0:00 Who was Enoch 2:53 Who were the Nephilim? 5:01 Who is Melchizedek? 6:55 Who is Job? 8:42 Who are Behemoth and Leviathan? 11:21 What is the Harrowing of Hell? 14:01 Book of Revelation?
ME TOO! When I was like 7-8 I tried to be special and read the bible backwards by books and that didn’t go very well I closed the book after two verses
@@dreaddshorts we are not saved by works, however works so show your faith. Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV [8] For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: [9] not of works, lest any man should boast.
Zero evidence for Exodus and Moses but you don't care about truth. You have faith and so you are superior to other humans. Christian archeologists graduate from Christian colleges and go to Egypt to find evidence of the Great Hebrew Migration and come back empty-handed, Dude. Let's chat about where you stand before the 2000th Easter in 2033. Pleased to meet you!
Heb. 11.6 is one of my personal favourite verses: "Without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.". Enoch walked with God and was rewarded by never knowing death.
@@dreaddshortsAs an inquirer into the Orthodox Church, it took me a while to understand that The church composed the Bible with the power of the Holy Spirit, established at Pentecost. it’s not something that fell out if the sky and that the Reformers caught. It is the same Church that Jesus Christ and His Apostles established still exists and has not fundamentally changed for 2000 years. Christ said the gates of hell will not prevail against his Church.
@@briandiehl9257 lol I get that, but that disqualifies Jesus in this particular passage. Obviously Jesus had earthly parents but he also existed eternally, so in that sense he had no genealogy. Understanding Melchizedek to be Jesus is a valid interpretation, even if it is not true. Both interpretations are reasonable
@@timothyvenable3336 I mean it could have been Jesus but I think it’s cooler of there was an actual dude named Melchizedek who was Priest of God Most High wandering around blessing people
@@dreaddshorts You’re just asserting your presuppositions on what “the church” means, does the scripture specifically mention the protection of traditions written by pseudo-Dionysius an anonymous pagan author that Orthodox build so much of their theology off of ? No, definitely not. Tradition is important but it needs to be tempered by scripture. If the concept of the church was as a physical body and if Orthodox claims were true we would expect to see certain blessings bestowed on the Orthodox Church but we don’t, the Orthodox Church is in active schism the Moscow Patriarchate and the Ecumenical Patriarchate are not on speaking terms and the division between theological conservatism and theological liberalism is forming another schism, overall the Orthodox are suffering the same problems that every other denomination is, the claim that orthodox are one church is dubious at best considering dogma is not universally understood or accepted across the churches in communion and even the very definition of dogma isn’t accepted universally. An example is Toll Houses, the Greeks will tell you overall that Toll Houses are not dogma but a lot of the Slavic churches will and both will use different definitions of what dogma is and isn’t to justify their respective opinions on the alleged church tradition. I heavily considered and defended Orthodoxy for a long time but ultimately they don’t have the philosophical, historical, and especially scriptural defense of each of their extra biblical traditions. Protestantism does indeed follow tradition we find it important, you’re just fighting a straw man of the reformed tradition because the reality is that you don’t actually understand it. The Church Fathers didn’t agree on much of anything though when they did we need to be sure to heed their opinions when it’s in line with scripture, but the fact that they disagreed and can’t build a consensus on most topics shows they aren’t infallible as individuals or as a community, so much of the Orthodox apologetic is to up charge the Fathers when it’s convenient and downplay them when it’s convenient. They’ll cite Justin Martyr to their defense but shy away when you mention the fact that Justin Martyr didn’t believe in the Trinity and that he thought Christ was a separate lesser god, but yet they still pray to him.
Fun fact, Revelation is not the only place in the Bible where 666 appears. 2 Chronicles 9:13 shows King Solomon receiving 666 talents of gold one year. It was also the sheer decadence of Solomon's kingdom that caused the Jews to forget God and worship idols. Also, Revelation describes 666 as being the number of a man. Coincidence? I think NOT! My interpretation of the Number of the Beast is that the Mark of the Beast is unrepentance and faithlessness itself, and the significance of the mark on your forehead and right hand is that the Mark (which is atheism and unrepentance) corrupts both your thoughts and your works.
Or, you can just Google the vaticanus codex 666 Greek rendering which looks identical to the Arabic "bismiallah" 3 centuries before Islam existed. It's no goddamn mystery. Greek rendering of 666 in ancient biblical Greek. Is the literal symbol of the words "in the name of Allah" in arabic. Why are you mystery thinking it?
On the topic of Leviathan/Behemoth I believe you could've have mentioned the possibility of them being rhetorical devices needed to express natural forces, as if the author meant that God is greater than any phenomenon
Exactly. Many people want every part of the bible to be historical to either prove it right/wrong, but much of it was always supposed to be seen as a metaphor. And that’s ok. Is it bad that the prodigal son did not exist? No, of course not, so I don’t think it’s bad at all either to see Job, Jericho, or some of the Genesis stories in the same way
You do realise that it's a heresy to disagree with the Church Fathers claiming that dragons and phoenixes don't exist, right? Thus saith St Bigchungus of Khazakhstan.
@@dreaddshorts Peace. No one denomination or tradition can claim to be the one true church since the church is the body of Christ and we’re joint to it by faith. Thus wherever there is faith, there is the church [Matthew 18:20]. There are many traditions which claim to stem from the Apostles. By the end of the second century simple details such as the date of Easter were disagreed upon by allegedly Apostolic traditions. An infallible revelation cannot contradict a prior infallible revelation and thus we should evaluate the later revelation of tradition by the earlier revelation of scripture. This is what Sola Scriptura means, not that Protestants deny traditions wholesale, but that we judge traditions using the scripture. Just as your Eastern Orthodox tradition believes the apostolic tradition of Rome to have fallen into error, we also believe you have erred and need reform! Salvation is by faith alone. It is impossible to do good works without faith [Hebrews 11:6]. James and Paul are using justification in two different ways. Paul uses the precise theological definition of being made righteous before God, whereas James uses it in the more general sense of meaning proven to be in the right, as seen in Luke 7:29. God certainly doesn’t need to be made righteous. Ultimately, you must not trust in your tradition for assurance of salvation, but instead look to Christ himself [John 6:47]! God bless.
Bro I think you need to study more profoundly the teaches of Jesus. He is criticising the fact that tradition and the word of God where at the same level as authority. Also you get saved by faith only as you can read in Ephesians 2. Also the thief that was crucified joined heaven just by faith. I agree that the facts are important and you know a true christian by his fruits but not the actions are saving us. It doesn’t matter your denomination to be saved if you believe that Jesus is King and God and if He is your Lord
@@rakalexandruesi3970 The teaching of Jesus is that you must obey Jesus. Jesus ordained his teachings to be transmitted and the remission of sins to be granted through the ministry of His twelve disciples. Only the presence of BOTH a valid ordination in succession from those disciples AND total orthodoxy of belief TOGETHER constitute the body of the Church.
