My arguably most favorite thing about these lectures is always the comprehensive context. Sometimes intros are so long that they become annoying as hell. But then, when a core topic is finally being addressed, it all suddenly starts making sense and I am grateful for all the prior explanations. That is how great teaching works: one does not just point out facts, but one explains why and how. Thank You, John Hamer & Co.!
Getting straight to the point, ..There never was multiple Gospels by multiple authors. The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.
@@Vytas. The Gospel narrative itself to start with, John 21:24 "This is the disciple[whom Jesus loved/ Lazarus] which testifieth of these things, AND WROTE THESE THINGS: and we[Apostles] know that his testimony is true." John 11:5 Now Jesus LOVED Martha, and her sister, and LAZARUS John 11:3 Therefore his sisters sent unto him{Jesus], saying, Lord, behold, HE[Lazarus] WHOM THOU LOVEST is sick.. John11:36 Then said the Jews, Behold how he[Jesus] LOVED him[Lazarus]!
@@Vytas. secondly, "At least one group of Crusaders brought back more than just heretical hearsay-- they reportedly returned to Europe with hard evidence of error and duplicity in church dogma." -Jim Mars, Rule By Secrecy (Secrets of the Freemasons)
@@termination9353 "Wrote these things" can mean anything. Hereby I write one sentence and it is "those" things. And Jesus loved John, everyone, so that is not an argument. As for the mess in the Bible, anyone can see without going to Jerusalem that there are many versions and we possibly will find even more later, maybe even more original, older versions. We keep "finding" fake versions and artifacts. Who claims that there was only one Gospel and it was split and adulterated by Romans? What is the evidence that there was only one gospel?
I'm one of those guys who have been recently lured into this channel by that algorithm you mentioned in the opening. As an atheist, I normally watch physics, mathematics, computer programming, rocket starts, history and stuff like that. And from now on: you too! :-) Greetings from Germany
I am an agnostic and even though I don't believe any of the supernatural claims from John's church I have really enjoyed attending his progressive Christian online church service on Sundays. They are a very accepting group of people who seem to be open to all religions and beliefs/non-believers.
i recently found this channel too and as an atheist who often engages with theists online, i find it's crucial to know as much as possible about this subject.
The Protestants got rid of the Apocrypha because they assumed that the Jewish canon was older, but the Jewish and Christian canons were developed at around the same time!
The gospel comes before the Jewish faith..they are the ones who corrupted it. "Beware of the leaven of the pharasees and Sadducees." "In the beginning, was the word..." The gospels were spoken before ever having been written down...if that makes sense
I like your podcasts on the history of the books of the Bible. Definitely do more of those. That’s where most Christian pastors fail. In my opinion, what you are doing is truly studying the Bible.
How excatly do you define whatever you mean by *Knowledge*" How do you know Hamer is not making it up as he goes along He can't be that bright if he does not know that the Josephus hoax was exposed as a hoax ages ago You can invent anything you like if you are confident that you cannot be contradicted and if you proceed on the basis that men (human beings/dreaming machines) are as pasively credulous as the kinderlander, you are on safe ground, you simply need to know which are the buttons or levers that control the natural credulity of said dreaming machines you can invent anything you please
Ur an excellent teacher. Thanks for putting together such interesting presentations. I’m not the fastest draw in the west but u somehow make me THINK I know what ur talking about. Lol. That a a great gift. Thank u!
John's lectures are such a tremendous blessing. With the algorithm feeding me the "psedo" History Channel and the juvenile deconstructionism of Mythvision I find myself watching these lectures more and more. John's genuine faith and intellectual integrity are a refreshing antidote to the copius bull poop of other channels. As someone who studies the New Testament in Greek daily, I can attest to the quality of his presentations. I am tremendously grateful for this ministry. 🙏🏼
Couldn’t help yourself huh? Had to sling your insecurities at mythvision. As an agnostic brought here by the same algorithm, I was just checking the comments to see if this was going to be just more Christian propaganda or actual critical scholarship - your comments suggests I shouldn’t waste my time. Hope the channel appreciates your efforts. See ya.
@@LexxysLifeDownUnder-kr8sb This channel actually engages a lot with actual critical scholarship, which is why I was surprised by the comment. I think it has to just be a vibes thing. Because since Centre Place are progressive Christian’s they engage with the critical scholarship in an honest way recognizing that the Bible is not without error. It’s just that they don’t spend much time criticizing Christianity itself since they are Christians. Like I said, different vibes. Atheists (for the most part) and their criticisms at mythvision is a different vibe than Christians trying to be better Christians honest with the scholarship.
It should be mentioned that the framing of Marcion taking the Gospel of Luke and changing it is what was said by the proto-orthodox group. Marcion and his followers contented that their version is the original version of the text. There are some modern biblical scholar who make a case that Marcion's version is the original one.
This is conflating two separate ideas about Marcion's gospel. There are scholars who think Marcion literally wrote the first gospel. This is idea one. There are also scholars who think Marcion had access to the original gospel (before "Mark" redacted it). This is idea two. The two ideas differ in timeline. For scholars who agree with the first idea, the four canonicals must then have been written post-Marcion, putting the dates of their composition firmly in the second century CE and above. For proponents of the second idea, the general consensus for date of composition can still be valid. In either case, the idea is that the 50% of Mark found in Luke, plus quotes from Marcion's gospel preserved by his opponents, form the totality of the first gospel that the four evangelists later redacted.
I'm not conflating anything, you're introducing this other question of Marcion priority which I didn't mention nor is it relevant to what I was talking about.
@@zelenisok It's very relevant. Right now the discussion about Marcion priority is very confused because most people conflate the two versions of this hypothesis. It's important to state which version you define as "Marcion priority", especially because Mythicists have gotten into the game now. The implications of Marcion inventing the first gospel (instead of inheriting it) can be seen as direct evidence for the Mythicist position. If Marcion did invent the first gospel and this gospel did not include any references to Judaism or of Jesus being a Jew, then the later gospels must be inventions intended to insert a Jewish preacher into a story about a Greek demigod.
My dude, I wasnt talking about Marcion priority at all. I dont care here about whether Marcion's gospel is the first gospel, but just whether or not its a redaction of Luke. And if its not a redaction of Luke, thats a separate issue from the one of is it first gospel or not.
Would you do a video on Mormonism and Freemasonry? Or the development of Christian Esotericism such as Neoplatonic Gnostic and Merkabah mysticism created various lineages of esoteric Christians? How about Rosicrucianism or Martinsm and other esoteric Christian lineages (their history, what inspired them, their theology etc). I used to be part of a quasi Masonic Order that separed from Regular (accepted by the United Grand Lodge of England) about 100 years ago. It was very Christian and nearly all Masons I've met were Judeo Christian of some form or another. The intersection between Mormonism and Masonry has been glossed over in some of these otherwise thorough lectures. There's a lot that could be said. The relationship between Freemasonry and the history LDS have links in ritual, symbolism, organizational structure, and more. Joseph Smith along with several early church leaders, became Freemasons in the early 1840s in Nauvoo, Illinois. This period was crucial for the development of the LDS Church, particularly in its formulation of temple rituals and ceremonies particularly Endowment. Masonry has had a often misunderstood, maligned and taboo place in history including Christian history. Subjects could include Solomon's Templ/Royal Arch, The Widow's Son, The Knights Templar and Neo Templarism, Knights of St John/of Malta etc however even just a video on Mormonism's history with Freemasonry would be much appreciated.
You might want to look at Who Wrote the Bible (the Documentary Hypothesis) a Centre Place presentation from about 4 years ago. There is a vast amount of material on this site, mine is a half-vast answer. Cheers.
@@dantallman5345 Matt Baker does a more comprehensive explanation of the Documentary hypothesis on his channel Useful Charts. That's to be expected though since his video is much more recent than John's.
