture. This is a show based on character from Scripture. If you can't enjoy that, then that's fine you'll need to go your own way. But if you want Scripture you read Scripture, if you want to watch and adaptation then you can enjoy the Chosen, or Prince of Egypt, or Veggie Tales or whatever else you prefer. Genuinely, I don't like to be accused of being an Anti-Semite. Anything that I mentioned about Jews is a reference to the authorities in the Bible, specifically the Pharisees and Saduccees. I have nothing but massive respect and love and appreciation for people of Jewish faith, they are God's chosen people, the progenitors of my faith, and they are important to all that God has in store for the future.
@@creedencequestions My point about Simon Peters wife is this. If we gave her a sin that is not in the Bible, it is okey as long as it is PLAUSIBLE correct ? Because isn't that what Dallas said it just has to be PLAUSIBLE.? Ok well here goes we are going to write into the next episode that we have been keeping a secret about Peters wife because that defiantly happened in Jesus's day people kept secrets. Well Edens new backstory is she is a TEMPLE WHORE that would certainly have been PLAUSIBLE because The Bible talks about Temple whores. So how is that ? Would that be okey if we did that ? Because again as long as it is PLAUSIBLE it is okey to put it in according to Mr.Jenkins. If someone comes a long and makes a New series and in the series he throws out a disclaimer that this is not a word for word of The Bible but just a story about Jesus with backstories to the people in The Bible. So instead of making one of Peters sins about him being a Sabbath breaker like Dallas did, The new writers make one of his sins that he is a Homosexual, and that John the Baptist is his lover and his backstory is this, the reason John is accusing Herod Antipas of his sin which is adultery and that he is sleeping with his brothers wife is because John is trying not to think about his sin. That is very very PLAUSIBLE as Dallas would say , one because Homosexuality and Adultery were both rampant is Jesus's day. And it makes so much sense because Christians do that all the time, they point their fingers at other peoples sins so that they don't have to focus on their own sin. Again very PLAUSIBLE. Romans 2V1 I am paraphrasing it. For in passing judgement on another you condemn yourself, because you who judge , practice the very same things. So what about that? Do you think that this would be okey if someone say's they want to make a series about Jesus and this is the Backstories they give about Jesus's cousin and disciple ? Do you think this would be okey with God? I mean we can't say that he is changing scripture right because these SINS were RAMPANT in Jesus day. And according to you and Dallas and half of the other people who are posting, it is alright if we give different sins to the disciples and to Jesus's other followers even though The Bible doesn't say that they did that, it's okey because Dallas did it and besides as long as it is plausible it is fine with God. My point is very simple if one thing is plausible then all has to be Plausible. That is why God has to be the final Authority because if He is not then anyone can say what they want without consequences as long as it is PLAUSIBLE. Think please about your own argument that I saw you used with someone else, you said that it is a concern only because they decided to portray something that is extra Biblical and because it had ramifications on Jesus Himself. THAT'S IT THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING. Every backstory has ramifications on Jesus look at Lilith when you take Jesus's power to heal away that is so sinful in Gods eye's. And if you don't know when they did that it was after Jesus heals her she goes back to her old ways and yes I know that can be PLAUSIBLE BUT IT WASN'T.That didn't happen, so that means that Dallas changed Jesus's Power that He received from His Father. At worst it is equal to your argument to the other person when you said that your CONCERN is it is something that Dallas added that again is EXTRA BIBLICAL. Thank you.
As for methodoly, inventing a hell realm and threatening people with it, doesnt seem to be the ideal, so the search continues No solution can come from gods, as its top down, and does not adress the unique needs of every being that is a product of this pluralist world
it wasn't a hell realm, it was the center of the Lands Between, Marika sent the entire region into the Shadow to hide it and keep her hated enemies suffering forever, it IS a real physical place though, as it lines up perfectly with the map from the Lands between.