Just a clarification on the age of the Book of Job- I think the claim isn’t that Job is the oldest BOOK of the Bible but is the oldest STORY of the Bible. The theory being that it was originally told as part of an oral tradition before the times of Moses and at some time it was later recorded in the literary form we now have.
@@blasphemetheheresy Like most cultures the Hebrew people would teach their histories and culture orally before a written method had become common place
This is very factual, and do not trust most dates for Bible book creation dates. This is found from two methods, our oldest copy, and from judging the context clues within the story (by the story itself or the language used in it). Our oldest copies, we know for a fact are no where near close to when they were written. Paper does not last long at all, and whenever cultures were defeated in ancient times their religious texts were often targeted. (Also The Christian God was never unanamiously accepted among the Jews, even during Moses’ time many praised false Gods so there wouldn’t be too many records at all). The second method is a bit more accurate, but still not very good at all. Mainly due to the fact that they do not have much to compare to from a similar time frame. It would be like finding a rotten orange, then finding 1 ripe orange and attempting to draw conclusions between them like “the ripe one has leaves on top, while the rotten does not, so the ripe must be older!”. The most likely guess for Bible book dates are Job/Books of Moses are quite a bit older than scholarly guesses, and the rest were likely written close to when they claimed to be and not far later
Harrowing of hell works really well with the thief on the cross if you take into consideration that Jesus is God and is always in heaven according to His divine nature.
So there is a big assumption that Heaven is a place that you go to. My interpretation from descriptions in the bible is that it's actually a time in the future. And the place is right here on earth.
As somebody who is new to Christianity, your videos have been a great help to me as they have helped me to better understand the different denominations and the core beliefs of Christianity. Thank you brother and God bless you. 🙏
My understanding as a Lutheran on the Harrowing of Hell is Jesus went down to Abraham's bosom in Sheol (kind of the proto-heaven) and proclaimed to the people waiting there before taking them up to Heaven proper with him now that his work was done. I'm no theologian, but it makes a lot of sense to me.
Hey Zoomer, I started listening to Calvin’s Institutes since you were talking about them at one point. Wow they are just incredible. The way he describes the character of God and man’s need for him (and futility without him) is just so eye opening. I just started listening to it yesterday and I’m already hooked!
The behemoth was always funny to me because it wasnt mentioned ever again, and it wasnt explained as to what it was other than a really big and strong animal. There is no description of the behemoth dying or being slain, just that it existed.
I think that's generally what makes people assume dinosaurs. because it is entirely possible people could have just randomly uncovered dinosaurs bones and they wouldnt have understood what they are at all except some giant powerful animal from the past
I think that's generally what makes people assume dinosaurs. because it is entirely possible people could have just randomly uncovered dinosaurs bones and they wouldnt have understood what they are at all except some giant powerful animal from the past
There was prophecy that one day righteous people will eat meal from leviathan in tent made of behemoth skin, or somwthing like that, but we still dont know what the heck they are and if they're symbolical or literal beings
Correction: the Archangel Michael contending with Satan is not a reference to the Book of Enoch but rather a reference to the Assumption of Moses (probably, the text we found was incomplete so we had to infer through quotations.) Jude does allude to Enoch in Jude 14.
I think the nephilim are supposed to be mythological heroes like Hercules or Perseus, with their fathers, the "sons of God", being fallen angels that pagans would worship as gods like Zeus or Poseidon, and their mothers, the "daughters of humans" being human women, whom pagan gods were known to consort with. I think this would explain why they're described as "heroes of old, men of renown"
On the Harrowing of Hell as a Lutheran: While some Lutherans do propose Jesus went to Sheol to preach the Gospel there and save the lost, many believe it was not done for salvation but as a proclamation of victory over his foes. Look at it like this: Jesus' spirit first ascended to heaven to reveal his victory, then in glorified body to hell to reveal victory, and finally back to earth to reveal his victory. In this way Jesus went to all three (known) realms to show he had won.
This consistent with the view of many early Church Fathers who viewed Enoch as apocryphal and useful. Also, the Codex of Alexandria used the word angels for the “sons of god”.
Literally i not even 10 minutes ago my uncle came over and started telling my dad about this leviathan in the bible and its making me start to lose faith then low and behold i find this video. I know god exist and he probably led me to this but I'm not sure what to make of it
I think everything with Revelation is supposed to not be understood. It’s the closest we get to God speaking to us with no filter, no dumbing it down. Some symbolism is clear, the lamb being Jesus for example, but something like the 7 trumpets I don’t think we know the answer to and we can’t know the answer to. Even something like the Mark of the Beast could be the symbol of a company and buying the product would be recieving it, or a group or cult with the symbol being on a hat, it could even be the symbol on your avatar inside of a virtual reality game. I don’t think that means we are supposed to live in fear every day, I think it means the exact opposite. That we don’t know, but God does, and God and his believers win in the end. So just let go of fear of the end, and just trust because he has a plan
When talking about Behemoth and Leviathan, you forgot to mention that a lot of young earth creationists believe dinosaurs and humans lived together at one point, so the two beasts would be first-hand descriptions of something like a Brontosaurus and Mosasaurus /Plesiosaur (although the fire-breathing and multiple heads would be embellishments 😅)
Just a heads up, Toll Houses, are not a universally held Orthodox Christian belief. Many online supporters just tend to be loud. Although the version you mentioned is rather benign.
@@mr.awsome1288 no shit people aren't going to be extremely united in nondogmatic things, which are literally up to yourself if you want to believe in. You either believe in it, good for you, or you don't, ultimately its up to you and no one cares. It's like calling a group of people badly united because some people like fish while others prefer pork, it's completely irrelevant.
@@kottekanin4006 yeah, it’s not that big a deal unless your church is claiming complete unified apostolic doctrine, and branches of said church don’t even accept the same interpretations of doctrine. This attitude can also have practical effects to, just take a look at the recent schism between the Russian Orthodox, and the Patriarch of Constantinople, over ecclesial authority. A huge selling point of the EO is it’s supposed unity. I was merely pointing out that in practice it operates like the Anglican communion just way less gay.
Ruth 2:14 (NIV): "At mealtime Boaz said to her, 'Come over here. Have some bread and dip it in the wine vinegar.' When she sat down with the harvesters, he offered her some roasted grain. She ate all she wanted and had some left over." 20 "'The Lord bless him!' Naomi said to her daughter-in-law. 'He has not stopped showing his kindness to the living and the dead.' She added, 'That man is our close relative; he is one of our guardian-redeemers.'"
“Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience-through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,” 1 Peter 3:21
What is "Corresponding to that" in the context of 1 Pet 3:21? Is the "saves... as an appeal to God for a good conscience" identical to the whole justification, sanctification, and glorification accomplished by Christ? Or is the "saves" in the context of this passage referring to something different, maybe a PIECE of the whole work of God in saving us?