Hidden Suppressed Secret or Extra etc Gospels / writings ... at 2:08 a question is asked about supposedly 'The Catholic Church suppressing the "Dead Sea Scrolls" '- which are correctly explained as dating from 'Roman times'. HOWEVER i think the questioner was probably thinking of the Nag Hammadi Library - see eg wikipedia, which includes lots of Christian Coptic and (arguably very) non-canonical writings from before 400
AD 51-125: The New Testament books are written. AD 140: Marcion, a businessman in Rome, taught that there were two Gods: Yahweh, the cruel God of the Old Testament, and Abba, the kind father of the New Testament. Marcion eliminated the Old Testament as Scriptures and, since he was anti-Semitic, kept from the New Testament only 10 letters of Paul and 2/3 of Luke's gospel (he deleted references to Jesus's Jewishness). Marcion's "New Testament", the first to be compiled, forced the mainstream Church to decide on a core canon: the four Gospels and Letters of Paul. AD 200: The periphery of the canon is not yet determined. According to one list, compiled at Rome c. AD 200 (the Muratorian Canon), the NT consists of the 4 gospels; Acts; 13 letters of Paul (Hebrews is not included); 3 of the 7 General Epistles (1-2 John and Jude); and also the Apocalypse of Peter. AD 367: The earliest extant list of the books of the NT, in exactly the number and order in which we presently have them, is written by Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, in his Festal letter # 39 of 367 A.D.. 382 --Council of Rome (whereby Pope Damasus started the ball rolling for the defining of a universal canon for all city-churches). Listed the New Testament books in their present number and order. 393 A.D. --the Council of Hippo, which began "arguing it out." Canon proposed by Bishop Athanasius. AD 397: The Council of Carthage, which refined the canon for the Western Church, sending it back to Pope Innocent for ratification. In the East, the canonical process was hampered by a number of schisms (esp. within the Church of Antioch). However, this changed by ... 787 A.D. The Ecumenical Council of Nicaea II, which adopted the canon of Carthage. At this point, both the Latin West and the Greek / Byzantine East had the same canon. However, ... The non-Greek, Monophysite and Nestorian Churches of the East (the Copts, the Ethiopians, the Syrians, the Armenians, the Syro-Malankars, the Chaldeans, and the Malabars) were still left out. But these Churches came together in agreement, in 1442A.D., in Florence. AD 1442: At the Council of Florence, the entire Church recognized the 27 books. This council confirmed the Roman Catholic Canon of the Bible which Pope Damasus I had published a thousand years earlier. So, by 1439, all orthodox branches of the Church were legally bound to the same canon. This is 100 years before the Reformation. AD 1536: In his translation of the Bible from Greek into German, Luther removed 4 N.T. books (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation) and placed them in an appendix saying they were less than canonical. AD 1546: At the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church reaffirmed once and for all the full list of 27 books. The council also confirmed the inclusion of the Deuterocanonical books which had been a part of the Bible canon since the early Church and was confirmed at the councils of 393 AD, 373, 787 and 1442 AD. At Trent Rome actually dogmatized the canon, making it more than a matter of canon law, which had been the case up to that point, closing it for good.
Well said, and Marcion was excommunicated unilaterally by who in 144 AD and what Church? I just want to document that on your list for the group of Christianity that sprung up in the 16th century from regions North of the Alps in Europe.
Can you please share what you know about the Redactor in the documentary hypothesis? Was the Redactor one person or multiple people and what evidence is there? Thanks I always appreciate your lectures 🙏
Hellenistic Greek was the language of the day during the time of Christ. This was due to the fact that Alexander the Great had conquered the region several hundred years before. The Hebrew language was on its way out, and there was a critical need for a translation of the Hebrew Old Testament for dispersed Greek speaking Jews. This translation, called the Septuagint, or LXX, was completed by Jewish scholars in about 148 B.C. and it had all of the books, including the seven removed by Martin Luther over 1650 years later. The New Testament has about 350 references to Old Testament verses. By careful examination, scholars have determined that 300 of these are from the Septuagint and the rest are from the Hebrew Old Testament*. They have shown that Jesus Christ Himself, quoted from the Septuagint. Early Christians used the Septuagint to support Christian teachings. For the first 300 years of Christianity, there was no Bible as we know it today. Christians had the Old Testament Septuagint, and literally hundreds of other books from which to choose. The Catholic Church realized early on that she had to decide which of these books were inspired and which ones weren't. The debates raged between theologians, Bishops, and Church Fathers, for several centuries as to which books were inspired and which ones weren't. In the meantime, several Church Councils or Synods, were convened to deal with the matter, notably, Rome in 382, Hippo in 393, and Carthage in 397 and 419. The debates sometimes became bitter on both sides. One of the most famous was between St. Jerome, who felt the seven books were not canonical, and St. Augustine who said they were. Protestants who write about this will invariably mention St. Jerome and his opposition, and conveniently omit the support of St. Augustine. I must point out here that Church Father's writings are not infallible statements, and their arguments are merely reflections of their own private opinions. When some say St. Jerome was against the inclusion of the seven books, they are merely showing his personal opinion of them. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion. However, A PERSONS PRIVATE OPINION DOES NOT CHANGE THE TRUTH AT ALL. There are always three sides to every story, this side, that side, and the side of truth. Whether Jerome's position, or Augustine's position was the correct position, had to be settled by a third party, and that third party was the Catholic Church. Now the story had a dramatic change, as the Pope stepped in to settle the matter. In concurrence with the opinion of St. Augustine, and being prompted by the Holy Spirit, Pope St. Damasus I, at the Council of Rome in 382, issued a decree appropriately called, "The Decree of Damasus", in which he listed the canonical books of both the Old and New Testaments. He then asked St. Jerome to use this canon and to write a new Bible translation which included an Old Testament of 46 books, which were all in the Septuagint, and a New Testament of 27 books. ROME HAD SPOKEN, THE ISSUE WAS SETTLED. "THE CHURCH RECOGNIZED ITS IMAGE IN THE INSPIRED BOOKS OF THE BIBLE. THAT IS HOW IT DETERMINED THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. St. Jerome acquiesced under obedience (Hebrews 13:17) and began the translation, and completed it in 404 A.D.. In 405, his new Latin Vulgate* was published for the first time. *The word "vulgate" means, "The common language of the people, or the vernacular". The Decree of Pope St. Damasus I, Council of Rome. 382 A.D.... ST. DAMASUS 1, POPE, THE DECREE OF DAMASUS:
There would be no New Testament without the Church and there would be no Church without the New Testament. They both grew up together. The New Testament was largely complete (agreed upon) by the mid-2nd century. It needed clarification and definition in response to Marcion. Perhaps the best way to describe it: as heresies appeared and claimed new or edited scriptures, the Church needed to define the limits. Other than this addition, I agree with you.
I always find it amusing that divine inspiration as explanation for a canonical text is made more viable by it being written earlier. As if it could run out or be diminished.
Referring to minute 1:23:13 - I am German and Lutheran, and I have my own theory why Martin Luther might have rejected the deutero-canonical books: It is well-known that the Protestant Reformation started by criticising the sale of indulgences for money, which the Dominican preacher Johann Tetzel had extended from an act of personal penitence to a payment instead of penitence, which he promoted also in favour of deceased loved ones, to bail them out of purgatory. In the second book of Maccabees, chapter 12 verses 39-45, there is a passage which might be used to justify the sale of indulgences for the dead, and I can imagine very well that Martin Luther might have been disgusted by this passage, and might have looked for excuses how to declare the books of Maccabees not to be an inspired holy scripture. - Furthermore, Martin Luther emphasised the biblical commandment that we shall serve God our Lord alone, which includes Jesus and the Holy Spirit who are equally divine according to the Nicene creed, but we shall not adore any graven images, and not pray to any saints neither angels, not even to the virgin Mary, because we have not been given any other name under heaven that would save us except the name of Jesus (Acts 4,12). ’ But the book of Tobit is full of dialogues between the protagonist Tobias and his guardian-angel Rafaël, so that this book might justify praying to the angels. So I suppose it was the content of these two books which caused Martin Luther to reject them, and the fact that these books are not in the Hebrew Bible provided Martin Luther with a reason to sort them out. Martin Luther did not think very highly of the Jews, and he would otherwise not have felt himself to be obliged by Jewish opinions. - All these thoughts are theories of my own, and my question is: Have these ideas already appeared elsewhere? Has 2nd Macc 12, 39.45, actually been used by the Catholic Church to underpin their indulgence trade?
Also, at what point did reformers decide they were going to take the bible literally? It seems throughout early Christian history, it was understood by Christian scholars that the Bible was not a literal text, so why did later people decide to start taking it this way? It seems odd.
After several listening, I get the feeling that Marcion was fairly unprecedented in coming up with a canon, and that Jewish communities hadn't bothered or thought to finalize a list of "Devine writings"
If you find four books titled Anonymous and after 180 years later these books were named Mark Mathew Luke and John then how these books became words of God. I can not understand it
What is there to understand? The claims of Genesis about life, the earth and the universe have been overturned by scientific evidence. These texts do not withstand logical tests. The bible is basically a steaming heap of monkey dung.
@@freddiereadie30....and yet all the zealots follow it as if it were the word of a god despite the fact, that we only have evidence to the contrary. Yet, more morons believe in this crap, that there are people who don't. 🤮
I am at four minutes, and I realized a couple of things. Your presentation starts with the idea that the books of the Bible were not meant to be a cohesive book, suggesting that God did not intend it that way. Jesus refers to an already compiled collection of books recognized as scripture. This reference would also be synonymous with the old wine. New wine could not be put in old bottles because they would burst, so the new one would have to be put in new bottles (or wine skins), also referred to as the new covenant, so both could be preserved. It is possible, if there were ever a document or group of documents written down (commonly referred to as Q), that Jesus purposely had his words written down with the intention there would be a forthcoming collection of perspectives compiled that would draw different people to him. I’m pretty sure he didn’t just want to save only the people who were within earshot, without his words being perpetuated for future generations.
It is simply a myth that the catholic church did not want the Bible to be translated into vernacular. At the time Luther appeared there had been many translations available. There may be an exception for England.
Could you provide a list of these "many translations" that existed at the time of Luther? Was there a German translation? An English translation? How about a French translation? Spanish? Italian? Dutch? Finnish? Danish? Russian? Polish? Eager to see this list. Thanks.