@@keithfilibeck2390 i was talking about Jesus
Everything comes from God technically. If we create a problem, we can't create the solution. Not sure if I'm understanding your objection fully
@@creedencequestions "god" created diffrence, but expects uniformity, which obviously wont lead to salvation for all
I think that the point of Elden Ring is that everyone is trying to become God, but they all eventually fail because... Well they can't. The way they become God is by removing something from the world, Marika removed death, while Miquella wants to remove freedom. God, or the Greater Will, created all these things, so trying to remove them would go against his will. A "proper" God would embrace all things equally, ironically Ranni's ending is closer to this, although I don't like her as a character
I am sorry but I don't know the name of the person doing this video. But I have to correct you on a couple of things before I ask you my question. You made the statement that John is the only one that followed Jesus to His crucifixion, that is partly true. You have to remember that Jesus prophesied that all His disciples would be scattered and basically the word in this context it to disperse. But most gentile pastors that I hear on these verses tend to miss the mark, kinda what you are doing . When Jesus was going through all the stuff that the Jews and Romans were putting Him through only Peter was there John scattered and hid just like all of them except for Peter and not only that, look how much he put his life on the line . the Bible say's that he just cut off the servant of the high priest ear and where was Peter ? at the patio of the high priest so even though they could have taken him and held him over for trial he still went there. And yes he finally ran away hours later. And then yes John eventually came out of hiding when everything was over and it was safe for him.
I just heard you say something like as long as it doesn't do anything contrary to scripture it is still not a issue. I guess it doesn't really matter because how can this be okey with God ? None of these people are even in the Bible. Do you really think that it is okey that Dallas adds in that Peter's wife has a miscarriage, or that Peter sells out his Jewish friends or just Jews in general having Peter breaking the Shabbat or again selling out Jews to pay his and his brothers taxes . Do you think that it is okey with God to make up that story ? Or to have him and his brother fighting their in laws or fighting anyone and betting on that . Do you think that would be okey with God to add that to the Scriptures ? Do you think that the disciples who tried with all their might not to sin against would be okey with Dallas turning them into worse sinners , making them twice as ready for the lake of fire. Do you think that it is okey that Dallas nullified Jesus's miracle to Mary Magdalene by having her go back to her old life after she was healed by God ? Or do you think that it is okey to have her named changed to Lilith and have her be an alcoholic when she wasn't one , or have her get raped by a Roman guard that one was probably alright with our Lord don't you think ? Here is one of my favorites in the first season, the first episode there is 54 minutes in the episode and out of that 54 minutes there is not 1 SECOND never mind 45 or 50 minutes that you would expect to come from the Bible in the episode , but there was not 1 SECOND of that 54 minutes that anything came from the New Testament. The make believe father of the make believe woman ( Lilith ) quoted the 1st verse from Isaiah 43 but the problem is it is not written in the real Bible them characters just don't exist. So your key word that helps you and your wife sleep at night seems to be not contrary to scripture. Are you kidding me all of this is contrary to scripture. I have been a RABBI for more years then I can count, but I am still willing to be corrected when I am wrong. Isn't God very clear when He has the Apostle Paul say to us in Galatians 1:v6-9 and I am just going to paraphrase Paul is accusing them of deserting Christ and turning to a different gospel, he then goes on to say not that there is another one but there are some who are bothering you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an Angel from heaven should preach to you a Gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. God was so serious about this happening to us also once we received the gospel. Well I have news for you this is the epitome of a different Gospel. Be honest everyone this is defiantly a different gospel message almost none of these people and events are in the Bible .You don't need to answer to me but one day we will all give an account for every word that we say.
Miquella is basically fromsoft Griffith, as Miyazaki loves berserk references, tho Griffith is effectively the anti-christ of berserk
no he's not they share zero similarities aside them both possessing charisma. miquella's goals however he achieves them are selfless, he truly grieves for the world and wants to change it for the better meanwhile Griffith is the complete opposite. He's not concerned by anything except his selfish goals of wanting to rule over a kingdom and nothing more
The real tragedy is that on paper, Miquella's plan was perfect, it was genuinely born from kind and compassionate intentions, but when he realized he had to sacrifice more to fulfill his goals, he began to abandon everything to resolve himself for his wish. Hhe believed that his dream would remain pure, separate from his actions, but the moment he decided to abandon his flesh, his sacrifices and his resolve, would all be in vain. His connection to the living, the mortal part of his demigod blood, that allowed him to sympathize with others, would be twisted the moment he ascended to godhood, and remained in St. Trina. St. Trina holds the true personality of Miquella, and the one we face at the end is a diety that can no longer comprehend or enact the human kindness he wished to guide the world towards. Just the blinded "compassion" of a god who could no longer understand the human heart. How could a god save something they can't comprehend? It would be a salvation deprived of sympathy. The same kind any other god in the Lands Between would bring. Miquella's wish, would only ever be a contradiction.
This was acctualy a great interpretation and a realy cool insight on Miquellas actions
Take it back! He is God!