@@ikemeitz5287 corresponding to the waters of the flood. We are buried in the waters of baptism, our sin is destroyed like the sin of the world was in the Great Flood. We are given a new name and clean conscience, a clean conscience can only come from the removal of sin. We are united to Christ in baptism which saves us (not because the water itself makes us physically cleaner, but rather the water and God’s word together make us spiritually clean and renewed) “For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.” 1 Peter 3:18-20
@@ikemeitz5287 "Corresponding to that" is in reference to 1 Peter 3:20 which describes how Noah's Ark saved 8 people in the flood. Thus, like the flood, the water does not save, the ark does not save, building the ark does not save. It is building the ark in the manner God instructed and then the ark going through the flood, much like saying the words of Baptism given to us by Jesus and using water completes the process to be saved. Without the water, the ark did nothing. Without the ark, the water is destructive. Without the instructions, the ark will not survive the water. Without the words, it is not Baptism. Without water, it is not a Baptism. In Colossians 2:12 it says that Baptism is sharing in the burial of Jesus, in which resurrection is also shared through faith.
There's an interesting argument in Job regarding this. God only gives a man what they deserve, as he is just. Satan and his demons torment people. If people reject God, they can expect unjust torment. If people accept God, we should expect fair punishment, granted we don't understand the significance of our sins, like Cain who murdered without understanding its severity, then complained the punishment was too great. So what's fair punishment may seem excessive to us, from our limited understanding.
In a study of revelations I heard that 666 actually meant that the devil could never get to be the number 7 (fullness or god) so he just tossed a lot of sixes instead trying to be a number greater than god but he can never be god
Baptism of the dead is another mystery that’s mentioned in a single verse, but never again. But the Mormons use it to say that you can get baptized for dead, unsaved relatives in order to save them.
6:56 Inspiring Philosophy actually has an hour long video on the book of Job and about how it may actually convey a different message than how most Christians see it from at a glance. I definitely can’t sum up the whole video because it’s a lot of depth that he goes into, however if I had to sum it up in a sentence, the message may be that it is about Job’s moralism, being that he believed he was righteous and did things just to get by, as opposed to hedonism which is just doing whatever you want. I would definitely give it a watch if you have the time.
For the Harrowing of Hell specifically, I believe it is true for the following reasons: - Heaven and Hell now are different than Heaven and Hell after Judgment Day: Scripture tells us that, in Hell (post judgment), people will be so wicked that they wouldn't ever want to go to Christ, which is why their punishment would be justified. However, in the story of the rich man and Lazarus, we see that, although the rich man was supposed to go to Hell (post judgment), he still wasnt exactly there as he begged Abraham to help him out, meaning he still wanted a connection with God. From here, we can figure out that, pre judgment, the dead who are waiting for Hell, still can choose God if given the chance - Jesus descended into Hell and people followed Him: As mentioned in the video, 1 Peter says that Jesus descended into Hell after His death but people followed Him from there (probably the OT saints). This would solidify the view of the "waiting room" before judgment day, mentioned above.
Hello fellow brother i wish to ask you about a spiritual question that has been plaguing me is copying the bible onto for example a mc book and quill a sin i want to show my devotion in how i play but im not surr if it may be sinfull
Hey RZ. Great video! I do have to offer some correction. Jude 1:9 is not a quotation from the Book of Enoch, but it is a reference to the Assumption of Moses, which is another piece of Second Temple apocalyptic literature. Jude 1: 14-15 however does quote the Book of Enoch.
Are the Nephilim really a mystery??? Like I feel like the angel thing is so straightforward and obvious tbh (you know the bible describes them as giants, right? Why would that happen by just two human groups interbreeding?)
The name, "Heretic," definitely fits for this point of view. Jesus was 5'5, what do you think David was when he slew the giant? The average height back then was short, and these, "Giants," were most likely 6'0. Not 50'0 like those weird Evangelical pastors like to preach. The righteous line of Seth is definitely a better understanding.
@OrthoJason ah yes, david was just a midget fighting an NBA player, and anyone who disagrees is a heretic. Jk no hard feeling but that is what your argument is.
Except it's really not. Angels don't procreate amongst themselves, how would they do it with humans. And the Bible doesn't call them giants. Enoch and the book of jubilees does. Enoch is deuterocanonical and Jubilees just straight up isn't.
Man I can’t wait for heaven to find about this stuff. To me this a great demonstration of how Christianity isn’t boring. The depth of the wisdom and knowledge and mystery of God is so amazing and interesting that such insults fall on deaf ears
My old pastor taught that Nero was a *potential* Antichrist, with there always being a candidate on earth, since the devil who gives power to the Antichrist doesn't know the day or hour any more than we do.
I'd love more of these videos that are more informational about the bible, cause I sure as hell wouldn't notice any of these if I were reading through it.
The Lord is clear and loud about his love for humanity on the Holy Scripture which is the most important thing, but the human authorship left some misteries which make it a even more incredible set of books
I might have (sort of) an answer to question 1. I’ve been reading Genesis recently, and when the book gets to Genesis 5 which is where Enoch’s life is mentioned what I got was this: Whether or not the people in Adam’s genealogy actually lived those literal number of years is secondary to the tension that the passage gives us. Right off the back of the Fall in Genesis 3 God has said that Adam and his offspring will die, and now his offspring are all dying off one by one. It doesn’t matter how long they live, (Methuselah lives 969 years) not a single one of them can escape the wages of sin being in the world. Throughout the reading of the whole genealogy, maybe the tension the author is trying to leave us with is: “will this person escape? No? How about this one? They’re living for so long! Oh no.. they died too.” But only one man stands out who is Enoch, and the passage tells us that Enoch “was not found, for God took him.” Enoch stands out among Adam’s offspring as the only man who does not die because the passage also tells us that he “walked with God”. In doing this the passage is offering us a little picture of the ultimate salvation from death that God offers to those who walk with Him. Then, by living through faith in the promise. Today only through Jesus Christ. In fact, if we look at believers today the gospel tells us that Christ will come to take us home. We will still die, but by trusting in Jesus, God delivers us from the curse of death like Enoch. We’re not really meant to know much else about his life, because that’s what I think the author’s purpose here is trying to point us to- his faith in God.
Only liberals that try to deny the inerrancy of scripture say that Job wasn't a real person. Other passages reference Job with Daniel and Noah in the same light. Even if these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they would deliver only themselves by their righteousness,” says the Lord God. Ezekiel 14:14 NKJV Blameless doesn't mean that he was sinless. It means that he walked in the fear of the Lord and had a righteous character. It says the same thing about Noah. Also, righteousness is counted by faith even in the old testament.
6:55 Job isn't the only one to be called blameless, so to say he's too good to be true ignores the other "blameless" or "upright" people in scripture. The author obviously doesn't mean they were perfect the way God is, but they walked faithfully with God. In Luke 1 the priest Zachariah and his wife were also described as blameless.