The majority of the work was done via common acceptance over years among a wide range of communities. Although after that church bodies and groups voted but if they knew if they strayed too far from accepted “tradition” then the vote would not be accepted.
Who told you that " the majority of the work was done via common acceptance over years among a wide range of communities," and why do you believe them?
Presumably because there is no way of finding out, he does not say who decided what would go into the so-called bible which is merely another word for book, nor who decided to tack the jesussey or gospels onto the foundational document of a religion that has *Absolutely_Nothing* to do with the way of christ, namely the Torah which is rather like tacking the Gita onto Halesbury's laws of England or the Four quartets onto Popular mechanics. It is a good question who is to decide what is official, sanctioned or canon. if there were any originals of the so-called gospels, where are they now?
Of course Nicea is now Iznik, a Muslim town famous for its beautiful Iznik ware porcelains with blue and green peacocks. I recommend pottery history over endless wars.
Why would Jewish people not want to have Maccabees in their Torah? Wouldn't a people be proud of such a story and is it recorded elsewhere in other non Christian texts texts to preserve the story for the community today?
If I were Jesus, I would have communicated with Paul in a third heaven dream and told him that law observance wasn't necessary for the gentiles. This is only a logical deduction from the logos.
The Bible is a Catholic book, whether Eastern, Latin or Ethiopian Catholics, so thanks to the Catholic church for writing and cannonizing the Bible. Unfortunately, so many other Christian denominations deny this fact. The Protestant Bible was created 1500 years later. Also, only the Catholic church have a continuing list of Bishops and Popes from the time of the Apostles up to this day, even with the Great Schism even if one doesn't include Peter as pope #1, proves that the Catholic church is the one church established by Christ Himself.
I don't suppose that by any chance you are familiar with the fallacy argumentum ad populum; it is frequently relied upon by the Elsies or Lower classes, and it is a fallacy of relevance, they supposing whether or not something is "commonly received" to have relevance, but to what they have no idea.
@@jamessheffield4173 "We", being you and your imaginary friend eh titch?-but bless you live a a little world all of your own and have no choice about that - or anything, but I expect you'll grow out of it in due course, you creatures tending to have your ephemeral little fads sand fashions, one day this, the next, the exact opposite.
May I suggest you read THE VALEDICTION OF MOSES and THE ORIGINS OF JUDAISM before your class coming later? Judaism greatly altered their records starting at Ezekiel's time, again starting 444 BC, and again in 900 CE MT. It's a mess - don't blame God.
Why not blame him? He is supposed to be all-knowing, all-seeing, almighty and benevolent. It just cannot all be true and if he exists at all he is clearly to blame for this colossal f**k-up. 😊
John, would you consider giving a presentation about the history of the weaponization of religion for political reasons? The horror happening in Gaza is really tearing me apart, emotionally. I am a 57 year-old white woman living in Missouri, and I am emotionally ripped apart by the mass murder of civilians that our media seems to believe is happening because of a virus or gremlins rather than a right-wing, theo-nationalist, barely democratic, government that my taxes are supporting.
( please see the comment I just posted on the history of modern Israel -- & yes Bibi Netanyahu needs to go ! as the majority of Israeli voters agree (& Israeli voters are 20% Arab) But Hamas is an Anti Democracy tool of Iran, with Russian backing -- Hamas leaders live in luxury in Doha Qatar, their families safe, while using "Palestinian" civilians as human shields + martyrs...
@@genskitchenmagic2957 No. It's really happening and it is just as she said. The abused have become the abusers, but it's important to remember this is Benji and his crew of thugs not everyone.
GLORY TO GOD இயேசுவின் வருகை சீக்கிரம்.. JESUS IS COMING VERY VERY SOON BE PREPARED...ஆயத்தமாவோம் மரணத்திற்கு முன் இயேசுவை ஏற்றுக்கொள்வோம் FROM JAFFNA SRI LANKA 0:40
-The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.
so at ~50-minute point, mention is made of Diaspora Jews returning to the Levant in "mid-20th C." -- while true for European Jews who survived the Holocaust, 50% of the ancestry of Israeli Jews is North African or former Ottoman Empire After The Great War, the Ottoman Empire collapsed, resulting in 21 Arab States in 1920s -- who then expelled the vast majority of their Jewish residents (note that when the State of Israel was declared after WW2, 2 decades later, the Arab population was not expelled -- 20% of Israeli citizens are Arab Their Arab neighbors who believed the 21 Arab States would destroy Israel ( now expressed as "From The River to the Sea" ) are who we call "Palestinians" today -- they fled to the "Two State Solution" == Jordan where they are the majority today, & they fled to borderlands, awaiting War to destroy Israel...
so The Didache did not make the canon, but is cited by Roman Catholics to support "only procreative sex is allowed / single male priesthood" ideas that arose later, ~AD 1100s... anachronistic
THIS MAN ASSERTS NOT ON PERSON IN THE BIBLE KNEW THEIR BOOKS WOULD BE PART OF SCRIPTURE This Man does not know what his is talking about BELAYING HE HAS NEVER READ THE BIBLE COVER TO COVER. The first who KNEW his books would be in scripture from his day to the end of the Age was MOSES. Within his texts in Exodus and Deuteronomy MOSES CLEARLY KNEW FROM GOD These books would be scripture. Enoch clearly knew his book 1 Enoch would be scripture for all time. Job Knew his book was to be scripture for all time. And to name a few others Isaiah, Knew, Daniel Knew, Ezra Knew, to name a few in the OT For this man to think Jesus did not clearly know, Shows how little of scripture this man has ever read. Matthew Mark Luke and John each clearly knew their Gospel were eternally part of scripture. See in revelation "The Testimony of Jesus" "The Every lasting Gospel" Peter, James, Jude, Paul, the writer of Hebrews [Not Paul but one who had been a Levite] ALL KNEW. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unlike this hack we studied reading original writings in Church History for 45 years We also have studied and translated Greek for 45 year and also Translate Latin. We first read the bible cover to cover at age 14, back to back 3x's with no break in less than a year. Which was THE MOST IMPORTANT THING I DID AS A CHILD AFTER COMING TO CHRIST. The word CANNON is not found anywhere in scripture. It refers to Men, Denominations in particular declaring a certain number of books are true scripture while others are not. This is called THE CANNON. Understand the first Cannon for scripture was named by a heretic around 90ad. This should NOT be accepted. The Only gospel he accepted was Luke. Paul tells us Jesus is the head of all teaching and revelation. (Moderns have put Paul as the head of all teaching and doctrine) Jesus knew all books that were scripture as did His apostles and disciples and Paul and the writer of Hebrews But Jesus is the head of the church. In the gospels and in revelation Jesus quotes and cites from ALL BOOKS OF SCRIPTURE if JESUS QUOTES FROM AND TEACHES FROM ANY BOOK; IT IS SCRIPTURE PERIOD As to the Cannons; There have been NUMEROUS CONFLICTING CANNONS over the centuries generations adding books others removing books so having far more books than we currently have in our bible. The King James Bible from 1611-1868 had many more books in the O.T. These extra books were called THE APOCRYPHA. What exactly is the Apocrypha that all moderns now reject. None remembering these books were in the KJV, The Luther Bible, The Geneva bible, and the Latin Vulgate. We have personally researched each of these to learning the years the Apocrypha was in each of these bibles. But moderns search out nothing. Except it is in modern writings IT NEVER EXISTED in their minds. So what is the Apocrypha? It is the original books in the Greek Septuagint and a few added later by rabbis'. The wisdom of Sirach, written by a rabbi. The book of Aristide the pharisees account of the creation of the Septuagint with themselves as the hero's Omitting the High Priest and the Priests. The Septuagint was translated in 280 bc by Ptolemy in Egypt. About 240 bc The Sadducees put the Greek Septuagint in every synagogue as the only bible uses as they were using TARGUMS up to that time with differing versions that were causing fights between synagogues. So one version was used then in all synagogues howbeit in Greek. So that for the remainder of the OT during the Gospels and all the Epistles to 130ad all synagogues only used the Greek Septuagint. So that in 1983 when I was a young pastor I discovered Jesus in Luke and Matthew when he announced his ministry HE DID NOT USE THE MASORETIC TEXT. As in our 4 VOLUME Hebrew interlinear we discovered words in Hebrew that were MATERIALLY DIFFERNT than what Jesus spoke. We had also a copy of the Septuagint so when we found the passage in Isaiah WE FOUND JESUS WORDS IN LUKE (Since this is the text we examined) Was Word for Word from the Greek Septuagint book of Isaiah. The dead sea scrolls Every book in the Septuagint has been recovered from the caves in Hebrew and Aramaic. As well as 2 versions of the Septuagint in Greek. a short and long version. This has changed the complexation in the Academic to realize EVERY BOOK or the Original Septuagint was scripture from 280bc to 340 as when Constantine sent Eusebius to gather all the books of scripture Understand from Christ's ascension to 340 Not one Apostle Not one Disciples and Not One church had EVER PUBLISHED A FULL OLD TESTAMET. It was left undone and it was Constantine that published the first full Greek Old Testament he made 50 copies none have been found that have survived at this time. Constantine also published the first New Testament binding it to the old testament so there was ONE TESTIMONY from Genesis to Revelation in that first bible. The lLatin Vulgate undid this breaking the bible into two testaments. when i first believed these were erroneously called The Jewish Bible and the Christian bible. We have one faith one baptism and one testament of God. So Jesus and the Apostles quote from 1 the book of Enoch, the sixth book of Moses,, the book of Gad the seer recovered by Israel in the 1980's and the 1st book of Ezra which begins in the 30th year of the captivity. (We have identified these in numerous quotes) The books of the full Septuagint making the OT have many more books but not all books have been yet recovered named in OT scripture. and in 2nd Maccabees. Since we now know Jesus and the apostles all quote and cite all their teachings doctrine and revelation from older scripture we can add in the New Testament the Epistle of Barnabas. But NO OTHER EPISTLES OF PAUL which we have examined in Greek to find the forgeries do not quote and cite older scripture. So a more important thing is MODERNS HAVE NOT KNOWN FOR GENERATIONS THAT WHAT JESUS AND THE APOSTLES QUOTE CITE AND TEACH IS SCRIPTURE. They have all authority the church of the 2nd century to today their Cannons are all based on current opinion of that day and nothing more. So these should be disregarded as having Authority And the cannons add and remove books constantantly. So in reality it is the LAST CANNON in made in the mid. 1800's that has been given all authority. Which is foolishness as these cannons have never agreed on about 5 NT books that are in all bibles today. SEE HOW MUCH OF THIS this hack knows?
Most of your claims cite only religious scripture, which is not a reliable historical source. For example, most scholars now agree Moses probably didn’t exist, and that’s just the first myth you accept unquestioningly and use as your basis for “truth.” This man has forgotten more about the Bible and related history than you’ve ever known.
@@yohei72 You sound like a modern Charismatic I have to state I have studied and translated Greek for 45 years Todays ministry is Greek illiterates I have also 45 years in studying church history and in this reading original writings by eye witnesses The class I was in was the last class that was taught any Greek. and a few years later all denominational bible schools and their pretend seminaries DROPPED TEACHING Church history. So unwittingly I have become a rare soul. Anyway Unless you believe Scripture by itself to be Specific here Original Hebrew That was before the Masoretic text published by Rabbi Akiba in 130 ad as per the 1901 Jewish encyclopedia that took a very dim view of a Rabbi that grossly added and removed from the original Hebrew to create a bible with perhaps 100 verses and passages about Christ removed In my study and translation I have found the Roman Catholic Latin vulgare freely added and removed things from the bible they felt in my estimation that only priests were allowed to know This doctrine of Pastors and Teachers keeping special knowledge afflicted the Reformation and was carried into every denomination of the day. The King James Bible Translation Moderns claim is God breathed Yet we have Found through many hours of work translating Latin that the queen Elizabeth bible a;ka The Bishop's Bible version 3 is word for word the KJV So then the queen Elizabeth bible is that also God breathed NO only the original texts in Hebrew Greek and Aramaic are God breathed No translation of man ever is either they are filled with errors OR certain denominations like the Anglican Church has also added to and removed from scripture inserting their doctrines and traditions while removing verses left and right and putting in filler so it looks complete. I am old retired and gravely ill. and yet I continue. Having had multiple strokes on yon brainstem it affects what I think and write mostly in spelling which I can not see when this is happening Nothing doctors in 14 years straight has but a dent in this and any of the life threatening problems I have. These are the discrepancies many see in scripture translations all texts today are almost identical with some word differences When there is an outlier a single verse that says something no where else in scripture and there are roughly a dozen people have glommed on to We have found in all we examined and retranslated it is the outlier that is mistranslated . In the other case a bit more work to chase down The second or third verses matching this are the One or one's mistranslated. There is a law in scripture in both covenants FOR OUT OF THE MOUTH OF TWO AND THREE WITNESSES [[Here of Scripture. Scripture in the bible is a witness and two or three verses need to confirm something is so ] This is how all teaching doctrine and revelation are to be CONFIRMED not blindly accepted because some preacher says so.
$-There never was multiple Gospels by multiple authors. The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.
As already pointed out, this argument proves that God is powerless. By this logic, we should worship Constantine instead, as he is clearly far more powerful than God can ever be. Heck, apparently even the King of France is more powerful than God.
@@TyronSmith-yo5tt God never said he'll protect his word. Warned us several time to beware lest ye be deceived. It's our job to be righteous not God's job. I've done my job and harmonized the 4 Gospels back together again. Your job is to recognize this truth.
@@andrewsuryali8540 If Centre Space hadn't recognized that God's Word was adulterated in this manner what does that say about the wisdom, understanding, and academics of Centre Space? What does that say about Centre Space actual Bible literacy?
@@termination9353 you are wrong in your settled mind because the oldest surviving manuscripts differ significantly from the bibles that are currently in circulation globally. God owes humanity his preserved word in order for mankind to correctly follow him or else it is inevitable that mankind collectively will fall into error. The whole point of having preserved material from God is so that people believe in him in truth and not error. If you cannot realize this then perhaps your intellect and judgement should be questioned.
@@edwardhale4294 It’s funny like the beano and the dandy. Lots of absurd stories Genesis particularly hilarious, not forgetting Captain Noah with his boat full of every animal on earth and yes including dinosaurs.
so The Didache did not make the canon, but is cited by Roman Catholics to support "only procreative sex is allowed / single male priesthood" ideas that arose later, ~AD 1100s... anachronistic
Been listening to these lectures every night since I discovered the channel a month ago. I feel like I discovered treasure. Thanks for all your work
My arguably most favorite thing about these lectures is always the comprehensive context. Sometimes intros are so long that they become annoying as hell. But then, when a core topic is finally being addressed, it all suddenly starts making sense and I am grateful for all the prior explanations. That is how great teaching works: one does not just point out facts, but one explains why and how. Thank You, John Hamer & Co.!
Getting straight to the point, ..There never was multiple Gospels by multiple authors. The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.
@@termination9353 What is your source for this info?
@@Vytas. The Gospel narrative itself to start with, John 21:24 "This is the disciple[whom Jesus loved/ Lazarus] which testifieth of these things, AND WROTE THESE THINGS: and we[Apostles] know that his testimony is true."
John 11:5
Now Jesus LOVED Martha, and her sister, and LAZARUS
John 11:3
Therefore his sisters sent unto him{Jesus], saying, Lord, behold, HE[Lazarus] WHOM THOU LOVEST is sick..
John11:36 Then said the Jews, Behold how he[Jesus] LOVED him[Lazarus]!
@@Vytas. secondly, "At least one group of Crusaders brought back more than just heretical hearsay-- they reportedly returned to Europe with hard evidence of error and duplicity in church dogma." -Jim Mars, Rule By Secrecy (Secrets of the Freemasons)
@@termination9353 "Wrote these things" can mean anything. Hereby I write one sentence and it is "those" things. And Jesus loved John, everyone, so that is not an argument. As for the mess in the Bible, anyone can see without going to Jerusalem that there are many versions and we possibly will find even more later, maybe even more original, older versions. We keep "finding" fake versions and artifacts. Who claims that there was only one Gospel and it was split and adulterated by Romans? What is the evidence that there was only one gospel?
I'm one of those guys who have been recently lured into this channel by that algorithm you mentioned in the opening. As an atheist, I normally watch physics, mathematics, computer programming, rocket starts, history and stuff like that. And from now on: you too! :-)
Greetings from Germany
The history of the Bible is equally interesting.
I am an agnostic and even though I don't believe any of the supernatural claims from John's church I have really enjoyed attending his progressive Christian online church service on Sundays.
They are a very accepting group of people who seem to be open to all religions and beliefs/non-believers.
i recently found this channel too and as an atheist who often engages with theists online, i find it's crucial to know as much as possible about this subject.
@@ObjectiveEthicsTry universalist unitarians or even better secular humanism.
Thanks for sharing that, welcome and greetings from Canada
John's scholarship is always appreciated.
Thanks for another wonderful lecture. 👍
Just to reiterate what others have said: Mr Hamer's history-focused lectures are great and much appreciated.
The Protestants got rid of the Apocrypha because they assumed that the Jewish canon was older, but the Jewish and Christian canons were developed at around the same time!
Yeah. No.
The gospel comes before the Jewish faith..they are the ones who corrupted it. "Beware of the leaven of the pharasees and Sadducees." "In the beginning, was the word..." The gospels were spoken before ever having been written down...if that makes sense
I like your podcasts on the history of the books of the Bible. Definitely do more of those. That’s where most Christian pastors fail. In my opinion, what you are doing is truly studying the Bible.
See you next week Tuesday at 7PM Eastern for another fantastic Hamercopia of Knowledge.
Lol So close
@@VoiceInHisHead Yet shofar
Could it be Cornucopia.