Yahweh defeating Leviathan rather reminds me of how Marduk defeated Tiamat. I always wondered if there was a connection there, literately or theologically. Also because of the use of "crush the head", which hearkens back to Genesis. "He (the serpent) will strike his heel, and he will crush its head." Recently had a sermon out of Peter. That was my pastor's interpretation, it was Jesus proclaiming his victory to the fallen angels. Funnily enough, I'd never heard that interpretation before. I always share that popular StarWars meme of Anikin vs Obiwan on the day after Good Friday "Actual Footage of Jesus Confronting Satan for the Souls in Hell" or whatever the caption is.
This is one of the things I came to realize; You can find elements of truth in other places but often twisted, forgotten, added to, corrupted or otherwise incomplete while scripture is the full and complete truth. The wisdom of Solomon was known BEFORE Solomon but recorded by him, all this wisdom comes from God before time. So naturally it has proliferated throughout the world. But God keeps his scripture to the purpouse of our perfecting 2 Timothy 3:16-17
I think Enoch was referenced because it was commonly understood but also the part Jude quotes is just about how God will come to judge the world so it's nothing that scripture doesn't already mention.
As soon as I saw the word "Dinosaurs" in the thumbnail, I knew you were going to talk about the two beasts mentioned in the book of Job (10:03-11:20). It is popular with Young Earth Creationists, and as tempting as the interpretation is to the average person who is a Christian and likes dinosaurs, you are right in the Bible not needing to mention the prehistoric creatures in the first place, as that is not the point of the gospel. I think this interpretation (and Young Earth Creationism as a whole) is an example of eisegesis.
About Revelation, it starts by saying that it is a Revelation of Jesus Christ, given to the Apostle John. I think that, although the events are important, the whole idea is that, after all the storms, Christ wins, and we all live happily forever after.
By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was commended as having pleased God And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.
Tollhouses aren't a doctrine of the orthodox church. While some believe in them others don't. If you have ever been to an orthodox funeral you'll hear a priest say that on this day the deceased one comes before God and God decides a place where his soul will reside till the final judgement.
The harrowing is probably my favorite story because christ is a redeemer and it only makes sense he would go down to hell to redeem the people that came before him, he is mankind's king and that means he wants for us to be in his kingdom. Nit to mention it parallels the story of soddom and gammorah wherein the angels are asked repeatedly if anyone in the city is good will it be spared, the number proposed getting smaller each time the question is asked. It's obvious that if he would be willing to spare the cities if they had ANY righteous citizens, then he would surely go to hell to redeem presumably virtuous pagans.
0:00 Who was Enoch
2:53 Who were the Nephilim?
5:01 Who is Melchizedek?
6:55 Who is Job?
8:42 Who are Behemoth and Leviathan?
11:21 What is the Harrowing of Hell?
14:01 Book of Revelation?
Thanks
Luckily,RZ explained what the Nephilim are🙏
6. The Harrowing of Hell is simple when you read the Gospel of Nicodemus...
B a s e d
@@JustinCage56 Zero evidence for Exodus and Moses but Christians have faith and no need for truth, facts or reality. Let's chat!
I made the mistake of reading the book of revelations when i was in the 3rd grade. I was not prepared
Revelation
Singular not plural
@@JanJansen985 ☝🤓
That's the equivalent of getting your first video game and then reading every bit of Destiny lore.
ME TOO! When I was like 7-8 I tried to be special and read the bible backwards by books and that didn’t go very well I closed the book after two verses
Hot take, Hebrews is scarier.
Man i hope Bible 2 covers those topics. I have been speculating for 2000 years
😂😂
@@dreaddshorts we are not saved by works, however works so show your faith. Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV
[8] For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: [9] not of works, lest any man should boast.
@@godismysource9014james2:24 😮
@@dreaddshorts True ☦
@@dreaddshorts james 2:17 generally clears this claim
Enoch is also in Hebrews 11 Faith Hall of Fame
i think that is a credit to the fact that he was likely a real historical figure.
Came to comment that. Thank you.
Zero evidence for Exodus and Moses but you don't care about truth. You have faith and so you are superior to other humans. Christian archeologists graduate from Christian colleges and go to Egypt to find evidence of the Great Hebrew Migration and come back empty-handed, Dude. Let's chat about where you stand before the 2000th Easter in 2033. Pleased to meet you!
Heb. 11.6 is one of my personal favourite verses: "Without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.". Enoch walked with God and was rewarded by never knowing death.
James describes acts of Faith like Abaraham offering Isaac and Rahab helping the Israelites. No mention of traditions.
@dreaddshorts
"...but really, all of church history has been _Pin the Tail on the Antichrist..."_
I've _got_ to remember that one, that's hilariously accurate.
Had to text that to my mom. Shes gonna have a good laugh
@@dreaddshortsAs an inquirer into the Orthodox Church, it took me a while to understand that The church composed the Bible with the power of the Holy Spirit, established at Pentecost.
it’s not something that fell out if the sky and that the Reformers caught.
It is the same Church that Jesus Christ and His Apostles established still exists and has not fundamentally changed for 2000 years.
Christ said the gates of hell will not prevail against his Church.
Baptist out here trying to do all of church history at once
5:30 Melchizedek didn’t literally have no parents. His recorded genealogy is just absent. This makes him a type.
You’re assuming. I think you could most certainly be right here, but it doesn’t make it clear either way.
Agreed. I've done a little bit of study on Hebrews, and this is what almost all the commentaries say.
@@timothyvenable3336 It is usually a good assumption that someone had parents
@@briandiehl9257 lol I get that, but that disqualifies Jesus in this particular passage. Obviously Jesus had earthly parents but he also existed eternally, so in that sense he had no genealogy. Understanding Melchizedek to be Jesus is a valid interpretation, even if it is not true. Both interpretations are reasonable
@@timothyvenable3336 I mean it could have been Jesus but I think it’s cooler of there was an actual dude named Melchizedek who was Priest of God Most High wandering around blessing people
I went to my first Presbyterian service at a small PCA church on Sunday, thanks to you !
Praise God!
@@CrownOfThornss There is no other!
@@tuckerbugeater Amen!