How excatly do you define whatever you mean by *Knowledge*" How do you know Hamer is not making it up as he goes along
He can't be that bright if he does not know that the Josephus hoax was exposed as a hoax ages ago
You can invent anything you like if you are confident that you cannot be contradicted and if you proceed on the basis that men (human beings/dreaming machines) are as pasively credulous as the kinderlander, you are on safe ground, you simply need to know which are the buttons or levers that control the natural credulity of said dreaming machines you can invent anything you please
So big is bible & other scriptures- it is nice to be reminded & learn ( I forget a lot) so the reminders are ACE!!
"love thy Neighbour" Amen
Very well done. Such a clear and comprehensive presentation. Thank you.
Thank you for sharing these lectures!
This presentation is so full of great information, I'm on my 3rd listening. I try taking notes, but there's just so much to absorb/consider
Wonderfully done! Bravo Bravo Bravo!!! Is a transcript of this video available? If yes, how can I attain a copy? What is the fee?
Thanks for the awesome stream.
No racist comments about white people? Nice to see you've grown up sister. ✌ ❤
Thanks!
Thank you for supporting the channel!
Would love a lecture on Jesus and the Talmud. Some interesting stuff there.
Great lecture as always!!
Thanks for all the excellent lectures, always looking forward
Ur an excellent teacher. Thanks for putting together such interesting presentations. I’m not the fastest draw in the west but u somehow make me THINK I know what ur talking about. Lol. That a a great gift. Thank u!
You're very welcome!
John's lectures are such a tremendous blessing. With the algorithm feeding me the "psedo" History Channel and the juvenile deconstructionism of Mythvision I find myself watching these lectures more and more. John's genuine faith and intellectual integrity are a refreshing antidote to the copius bull poop of other channels. As someone who studies the New Testament in Greek daily, I can attest to the quality of his presentations. I am tremendously grateful for this ministry. 🙏🏼
both Centre Place and Mythvision are valuable resources. They just have different vibes.
Couldn’t help yourself huh? Had to sling your insecurities at mythvision. As an agnostic brought here by the same algorithm, I was just checking the comments to see if this was going to be just more Christian propaganda or actual critical scholarship - your comments suggests I shouldn’t waste my time. Hope the channel appreciates your efforts. See ya.
@@LexxysLifeDownUnder-kr8sb This channel actually engages a lot with actual critical scholarship, which is why I was surprised by the comment. I think it has to just be a vibes thing. Because since Centre Place are progressive Christian’s they engage with the critical scholarship in an honest way recognizing that the Bible is not without error. It’s just that they don’t spend much time criticizing Christianity itself since they are Christians. Like I said, different vibes. Atheists (for the most part) and their criticisms at mythvision is a different vibe than Christians trying to be better Christians honest with the scholarship.
@@LexxysLifeDownUnder-kr8sb I watch and enjoy both Mythvision and Centre Place. Give it another shot. They go into a lot of depth here
@@LexxysLifeDownUnder-kr8sbyou are the one coming across insecure here. This is an excellent channel
Is there a way to download your PowerPoint?
Did you do a video on the Julio Claudian dynasty? That would be nice.
I like Centre Place. You always go into more details.
I know on a previous Q&A you said you would love to have a talk with bart ehrman, what topic(s) would you like to talk to him about?
It should be mentioned that the framing of Marcion taking the Gospel of Luke and changing it is what was said by the proto-orthodox group. Marcion and his followers contented that their version is the original version of the text. There are some modern biblical scholar who make a case that Marcion's version is the original one.
This is conflating two separate ideas about Marcion's gospel. There are scholars who think Marcion literally wrote the first gospel. This is idea one. There are also scholars who think Marcion had access to the original gospel (before "Mark" redacted it). This is idea two. The two ideas differ in timeline. For scholars who agree with the first idea, the four canonicals must then have been written post-Marcion, putting the dates of their composition firmly in the second century CE and above. For proponents of the second idea, the general consensus for date of composition can still be valid.
In either case, the idea is that the 50% of Mark found in Luke, plus quotes from Marcion's gospel preserved by his opponents, form the totality of the first gospel that the four evangelists later redacted.
I'm not conflating anything, you're introducing this other question of Marcion priority which I didn't mention nor is it relevant to what I was talking about.
@@zelenisok It's very relevant. Right now the discussion about Marcion priority is very confused because most people conflate the two versions of this hypothesis. It's important to state which version you define as "Marcion priority", especially because Mythicists have gotten into the game now. The implications of Marcion inventing the first gospel (instead of inheriting it) can be seen as direct evidence for the Mythicist position. If Marcion did invent the first gospel and this gospel did not include any references to Judaism or of Jesus being a Jew, then the later gospels must be inventions intended to insert a Jewish preacher into a story about a Greek demigod.
My dude, I wasnt talking about Marcion priority at all. I dont care here about whether Marcion's gospel is the first gospel, but just whether or not its a redaction of Luke. And if its not a redaction of Luke, thats a separate issue from the one of is it first gospel or not.
...also google up "was gospel according to luke written by a woman"
Excellent. Thank you John 😊
Very good…excellent content. It’s Bart but if he took about 1 mg of Xanax.
😂 👍
Would you do a video on Mormonism and Freemasonry? Or the development of Christian Esotericism such as Neoplatonic Gnostic and Merkabah mysticism created various lineages of esoteric Christians? How about Rosicrucianism or Martinsm and other esoteric Christian lineages (their history, what inspired them, their theology etc).
I used to be part of a quasi Masonic Order that separed from Regular (accepted by the United Grand Lodge of England) about 100 years ago. It was very Christian and nearly all Masons I've met were Judeo Christian of some form or another. The intersection between Mormonism and Masonry has been glossed over in some of these otherwise thorough lectures. There's a lot that could be said.
The relationship between Freemasonry and the history LDS have links in ritual, symbolism, organizational structure, and more.
Joseph Smith along with several early church leaders, became Freemasons in the early 1840s in Nauvoo, Illinois. This period was crucial for the development of the LDS Church, particularly in its formulation of temple rituals and ceremonies particularly Endowment.
Masonry has had a often misunderstood, maligned and taboo place in history including Christian history. Subjects could include Solomon's Templ/Royal Arch, The Widow's Son, The Knights Templar and Neo Templarism, Knights of St John/of Malta etc however even just a video on Mormonism's history with Freemasonry would be much appreciated.
Having moved to Utah in the past few years and having heard Catholic opposition to Freemasons much of my life, both of these sound like great topics!
Excellent! Thank you for sharing your gift for teaching and appreciation for the precious Word of God.
What's the difference of color in the scrolls mean? Yellow is authoritative, red is pseudepigraphical, purple is extra canonical?
You might want to look at Who Wrote the Bible (the Documentary Hypothesis) a Centre Place presentation from about 4 years ago. There is a vast amount of material on this site, mine is a half-vast answer. Cheers.
I think it's based on when each book was written.
@@dantallman5345 Matt Baker does a more comprehensive explanation of the Documentary hypothesis on his channel Useful Charts. That's to be expected though since his video is much more recent than John's.
@@ObjectiveEthicsyeah Matt Baker is awesome. I've been following his channel for about a year now
Hidden Suppressed Secret or Extra etc Gospels / writings ...
at 2:08 a question is asked about supposedly 'The Catholic Church suppressing the "Dead Sea Scrolls" '- which are correctly explained as dating from 'Roman times'.
HOWEVER i think the questioner was probably thinking of the Nag Hammadi Library - see eg wikipedia, which includes lots of Christian Coptic and (arguably very) non-canonical writings from before 400
Is there a way to find out how long these sessions are. I prefer not to exhaust a fully charged cellphone for any session that goes beyond one hour.
AD 51-125: The New Testament books are written.
AD 140: Marcion, a businessman in Rome, taught that there were two Gods:
Yahweh, the cruel God of the Old Testament, and Abba, the kind father of the New Testament. Marcion eliminated the Old Testament as Scriptures and, since he was anti-Semitic, kept from the New Testament only 10 letters of Paul and 2/3 of Luke's gospel (he deleted references to Jesus's Jewishness). Marcion's "New Testament", the first to be compiled, forced the mainstream Church to decide on a core canon: the four Gospels and Letters of Paul.
AD 200: The periphery of the canon is not yet determined. According to one list, compiled at Rome c. AD 200 (the Muratorian Canon), the NT consists of the 4 gospels; Acts; 13 letters of Paul (Hebrews is not included); 3 of the 7 General Epistles (1-2 John and Jude); and also the Apocalypse of Peter.
AD 367: The earliest extant list of the books of the NT, in exactly the number and order in which we presently have them, is written by Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, in his Festal letter # 39 of 367 A.D..
382 --Council of Rome (whereby Pope Damasus started the ball rolling for the defining of a universal canon for all city-churches). Listed the New Testament books in their present number and order.
393 A.D. --the Council of Hippo, which began "arguing it out." Canon proposed by Bishop Athanasius.
AD 397: The Council of Carthage, which refined the canon for the Western Church, sending it back to Pope Innocent for ratification. In the East, the canonical process was hampered by a number of schisms (esp. within the Church of Antioch). However, this changed by ...
787 A.D. The Ecumenical Council of Nicaea II, which adopted the canon of Carthage. At this point, both the Latin West and the Greek / Byzantine East had the same canon. However, ... The non-Greek, Monophysite and Nestorian Churches of the East (the Copts, the Ethiopians, the Syrians, the Armenians, the Syro-Malankars, the Chaldeans, and the Malabars) were still left out. But these Churches came together in agreement, in 1442A.D., in Florence.
AD 1442: At the Council of Florence, the entire Church recognized the 27 books. This council confirmed the Roman Catholic Canon of the Bible which Pope Damasus I had published a thousand years earlier. So, by 1439, all orthodox branches of the Church were legally bound to the same canon. This is 100 years before the Reformation.
AD 1536: In his translation of the Bible from Greek into German, Luther removed 4 N.T. books (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation) and placed them in an appendix saying they were less than canonical.
AD 1546: At the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church reaffirmed once and for all the full list of 27 books. The council also confirmed the inclusion of the Deuterocanonical books which had been a part of the Bible canon since the early Church and was confirmed at the councils of 393 AD, 373, 787 and 1442 AD. At Trent Rome actually dogmatized the canon, making it more than a matter of canon law, which had been the case up to that point, closing it for good.
Well said, and Marcion was excommunicated unilaterally by who in 144 AD and what Church? I just want to document that on your list for the group of Christianity that sprung up in the 16th century from regions North of the Alps in Europe.
John does nice lectures!
Can you please share what you know about the Redactor in the documentary hypothesis? Was the Redactor one person or multiple people and what evidence is there? Thanks I always appreciate your lectures 🙏
I am the redactor, you can ask me and I’ll tell you anything
@@catholicconvert2119why did you redact the text and when and also how 😮
@@andyd8299 I did it because I could. I used a new scroll 📜
Hellenistic Greek was the language of the day during the time of Christ. This was due to the fact that Alexander the Great had conquered the region several hundred years before. The Hebrew language was on its way out, and there was a critical need for a translation of the Hebrew Old Testament for dispersed Greek speaking Jews. This translation, called the Septuagint, or LXX, was completed by Jewish scholars in about 148 B.C. and it had all of the books, including the seven removed by Martin Luther over 1650 years later. The New Testament has about 350 references to Old Testament verses. By careful examination, scholars have determined that 300 of these are from the Septuagint and the rest are from the Hebrew Old Testament*. They have shown that Jesus Christ Himself, quoted from the Septuagint. Early Christians used the Septuagint to support Christian teachings.
For the first 300 years of Christianity, there was no Bible as we know it today. Christians had the Old Testament Septuagint, and literally hundreds of other books from which to choose. The Catholic Church realized early on that she had to decide which of these books were inspired and which ones weren't. The debates raged between theologians, Bishops, and Church Fathers, for several centuries as to which books were inspired and which ones weren't. In the meantime, several Church Councils or Synods, were convened to deal with the matter, notably, Rome in 382, Hippo in 393, and Carthage in 397 and 419. The debates sometimes became bitter on both sides. One of the most famous was between St. Jerome, who felt the seven books were not canonical, and St. Augustine who said they were. Protestants who write about this will invariably mention St. Jerome and his opposition, and conveniently omit the support of St. Augustine. I must point out here that Church Father's writings are not infallible statements, and their arguments are merely reflections of their own private opinions. When some say St. Jerome was against the inclusion of the seven books, they are merely showing his personal opinion of them. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion. However, A PERSONS PRIVATE OPINION DOES NOT CHANGE THE TRUTH AT ALL. There are always three sides to every story, this side, that side, and the side of truth. Whether Jerome's position, or Augustine's position was the correct position, had to be settled by a third party, and that third party was the Catholic Church.
Now the story had a dramatic change, as the Pope stepped in to settle the matter. In concurrence with the opinion of St. Augustine, and being prompted by the Holy Spirit, Pope St. Damasus I, at the Council of Rome in 382, issued a decree appropriately called, "The Decree of Damasus", in which he listed the canonical books of both the Old and New Testaments. He then asked St. Jerome to use this canon and to write a new Bible translation which included an Old Testament of 46 books, which were all in the Septuagint, and a New Testament of 27 books.
ROME HAD SPOKEN, THE ISSUE WAS SETTLED.
"THE CHURCH RECOGNIZED ITS IMAGE IN THE INSPIRED BOOKS OF THE BIBLE. THAT IS HOW IT DETERMINED THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE.
St. Jerome acquiesced under obedience (Hebrews 13:17) and began the translation, and completed it in 404 A.D.. In 405, his new Latin Vulgate* was published for the first time.
*The word "vulgate" means, "The common language of the people, or the vernacular".
The Decree of Pope St. Damasus I, Council of Rome. 382 A.D....
ST. DAMASUS 1, POPE, THE DECREE OF DAMASUS:
There would be no New Testament without the Church and there would be no Church without the New Testament. They both grew up together. The New Testament was largely complete (agreed upon) by the mid-2nd century. It needed clarification and definition in response to Marcion. Perhaps the best way to describe it: as heresies appeared and claimed new or edited scriptures, the Church needed to define the limits. Other than this addition, I agree with you.
I always find it amusing that divine inspiration as explanation for a canonical text is made more viable by it being written earlier. As if it could run out or be diminished.
What is the color coding key for the books?
What about the numeric code that exists in scriptures that shows patterns and multiples of numbers.
Good stuff!!!
what quotation from the book of Enoch was quoted???
Referring to minute 1:23:13 - I am German and Lutheran, and I have my own theory
why Martin Luther might have rejected the deutero-canonical books:
It is well-known that the Protestant Reformation started by criticising the sale of indulgences for money,
which the Dominican preacher Johann Tetzel had extended from an act of personal penitence
to a payment instead of penitence, which he promoted also in favour of deceased loved ones, to bail them out of purgatory.
In the second book of Maccabees, chapter 12 verses 39-45, there is a passage
which might be used to justify the sale of indulgences for the dead,
and I can imagine very well that Martin Luther might have been disgusted by this passage,
and might have looked for excuses how to declare the books of Maccabees not to be an inspired holy scripture. -
Furthermore, Martin Luther emphasised the biblical commandment that we shall serve God our Lord alone,
which includes Jesus and the Holy Spirit who are equally divine according to the Nicene creed,
but we shall not adore any graven images, and not pray to any saints neither angels, not even to the virgin Mary,
because we have not been given any other name under heaven that would save us except the name of Jesus (Acts 4,12). ’
But the book of Tobit is full of dialogues between the protagonist Tobias and his guardian-angel Rafaël,
so that this book might justify praying to the angels.
So I suppose it was the content of these two books which caused Martin Luther to reject them,
and the fact that these books are not in the Hebrew Bible provided Martin Luther with a reason to sort them out.
Martin Luther did not think very highly of the Jews, and he would otherwise not have felt himself to be obliged by Jewish opinions. -
All these thoughts are theories of my own, and my question is: Have these ideas already appeared elsewhere?
Has 2nd Macc 12, 39.45, actually been used by the Catholic Church to underpin their indulgence trade?
They didn't have canons in those days.
only catapults & trebuchets
Too bad. They could have blown this bullshit book away!
Also, at what point did reformers decide they were going to take the bible literally? It seems throughout early Christian history, it was understood by Christian scholars that the Bible was not a literal text, so why did later people decide to start taking it this way? It seems odd.
After several listening, I get the feeling that Marcion was fairly unprecedented in coming up with a canon, and that Jewish communities hadn't bothered or thought to finalize a list of "Devine writings"
If you find four books titled Anonymous and after 180 years later these books were named Mark Mathew Luke and John then how these books became words of God. I can not understand it
What is there to understand? The claims of Genesis about life, the earth and the universe have been overturned by scientific evidence. These texts do not withstand logical tests. The bible is basically a steaming heap of monkey dung.
So...who came up with the bright idea to call the NT inspired or inerrant, etc. and when?
The unknown guy who wrote the letters to Timothy.
@@freddiereadie30 anything else?
@@Robert_L_Peters
That's about it. You will never find a single verse in the Bible where God himself says he inspired the authors of the Bible. Zero.
@@freddiereadie30 evil Christians
@@freddiereadie30....and yet all the zealots follow it as if it were the word of a god despite the fact, that we only have evidence to the contrary. Yet, more morons believe in this crap, that there are people who don't. 🤮
I am at four minutes, and I realized a couple of things.
Your presentation starts with the idea that the books of the Bible were not meant to be a cohesive book, suggesting that God did not intend it that way.
Jesus refers to an already compiled collection of books recognized as scripture.
This reference would also be synonymous with the old wine.
New wine could not be put in old bottles because they would burst, so the new one would have to be put in new bottles (or wine skins), also referred to as the new covenant, so both could be preserved.
It is possible, if there were ever a document or group of documents written down (commonly referred to as Q), that Jesus purposely had his words written down with the intention there would be a forthcoming collection of perspectives compiled that would draw different people to him.