Amen
@@dreaddshorts You’re just asserting your presuppositions on what “the church” means, does the scripture specifically mention the protection of traditions written by pseudo-Dionysius an anonymous pagan author that Orthodox build so much of their theology off of ? No, definitely not. Tradition is important but it needs to be tempered by scripture. If the concept of the church was as a physical body and if Orthodox claims were true we would expect to see certain blessings bestowed on the Orthodox Church but we don’t, the Orthodox Church is in active schism the Moscow Patriarchate and the Ecumenical Patriarchate are not on speaking terms and the division between theological conservatism and theological liberalism is forming another schism, overall the Orthodox are suffering the same problems that every other denomination is, the claim that orthodox are one church is dubious at best considering dogma is not universally understood or accepted across the churches in communion and even the very definition of dogma isn’t accepted universally. An example is Toll Houses, the Greeks will tell you overall that Toll Houses are not dogma but a lot of the Slavic churches will and both will use different definitions of what dogma is and isn’t to justify their respective opinions on the alleged church tradition. I heavily considered and defended Orthodoxy for a long time but ultimately they don’t have the philosophical, historical, and especially scriptural defense of each of their extra biblical traditions. Protestantism does indeed follow tradition we find it important, you’re just fighting a straw man of the reformed tradition because the reality is that you don’t actually understand it. The Church Fathers didn’t agree on much of anything though when they did we need to be sure to heed their opinions when it’s in line with scripture, but the fact that they disagreed and can’t build a consensus on most topics shows they aren’t infallible as individuals or as a community, so much of the Orthodox apologetic is to up charge the Fathers when it’s convenient and downplay them when it’s convenient. They’ll cite Justin Martyr to their defense but shy away when you mention the fact that Justin Martyr didn’t believe in the Trinity and that he thought Christ was a separate lesser god, but yet they still pray to him.
I chuckled when the book of revelations was put in there as a whole
I was laughing at him, as he doesn't understand it...
@@dreaddshorts
No messianic is... This is what the disciples practiced.
Fun fact, Revelation is not the only place in the Bible where 666 appears. 2 Chronicles 9:13 shows King Solomon receiving 666 talents of gold one year. It was also the sheer decadence of Solomon's kingdom that caused the Jews to forget God and worship idols. Also, Revelation describes 666 as being the number of a man. Coincidence? I think NOT! My interpretation of the Number of the Beast is that the Mark of the Beast is unrepentance and faithlessness itself, and the significance of the mark on your forehead and right hand is that the Mark (which is atheism and unrepentance) corrupts both your thoughts and your works.
Or, you can just Google the vaticanus codex 666 Greek rendering which looks identical to the Arabic "bismiallah" 3 centuries before Islam existed.
It's no goddamn mystery.
Greek rendering of 666 in ancient biblical Greek. Is the literal symbol of the words "in the name of Allah" in arabic.
Why are you mystery thinking it?
@@noahtylerpritchett2682 It probably means "Nero Caesar"
It's probably a coincidence.
@@GreatTrollger
ua-cam.com/video/3B4Vk_P2Zu0/v-deo.htmlsi=cgSGKW3WUFXG3S_Z
@@GreatTrollger The biblical warning of Islam
Infinity Apologetics clinic.
On the topic of Leviathan/Behemoth I believe you could've have mentioned the possibility of them being rhetorical devices needed to express natural forces, as if the author meant that God is greater than any phenomenon
Exactly. Many people want every part of the bible to be historical to either prove it right/wrong, but much of it was always supposed to be seen as a metaphor. And that’s ok. Is it bad that the prodigal son did not exist? No, of course not, so I don’t think it’s bad at all either to see Job, Jericho, or some of the Genesis stories in the same way
Even if parts of the bible are fictionalised/mythologised, they're fictions authored by the Holy Spirit. What a blessimg
You do realise that it's a heresy to disagree with the Church Fathers claiming that dragons and phoenixes don't exist, right? Thus saith St Bigchungus of Khazakhstan.
@@dreaddshorts Peace. No one denomination or tradition can claim to be the one true church since the church is the body of Christ and we’re joint to it by faith. Thus wherever there is faith, there is the church [Matthew 18:20]. There are many traditions which claim to stem from the Apostles. By the end of the second century simple details such as the date of Easter were disagreed upon by allegedly Apostolic traditions. An infallible revelation cannot contradict a prior infallible revelation and thus we should evaluate the later revelation of tradition by the earlier revelation of scripture. This is what Sola Scriptura means, not that Protestants deny traditions wholesale, but that we judge traditions using the scripture. Just as your Eastern Orthodox tradition believes the apostolic tradition of Rome to have fallen into error, we also believe you have erred and need reform! Salvation is by faith alone. It is impossible to do good works without faith [Hebrews 11:6]. James and Paul are using justification in two different ways. Paul uses the precise theological definition of being made righteous before God, whereas James uses it in the more general sense of meaning proven to be in the right, as seen in Luke 7:29. God certainly doesn’t need to be made righteous. Ultimately, you must not trust in your tradition for assurance of salvation, but instead look to Christ himself [John 6:47]! God bless.
Bro I think you need to study more profoundly the teaches of Jesus. He is criticising the fact that tradition and the word of God where at the same level as authority. Also you get saved by faith only as you can read in Ephesians 2. Also the thief that was crucified joined heaven just by faith. I agree that the facts are important and you know a true christian by his fruits but not the actions are saving us. It doesn’t matter your denomination to be saved if you believe that Jesus is King and God and if He is your Lord
@@rakalexandruesi3970 The teaching of Jesus is that you must obey Jesus. Jesus ordained his teachings to be transmitted and the remission of sins to be granted through the ministry of His twelve disciples. Only the presence of BOTH a valid ordination in succession from those disciples AND total orthodoxy of belief TOGETHER constitute the body of the Church.
Haha! Dragons are amazing and really love them. But jokes aside, that is ridiculous!
@@kingoffire105 then you reject the Mind of the Church and have not access to the Holy Spirit. Simple as.
Enoch beat the game without death 🔥🔥💯
Life: full walkthrough (No death run)
flawless run
100% complete run through
I believe him and Elijah are the two prophets in revelation, so they still have time to mess up the record.
@@Strxwberrycloudsmight not be 100% complete. He might have to come back as 1 of the 2 prophets in revelation to die
Read "The Unseen Realm" by Michael Heiser. Approved by various Reformed theologians including Glen Sunshine and Chris Wiley.
I immediately click as soon as I see the title notification
Me too
@@dreaddshorts Please don’t spam
Just a clarification on the age of the Book of Job- I think the claim isn’t that Job is the oldest BOOK of the Bible but is the oldest STORY of the Bible. The theory being that it was originally told as part of an oral tradition before the times of Moses and at some time it was later recorded in the literary form we now have.
Like The Odyssey?
@@blasphemetheheresy Like most cultures the Hebrew people would teach their histories and culture orally before a written method had become common place
This is very factual, and do not trust most dates for Bible book creation dates. This is found from two methods, our oldest copy, and from judging the context clues within the story (by the story itself or the language used in it). Our oldest copies, we know for a fact are no where near close to when they were written. Paper does not last long at all, and whenever cultures were defeated in ancient times their religious texts were often targeted. (Also The Christian God was never unanamiously accepted among the Jews, even during Moses’ time many praised false Gods so there wouldn’t be too many records at all). The second method is a bit more accurate, but still not very good at all. Mainly due to the fact that they do not have much to compare to from a similar time frame. It would be like finding a rotten orange, then finding 1 ripe orange and attempting to draw conclusions between them like “the ripe one has leaves on top, while the rotten does not, so the ripe must be older!”.
The most likely guess for Bible book dates are Job/Books of Moses are quite a bit older than scholarly guesses, and the rest were likely written close to when they claimed to be and not far later
Harrowing of hell works really well with the thief on the cross if you take into consideration that Jesus is God and is always in heaven according to His divine nature.