I’m pretty sure he didn’t just want to save only the people who were within earshot, without his words being perpetuated for future generations.
It is simply a myth that the catholic church did not want the Bible to be translated into vernacular. At the time Luther appeared there had been many translations available. There may be an exception for England.
Could you provide a list of these "many translations" that existed at the time of Luther? Was there a German translation? An English translation? How about a French translation? Spanish? Italian? Dutch? Finnish? Danish? Russian? Polish? Eager to see this list. Thanks.
The majority of the work was done via common acceptance over years among a wide range of communities. Although after that church bodies and groups voted but if they knew if they strayed too far from accepted “tradition” then the vote would not be accepted.
Who told you that " the majority of the work was done via common acceptance over years among a wide range of communities," and why do you believe them?
Presumably because there is no way of finding out, he does not say who decided what would go into the so-called bible which is merely another word for book, nor who decided to tack the jesussey or gospels onto the foundational document of a religion that has *Absolutely_Nothing* to do with the way of christ, namely the Torah which is rather like tacking the Gita onto Halesbury's laws of England or the Four quartets onto Popular mechanics.
It is a good question who is to decide what is official, sanctioned or canon. if there were any originals of the so-called gospels, where are they now?
Of course Nicea is now Iznik, a Muslim town famous for its beautiful Iznik ware porcelains with blue and green peacocks. I recommend pottery history over endless wars.
The gospels are written by anonymous authors? Am i accurate?
Great 👍
Why would Jewish people not want to have Maccabees in their Torah? Wouldn't a people be proud of such a story and is it recorded elsewhere in other non Christian texts texts to preserve the story for the community today?
If I were Jesus, I would have communicated with Paul in a third heaven dream and told him that law observance wasn't necessary for the gentiles. This is only a logical deduction from the logos.
The Bible is a Catholic book, whether Eastern, Latin or Ethiopian Catholics, so thanks to the Catholic church for writing and cannonizing the Bible. Unfortunately, so many other Christian denominations deny this fact. The Protestant Bible was created 1500 years later. Also, only the Catholic church have a continuing list of Bishops and Popes from the time of the Apostles up to this day, even with the Great Schism even if one doesn't include Peter as pope #1, proves that the Catholic church is the one church established by Christ Himself.
The idea of an unbroken succession is a myth with little if any historical evidence.
Thanks
All the Books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive, and account them Canonical. 39 Articles of Religion
I don't suppose that by any chance you are familiar with the fallacy argumentum ad populum; it is frequently relied upon by the Elsies or Lower classes, and it is a fallacy of relevance, they supposing whether or not something is "commonly received" to have relevance, but to what they have no idea.
@@vhawk1951kl Non sequitur, independent witnesses are not populism Nicene Creed: We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church.
@@jamessheffield4173 "We", being you and your imaginary friend eh titch?-but bless you live a a little world all of your own and have no choice about that - or anything, but I expect you'll grow out of it in due course, you creatures tending to have your ephemeral little fads sand fashions, one day this, the next, the exact opposite.
You should do these lectures sitting down. You are standing there for 2,5 hours...
40:00 I heard a joke from a rabbi who said a true miracle would of been to put 70 rabbis in ONE room and have them produce one translation 😂
Live Christianity alone Whole systems created for control
155mm Howitzer?
He uses too many probablies. Also I would love to know why scholars think all these books were written later. I know papyrus doesn’t last forever.
By keeping book out so many missing books and they keep on liens to us
Nothing is stopping us from reading the apocrypha.
The apocrypha are easily accessible and have never been hidden, they simply are not reliable
May I suggest you read THE VALEDICTION OF MOSES and THE ORIGINS OF JUDAISM before your class coming later? Judaism greatly altered their records starting at Ezekiel's time, again starting 444 BC, and again in 900 CE MT. It's a mess - don't blame God.
Why not blame him? He is supposed to be all-knowing, all-seeing, almighty and benevolent. It just cannot all be true and if he exists at all he is clearly to blame for this colossal f**k-up. 😊
The Neo-Gnostics!
Choosing to exclude eschatology from your belief system - most hilarious!
Yeah, right! We must immanentize the eschaton!!!😂
John, would you consider giving a presentation about the history of the weaponization of religion for political reasons? The horror happening in Gaza is really tearing me apart, emotionally. I am a 57 year-old white woman living in Missouri, and I am emotionally ripped apart by the mass murder of civilians that our media seems to believe is happening because of a virus or gremlins rather than a right-wing, theo-nationalist, barely democratic, government that my taxes are supporting.
Turn off your TV. They’re lying to you.
( please see the comment I just posted on the history of modern Israel
-- & yes Bibi Netanyahu needs to go ! as the majority of Israeli voters agree
(& Israeli voters are 20% Arab)
But Hamas is an Anti Democracy tool of Iran, with Russian backing -- Hamas leaders live in luxury in Doha Qatar, their families safe,
while using "Palestinian" civilians as human shields + martyrs...
I do not take seriously anyone who has to validate their "fears and sadness" by first stating their skin color.
@@genskitchenmagic2957 No. It's really happening and it is just as she said. The abused have become the abusers, but it's important to remember this is Benji and his crew of thugs not everyone.
I hear you! 😢
Wish it had been cannonized instead of canonized. We’d all be better off.
In a way it was when the librarie of Alexandria was torch what you got its what they stole from there an their version. cherrios.
@leeporgLRT!
Yeah, all that talk about love, hope, and equality. Such horrors. 🙄
@leeporg Holier than thou coward.
@@kevin6293 Yeah, because those are the only messages there. You appear only to have read the bits… in red ink.
Me
The Bible is a Catholic book 💫
Paul was a false apostle. Why are his epistles in the Canon?
All Christians follow Paul. You're just a false Christian.
R u muslim?
man made mans words
Fascinating content. Thank you. The Bible as we know it today seems to have largely mythical content.
It doesn't just seem that way. 😂
GLORY TO GOD
இயேசுவின் வருகை சீக்கிரம்..
JESUS IS COMING VERY VERY SOON BE PREPARED...ஆயத்தமாவோம் மரணத்திற்கு முன் இயேசுவை ஏற்றுக்கொள்வோம்
FROM JAFFNA SRI LANKA 0:40
Not until the black man become 1st again, the 1st will be last and the last will be 1st.
Or, as Ricky Bobby said, if you aren't first then you're last.
@@saltwell80you racist
awesome!
Don't hold your breath bra. 😂
Oh gosh, I was about to get into this video when I read the channel description. LGBTQ+-affirming… oh no :(
It was the Catholic Church that canonized the Bible. Christ gave us the Church and the Church gave us the Bible.
-The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.
@@termination9353Dan Brown is that you?
@@winstonbarquez9538 haha
@@winstonbarquez9538 Osama bin Laden is that you?
Which church? The jewish Christian church had a different canon of one gospel which is not ours today.
so at ~50-minute point, mention is made of Diaspora Jews returning to the Levant in "mid-20th C." -- while true for European Jews who survived the Holocaust,
50% of the ancestry of Israeli Jews is North African or former Ottoman Empire
After The Great War, the Ottoman Empire collapsed, resulting in 21 Arab States in 1920s
-- who then expelled the vast majority of their Jewish residents
(note that when the State of Israel was declared after WW2, 2 decades later, the Arab population was not expelled -- 20% of Israeli citizens are Arab
Their Arab neighbors who believed the 21 Arab States would destroy Israel
( now expressed as "From The River to the Sea" )
are who we call "Palestinians" today -- they fled to the "Two State Solution" == Jordan where they are the majority today,
& they fled to borderlands, awaiting War to destroy Israel...
You can continue to believe your false narratives, if it makes you feel comfy. I know better, and I call BULLSHIT!
so The Didache did not make the canon, but is cited by Roman Catholics to support "only procreative sex is allowed / single male priesthood" ideas that arose later, ~AD 1100s...
anachronistic
💙 Angels are not divine (deity). Jesus is deity. Enoch has a lot of false teachings.
penta toke
THE LAW, according to Jesus, included Psalms.
It's a long story about how this book of Fairy Tales became the book of the weak-minded!
This man has a lot of errors,
Can you name one? Let's cross check you.
Not nearly as many errors as the bible though! 😂
THIS MAN ASSERTS NOT ON PERSON IN THE BIBLE KNEW THEIR BOOKS WOULD BE PART OF SCRIPTURE
This Man does not know what his is talking about BELAYING HE HAS NEVER READ THE BIBLE COVER TO COVER.
The first who KNEW his books would be in scripture from his day to the end of the Age was MOSES.
Within his texts in Exodus and Deuteronomy MOSES CLEARLY KNEW FROM GOD These books would be scripture.
Enoch clearly knew his book 1 Enoch would be scripture for all time.
Job Knew his book was to be scripture for all time.
And to name a few others Isaiah, Knew, Daniel Knew, Ezra Knew, to name a few in the OT
For this man to think Jesus did not clearly know, Shows how little of scripture this man has ever read.
Matthew Mark Luke and John each clearly knew their Gospel were eternally part of scripture.