Or that He went to heaven right after death, and then *afterward* descended into hell.
So there is a big assumption that Heaven is a place that you go to. My interpretation from descriptions in the bible is that it's actually a time in the future. And the place is right here on earth.
@@NedJeffery The Bible describes the new Earth as having no more sea. That sounds like a different planet.
As somebody who is new to Christianity, your videos have been a great help to me as they have helped me to better understand the different denominations and the core beliefs of Christianity. Thank you brother and God bless you. 🙏
My understanding as a Lutheran on the Harrowing of Hell is Jesus went down to Abraham's bosom in Sheol (kind of the proto-heaven) and proclaimed to the people waiting there before taking them up to Heaven proper with him now that his work was done. I'm no theologian, but it makes a lot of sense to me.
THAT is how it was explained to me also. That is explanation that makes every aspect mesh and make sense.
This is how the Harrowing was explained to me as a Confessional Lutheran as well
As a Baptist, this is what I have been taught and believe too. Cool!
Same
As a Catholic, same
Its good to see someone talking about these topics , nice vudeo man
Hey Zoomer, I started listening to Calvin’s Institutes since you were talking about them at one point. Wow they are just incredible. The way he describes the character of God and man’s need for him (and futility without him) is just so eye opening. I just started listening to it yesterday and I’m already hooked!
The behemoth was always funny to me because it wasnt mentioned ever again, and it wasnt explained as to what it was other than a really big and strong animal. There is no description of the behemoth dying or being slain, just that it existed.
I think that's generally what makes people assume dinosaurs. because it is entirely possible people could have just randomly uncovered dinosaurs bones and they wouldnt have understood what they are at all except some giant powerful animal from the past
I think that's generally what makes people assume dinosaurs. because it is entirely possible people could have just randomly uncovered dinosaurs bones and they wouldnt have understood what they are at all except some giant powerful animal from the past
There was prophecy that one day righteous people will eat meal from leviathan in tent made of behemoth skin, or somwthing like that, but we still dont know what the heck they are and if they're symbolical or literal beings
Loved that ending! We don’t need to solve the mysteries (although they are cool to discuss) we just need to put our faith in Jesus!
Correction: the Archangel Michael contending with Satan is not a reference to the Book of Enoch but rather a reference to the Assumption of Moses (probably, the text we found was incomplete so we had to infer through quotations.) Jude does allude to Enoch in Jude 14.
This is the stuff I find super interesting. Please make more!
Great video!
And as an Eastern Orthodox Christian, I can confirm, we do believe in the literal Harrowing of Hell.
As a Catholic, we have 20 more mysteries.
Edit: I may have caused an argument.
Yeah but two of them aren't quite "in the Bible."
They literaly are quoted from scripture
@@Bruno_Noobador Please direct me to the passages depicting (not merely supporting) the Assumption and the Coronation.
Lol
@@jdotoz Revelation 12
I think the nephilim are supposed to be mythological heroes like Hercules or Perseus, with their fathers, the "sons of God", being fallen angels that pagans would worship as gods like Zeus or Poseidon, and their mothers, the "daughters of humans" being human women, whom pagan gods were known to consort with.
I think this would explain why they're described as "heroes of old, men of renown"
On the Harrowing of Hell as a Lutheran:
While some Lutherans do propose Jesus went to Sheol to preach the Gospel there and save the lost, many believe it was not done for salvation but as a proclamation of victory over his foes. Look at it like this: Jesus' spirit first ascended to heaven to reveal his victory, then in glorified body to hell to reveal victory, and finally back to earth to reveal his victory. In this way Jesus went to all three (known) realms to show he had won.
This consistent with the view of many early Church Fathers who viewed Enoch as apocryphal and useful. Also, the Codex of Alexandria used the word angels for the “sons of god”.
Literally i not even 10 minutes ago my uncle came over and started telling my dad about this leviathan in the bible and its making me start to lose faith then low and behold i find this video. I know god exist and he probably led me to this but I'm not sure what to make of it
I think everything with Revelation is supposed to not be understood. It’s the closest we get to God speaking to us with no filter, no dumbing it down. Some symbolism is clear, the lamb being Jesus for example, but something like the 7 trumpets I don’t think we know the answer to and we can’t know the answer to.
Even something like the Mark of the Beast could be the symbol of a company and buying the product would be recieving it, or a group or cult with the symbol being on a hat, it could even be the symbol on your avatar inside of a virtual reality game.
I don’t think that means we are supposed to live in fear every day, I think it means the exact opposite. That we don’t know, but God does, and God and his believers win in the end. So just let go of fear of the end, and just trust because he has a plan
When talking about Behemoth and Leviathan, you forgot to mention that a lot of young earth creationists believe dinosaurs and humans lived together at one point, so the two beasts would be first-hand descriptions of something like a Brontosaurus and Mosasaurus /Plesiosaur (although the fire-breathing and multiple heads would be embellishments 😅)
Just a heads up, Toll Houses, are not a universally held Orthodox Christian belief. Many online supporters just tend to be loud. Although the version you mentioned is rather benign.
Watch David Erhan on the issue.
It seems like the more you dig into orthodoxy the less United it becomes. Their like Anglicans, except less gay
@@mr.awsome1288 no shit people aren't going to be extremely united in nondogmatic things, which are literally up to yourself if you want to believe in. You either believe in it, good for you, or you don't, ultimately its up to you and no one cares. It's like calling a group of people badly united because some people like fish while others prefer pork, it's completely irrelevant.
@@kottekanin4006 yeah, it’s not that big a deal unless your church is claiming complete unified apostolic doctrine, and branches of said church don’t even accept the same interpretations of doctrine. This attitude can also have practical effects to, just take a look at the recent schism between the Russian Orthodox, and the Patriarch of Constantinople, over ecclesial authority. A huge selling point of the EO is it’s supposed unity. I was merely pointing out that in practice it operates like the Anglican communion just way less gay.
@@mr.awsome1288 Ah yes.👍
3:06 You made a great video on the Nephilim that i definitely listened to
I think they're just giant men.
What video was about the nephilim?
@@Rareorgans45 The one on april 1st.
8: does the Bible affirm the Three Self Patriotic Movement?
About Melchizedek, when he blessed Abram, they ate wine and bread
isn't that a reference to the Lord's Supper?
Retroactively, yes. Hebrews makes the connection.
Yep! I caught that too! Also in Leviticus the "meat" offering, which is bread, is the most holy offering.
I love foreshadowing
Ruth 2:14 (NIV): "At mealtime Boaz said to her, 'Come over here. Have some bread and dip it in the wine vinegar.' When she sat down with the harvesters, he offered her some roasted grain. She ate all she wanted and had some left over."
20 "'The Lord bless him!' Naomi said to her daughter-in-law. 'He has not stopped showing his kindness to the living and the dead.' She added, 'That man is our close relative; he is one of our guardian-redeemers.'"
“Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience-through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,”
1 Peter 3:21
What is "Corresponding to that" in the context of 1 Pet 3:21? Is the "saves... as an appeal to God for a good conscience" identical to the whole justification, sanctification, and glorification accomplished by Christ? Or is the "saves" in the context of this passage referring to something different, maybe a PIECE of the whole work of God in saving us?
@@ikemeitz5287 corresponding to the waters of the flood. We are buried in the waters of baptism, our sin is destroyed like the sin of the world was in the Great Flood.
We are given a new name and clean conscience, a clean conscience can only come from the removal of sin. We are united to Christ in baptism which saves us (not because the water itself makes us physically cleaner, but rather the water and God’s word together make us spiritually clean and renewed)
“For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.”
1 Peter 3:18-20
@@ikemeitz5287 "Corresponding to that" is in reference to 1 Peter 3:20 which describes how Noah's Ark saved 8 people in the flood. Thus, like the flood, the water does not save, the ark does not save, building the ark does not save. It is building the ark in the manner God instructed and then the ark going through the flood, much like saying the words of Baptism given to us by Jesus and using water completes the process to be saved. Without the water, the ark did nothing. Without the ark, the water is destructive. Without the instructions, the ark will not survive the water. Without the words, it is not Baptism. Without water, it is not a Baptism. In Colossians 2:12 it says that Baptism is sharing in the burial of Jesus, in which resurrection is also shared through faith.
Great summary again thanks
8:28 uh, yes, every person deserves Hell. That doesn't mean we can't receive undeserved pain and suffering in this life.
There's an interesting argument in Job regarding this.
God only gives a man what they deserve, as he is just. Satan and his demons torment people. If people reject God, they can expect unjust torment. If people accept God, we should expect fair punishment, granted we don't understand the significance of our sins, like Cain who murdered without understanding its severity, then complained the punishment was too great. So what's fair punishment may seem excessive to us, from our limited understanding.
Love the concluison 🫶
How about you make a video about all of the Church councils?
🙂
Great video!
In a study of revelations I heard that 666 actually meant that the devil could never get to be the number 7 (fullness or god) so he just tossed a lot of sixes instead trying to be a number greater than god but he can never be god
My Favorite protestant UA-camr out here god bless🙏 from a Romanists papal enjoyer 😂🙏✝️🇻🇦😇
Just say Catholic😭
please make a part two
Bruce Gore playlist about revelation is so interesting and worth a watch. Recommend it
Baptism of the dead is another mystery that’s mentioned in a single verse, but never again. But the Mormons use it to say that you can get baptized for dead, unsaved relatives in order to save them.
This seems like something Windagoon would cover. Great video
200 views in 4 minutes, bro didn't fall off
859 views in 17 minutes
@@JoWilliams-ud4eu 1k in 19
1008 veiws in 20 minutes
13k views in 6 hours
@@JoWilliams-ud4eu16,000 views in 8 hours.
Ark of the Covenant should be included too
I think, personally, the ark is in the Vatican. Or it was destroyed like the curtain in the temple when Christ was crucified.
@@JoWilliams-ud4eu Supposedly it's in Ethiopia, and that's how they were able to resist colonization. But who knows.
@@insearchofprometheus another reasonable theory.
why are you even watching this video then you atheist
@@mjgtmkme123salternate Who are you talking to?
6:56 Inspiring Philosophy actually has an hour long video on the book of Job and about how it may actually convey a different message than how most Christians see it from at a glance. I definitely can’t sum up the whole video because it’s a lot of depth that he goes into, however if I had to sum it up in a sentence, the message may be that it is about Job’s moralism, being that he believed he was righteous and did things just to get by, as opposed to hedonism which is just doing whatever you want. I would definitely give it a watch if you have the time.
Now this is an interesting topic
For the Harrowing of Hell specifically, I believe it is true for the following reasons:
- Heaven and Hell now are different than Heaven and Hell after Judgment Day:
Scripture tells us that, in Hell (post judgment), people will be so wicked that they wouldn't ever want to go to Christ, which is why their punishment would be justified. However, in the story of the rich man and Lazarus, we see that, although the rich man was supposed to go to Hell (post judgment), he still wasnt exactly there as he begged Abraham to help him out, meaning he still wanted a connection with God. From here, we can figure out that, pre judgment, the dead who are waiting for Hell, still can choose God if given the chance
- Jesus descended into Hell and people followed Him:
As mentioned in the video, 1 Peter says that Jesus descended into Hell after His death but people followed Him from there (probably the OT saints). This would solidify the view of the "waiting room" before judgment day, mentioned above.
Please do a video on the Shepard Of Hermas
I can tell you where the garden of Eden is hiding.
Well where is it Antarctica or heaven?
Woah it’s Mister Dean
I saw you say you liked this guy on a community post but I didn’t expect you to make a comment there was a brain disconnect there
You should make a video on the early church interpretations on genesis
Great closing statement
thanks :D
God bless you
When it says “you gave him as food for the creatures of the wilderness”, it reminds me of Whale Falls for some reason
I just wanna say that i love the way you end your videos.
Hello fellow brother i wish to ask you about a spiritual question that has been plaguing me is copying the bible onto for example a mc book and quill a sin i want to show my devotion in how i play but im not surr if it may be sinfull
If anyone wants to know more about the nephilim, I highly recommend zoomers video about it.
It solves all the mysteries
Man, I love how unbiased you explain the different possible interpretations. Thanks for that my fellow Zoomer
Hey RZ. Great video! I do have to offer some correction. Jude 1:9 is not a quotation from the Book of Enoch, but it is a reference to the Assumption of Moses, which is another piece of Second Temple apocalyptic literature. Jude 1: 14-15 however does quote the Book of Enoch.
Are the Nephilim really a mystery??? Like I feel like the angel thing is so straightforward and obvious tbh (you know the bible describes them as giants, right? Why would that happen by just two human groups interbreeding?)
I kinda of agree, but it is still debatable.
The name, "Heretic," definitely fits for this point of view. Jesus was 5'5, what do you think David was when he slew the giant? The average height back then was short, and these, "Giants," were most likely 6'0. Not 50'0 like those weird Evangelical pastors like to preach. The righteous line of Seth is definitely a better understanding.
@OrthoJason ah yes, david was just a midget fighting an NBA player, and anyone who disagrees is a heretic. Jk no hard feeling but that is what your argument is.
Except it's really not. Angels don't procreate amongst themselves, how would they do it with humans. And the Bible doesn't call them giants. Enoch and the book of jubilees does. Enoch is deuterocanonical and Jubilees just straight up isn't.
@@OrthoJason We learn that goliath was like 6'6 as I remember, so that is probably about what we are talking about
Job is a good lesson for those compelled to judge others or weigh in on something. You make yourself an accuser when you side with the accusers.
Man I can’t wait for heaven to find about this stuff. To me this a great demonstration of how Christianity isn’t boring. The depth of the wisdom and knowledge and mystery of God is so amazing and interesting that such insults fall on deaf ears
That was a beautiful closing, my guy
Very nice video🎉
Wendigoon RZ colab when? 👀👀
Zoomer, what’s your opinion of the Fallen Kingdom series?
My old pastor taught that Nero was a *potential* Antichrist, with there always being a candidate on earth, since the devil who gives power to the Antichrist doesn't know the day or hour any more than we do.
The Eastern Orthodox do teach the Harrowing of Hell. Some say that Plato was saved during the event 💪
We can (probably) never know, but I'd like to think Plato was saved.
Have you been listening to lord of spirits? They just discussed the dispute over moses body recently
He mentioned a possible conversation with Fr Stephen De Young on a stream a while back, and the need for that to happen is only increasing.
I'd love more of these videos that are more informational about the bible, cause I sure as hell wouldn't notice any of these if I were reading through it.
The Lord is clear and loud about his love for humanity on the Holy Scripture which is the most important thing, but the human authorship left some misteries which make it a even more incredible set of books
Christ in you, the hope of glory
What about the author of Hebrews!
I’m pretty sure the argument over Moses’ body comes from the Assumption of Moses, another work which Jude also quotes.
I agree with RZ's view on the Nephilim, which he explained in another video that everyone should watch right after this one
The arguments using the good thief against the harrowing of hell can be refuted when you remind yourself how many days Jesus’ body was in the tomb
“pin the tail on the Antichrist” incredible
I might have (sort of) an answer to question 1. I’ve been reading Genesis recently, and when the book gets to Genesis 5 which is where Enoch’s life is mentioned what I got was this:
Whether or not the people in Adam’s genealogy actually lived those literal number of years is secondary to the tension that the passage gives us. Right off the back of the Fall in Genesis 3 God has said that Adam and his offspring will die, and now his offspring are all dying off one by one. It doesn’t matter how long they live, (Methuselah lives 969 years) not a single one of them can escape the wages of sin being in the world.
Throughout the reading of the whole genealogy, maybe the tension the author is trying to leave us with is: “will this person escape? No? How about this one? They’re living for so long! Oh no.. they died too.” But only one man stands out who is Enoch, and the passage tells us that Enoch “was not found, for God took him.”
Enoch stands out among Adam’s offspring as the only man who does not die because the passage also tells us that he “walked with God”. In doing this the passage is offering us a little picture of the ultimate salvation from death that God offers to those who walk with Him. Then, by living through faith in the promise. Today only through Jesus Christ. In fact, if we look at believers today the gospel tells us that Christ will come to take us home. We will still die, but by trusting in Jesus, God delivers us from the curse of death like Enoch. We’re not really meant to know much else about his life, because that’s what I think the author’s purpose here is trying to point us to- his faith in God.
Never stop making these kinda videos
Only liberals that try to deny the inerrancy of scripture say that Job wasn't a real person. Other passages reference Job with Daniel and Noah in the same light.
Even if these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they would deliver only themselves by their righteousness,” says the Lord God.
Ezekiel 14:14 NKJV
Blameless doesn't mean that he was sinless. It means that he walked in the fear of the Lord and had a righteous character. It says the same thing about Noah. Also, righteousness is counted by faith even in the old testament.
6:55 Job isn't the only one to be called blameless, so to say he's too good to be true ignores the other "blameless" or "upright" people in scripture. The author obviously doesn't mean they were perfect the way God is, but they walked faithfully with God. In Luke 1 the priest Zachariah and his wife were also described as blameless.
Job seems like a kind of parable to me, a continued conversation of Proverbs vs Ecclesiastes
Pls one day talk about the Angel's Letters to the Churches in Revelations sometime fren
Yahweh defeating Leviathan rather reminds me of how Marduk defeated Tiamat. I always wondered if there was a connection there, literately or theologically. Also because of the use of "crush the head", which hearkens back to Genesis. "He (the serpent) will strike his heel, and he will crush its head."
Recently had a sermon out of Peter. That was my pastor's interpretation, it was Jesus proclaiming his victory to the fallen angels. Funnily enough, I'd never heard that interpretation before. I always share that popular StarWars meme of Anikin vs Obiwan on the day after Good Friday "Actual Footage of Jesus Confronting Satan for the Souls in Hell" or whatever the caption is.
This is one of the things I came to realize; You can find elements of truth in other places but often twisted, forgotten, added to, corrupted or otherwise incomplete while scripture is the full and complete truth. The wisdom of Solomon was known BEFORE Solomon but recorded by him, all this wisdom comes from God before time. So naturally it has proliferated throughout the world. But God keeps his scripture to the purpouse of our perfecting 2 Timothy 3:16-17
I’m not aware of Enoch referring to Michael disputing with the Devil over Moses’s body. I think you are mistaken about that.
The book you're thinking of is the "Assumption of Moses"
and the ten lost tribes. You should make a sequel
I think Enoch was referenced because it was commonly understood but also the part Jude quotes is just about how God will come to judge the world so it's nothing that scripture doesn't already mention.
As soon as I saw the word "Dinosaurs" in the thumbnail, I knew you were going to talk about the two beasts mentioned in the book of Job (10:03-11:20).
It is popular with Young Earth Creationists, and as tempting as the interpretation is to the average person who is a Christian and likes dinosaurs, you are right in the Bible not needing to mention the prehistoric creatures in the first place, as that is not the point of the gospel. I think this interpretation (and Young Earth Creationism as a whole) is an example of eisegesis.
About Revelation, it starts by saying that it is a Revelation of Jesus Christ, given to the Apostle John. I think that, although the events are important, the whole idea is that, after all the storms, Christ wins, and we all live happily forever after.
Can't wait for atheists to clip this video out of context 😂
By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was commended as having pleased God
And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.
Jude 1:9 is not referring to the book of enoch but some other oral tradition. Jude refers to enoch later on
Tollhouses aren't a doctrine of the orthodox church. While some believe in them others don't. If you have ever been to an orthodox funeral you'll hear a priest say that on this day the deceased one comes before God and God decides a place where his soul will reside till the final judgement.
I think Michael Jones’ opinion on the Nephilim is the most reasonable interpretation
I think it puts too much stock in the interpretations of one particular place and time and dismisses the rest as "anti supernatural prejudice"
I remember the first time I read through Revelation. When I was done, I thought "no wonder this Book's meaning is so highly Contested."
The harrowing is probably my favorite story because christ is a redeemer and it only makes sense he would go down to hell to redeem the people that came before him, he is mankind's king and that means he wants for us to be in his kingdom.
Nit to mention it parallels the story of soddom and gammorah wherein the angels are asked repeatedly if anyone in the city is good will it be spared, the number proposed getting smaller each time the question is asked. It's obvious that if he would be willing to spare the cities if they had ANY righteous citizens, then he would surely go to hell to redeem presumably virtuous pagans.