See in revelation "The Testimony of Jesus" "The Every lasting Gospel"
Peter, James, Jude, Paul, the writer of Hebrews [Not Paul but one who had been a Levite] ALL KNEW.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unlike this hack we studied reading original writings in Church History for 45 years We also have studied and translated Greek for 45 year and also Translate Latin.
We first read the bible cover to cover at age 14, back to back 3x's with no break in less than a year.
Which was THE MOST IMPORTANT THING I DID AS A CHILD AFTER COMING TO CHRIST.
The word CANNON is not found anywhere in scripture. It refers to Men, Denominations in particular declaring a certain number of books are true scripture while others are not.
This is called THE CANNON. Understand the first Cannon for scripture was named by a heretic around 90ad. This should NOT be accepted. The Only gospel he accepted was Luke.
Paul tells us Jesus is the head of all teaching and revelation. (Moderns have put Paul as the head of all teaching and doctrine)
Jesus knew all books that were scripture as did His apostles and disciples and Paul and the writer of Hebrews
But Jesus is the head of the church. In the gospels and in revelation Jesus quotes and cites from ALL BOOKS OF SCRIPTURE
if JESUS QUOTES FROM AND TEACHES FROM ANY BOOK; IT IS SCRIPTURE PERIOD
As to the Cannons; There have been NUMEROUS CONFLICTING CANNONS over the centuries generations adding books others removing books so having far more books than we currently have in our bible.
The King James Bible from 1611-1868 had many more books in the O.T. These extra books were called THE APOCRYPHA.
What exactly is the Apocrypha that all moderns now reject. None remembering these books were in the KJV, The Luther Bible, The Geneva bible, and the Latin Vulgate.
We have personally researched each of these to learning the years the Apocrypha was in each of these bibles.
But moderns search out nothing. Except it is in modern writings IT NEVER EXISTED in their minds.
So what is the Apocrypha? It is the original books in the Greek Septuagint and a few added later by rabbis'. The wisdom of Sirach, written by a rabbi. The book of Aristide the pharisees account of the creation of the Septuagint with themselves as the hero's Omitting the High Priest and the Priests.
The Septuagint was translated in 280 bc by Ptolemy in Egypt. About 240 bc The Sadducees put the Greek Septuagint in every synagogue as the only bible uses as they were using TARGUMS up to that time with differing versions that were causing fights between synagogues. So one version was used then in all synagogues howbeit in Greek.
So that for the remainder of the OT during the Gospels and all the Epistles to 130ad all synagogues only used the Greek Septuagint.
So that in 1983 when I was a young pastor I discovered Jesus in Luke and Matthew when he announced his ministry HE DID NOT USE THE MASORETIC TEXT. As in our 4 VOLUME Hebrew interlinear we discovered words in Hebrew that were MATERIALLY DIFFERNT than what Jesus spoke.
We had also a copy of the Septuagint so when we found the passage in Isaiah WE FOUND JESUS WORDS IN LUKE (Since this is the text we examined) Was Word for Word from the Greek Septuagint book of Isaiah.
The dead sea scrolls Every book in the Septuagint has been recovered from the caves in Hebrew and Aramaic. As well as 2 versions of the Septuagint in Greek. a short and long version.
This has changed the complexation in the Academic to realize EVERY BOOK or the Original Septuagint was scripture from 280bc to 340 as when Constantine sent Eusebius to gather all the books of scripture
Understand from Christ's ascension to 340 Not one Apostle Not one Disciples and Not One church had EVER PUBLISHED A FULL OLD TESTAMET. It was left undone and it was Constantine that published the first full Greek Old Testament he made 50 copies none have been found that have survived at this time. Constantine also published the first New Testament binding it to the old testament so there was ONE TESTIMONY from Genesis to Revelation in that first bible.
The lLatin Vulgate undid this breaking the bible into two testaments. when i first believed these were erroneously called The Jewish Bible and the Christian bible.
We have one faith one baptism and one testament of God.
So Jesus and the Apostles quote from 1 the book of Enoch, the sixth book of Moses,, the book of Gad the seer recovered by Israel in the 1980's and
the 1st book of Ezra which begins in the 30th year of the captivity. (We have identified these in numerous quotes) The books of the full Septuagint making the OT have many more books but not all books have been yet recovered named in OT scripture. and in 2nd Maccabees. Since we now know Jesus and the apostles all quote and cite all their teachings doctrine and revelation from older scripture we can add in the New Testament the Epistle of Barnabas. But NO OTHER EPISTLES OF PAUL which we have examined in Greek to find the forgeries do not quote and cite older scripture.
So a more important thing is MODERNS HAVE NOT KNOWN FOR GENERATIONS THAT WHAT JESUS AND THE APOSTLES QUOTE CITE AND TEACH IS SCRIPTURE. They have all authority the church of the 2nd century to today their Cannons are all based on current opinion of that day and nothing more. So these should be disregarded as having Authority
And the cannons add and remove books constantantly. So in reality it is the LAST CANNON in made in the mid. 1800's that has been given all authority. Which is foolishness as these cannons have never agreed on about 5 NT books that are in all bibles today.
SEE HOW MUCH OF THIS this hack knows?
Most of your claims cite only religious scripture, which is not a reliable historical source. For example, most scholars now agree Moses probably didn’t exist, and that’s just the first myth you accept unquestioningly and use as your basis for “truth.” This man has forgotten more about the Bible and related history than you’ve ever known.
Also, it’s “canon.” And learn to edit to make your points more cogently.
@@yohei72 You sound like a modern Charismatic
I have to state I have studied and translated Greek for 45 years
Todays ministry is Greek illiterates
I have also 45 years in studying church history and in this reading original writings by eye witnesses
The class I was in was the last class that was taught any Greek. and a few years later all denominational bible schools and their pretend seminaries DROPPED TEACHING Church history.
So unwittingly I have become a rare soul.
Anyway Unless you believe Scripture by itself to be Specific here Original Hebrew
That was before the Masoretic text published by Rabbi Akiba in 130 ad as per the 1901 Jewish encyclopedia that took a very dim view of a Rabbi that grossly added and removed from the original Hebrew to create a bible with perhaps 100 verses and passages about Christ removed
In my study and translation I have found the Roman Catholic Latin vulgare freely added and removed things from the bible they felt in my estimation that only priests were allowed to know
This doctrine of Pastors and Teachers keeping special knowledge afflicted the Reformation and was carried into every denomination of the day.
The King James Bible Translation Moderns claim is God breathed
Yet we have Found through many hours of work translating Latin that the queen Elizabeth bible a;ka The Bishop's Bible version 3 is word for word the KJV
So then the queen Elizabeth bible is that also God breathed
NO only the original texts in Hebrew Greek and Aramaic are God breathed
No translation of man ever is either they are filled with errors
OR certain denominations like the Anglican Church has also added to and removed from scripture inserting their doctrines and traditions while removing verses left and right and putting in filler so it looks complete.
I am old retired and gravely ill. and yet I continue. Having had multiple strokes on yon brainstem it affects what I think and write mostly in spelling which I can not see when this is happening
Nothing doctors in 14 years straight has but a dent in this and any of the life threatening problems I have.
These are the discrepancies many see in scripture translations all texts today are almost identical with some word differences
When there is an outlier a single verse that says something no where else in scripture and there are roughly a dozen people have glommed on to
We have found in all we examined and retranslated it is the outlier that is mistranslated . In the other case a bit more work to chase down The second or third verses matching this are the One or one's mistranslated.
There is a law in scripture in both covenants FOR OUT OF THE MOUTH OF TWO AND THREE WITNESSES [[Here of Scripture. Scripture in the bible is a witness and two or three verses need to confirm something is so ] This is how all teaching doctrine and revelation are to be CONFIRMED not blindly accepted because some preacher says so.
$-There never was multiple Gospels by multiple authors. The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.
What!? More proof that your god could not preserve his word.
As already pointed out, this argument proves that God is powerless. By this logic, we should worship Constantine instead, as he is clearly far more powerful than God can ever be. Heck, apparently even the King of France is more powerful than God.
@@TyronSmith-yo5tt God never said he'll protect his word. Warned us several time to beware lest ye be deceived. It's our job to be righteous not God's job. I've done my job and harmonized the 4 Gospels back together again. Your job is to recognize this truth.
@@andrewsuryali8540 If Centre Space hadn't recognized that God's Word was adulterated in this manner what does that say about the wisdom, understanding, and academics of Centre Space? What does that say about Centre Space actual Bible literacy?
@@termination9353 you are wrong in your settled mind because the oldest surviving manuscripts differ significantly from the bibles that are currently in circulation globally. God owes humanity his preserved word in order for mankind to correctly follow him or else it is inevitable that mankind collectively will fall into error. The whole point of having preserved material from God is so that people believe in him in truth and not error. If you cannot realize this then perhaps your intellect and judgement should be questioned.
You take too long to get to the point.
Who cares about that absurd book
Apparently you do
@@edwardhale4294 It’s funny like the beano and the dandy. Lots of absurd stories Genesis particularly hilarious, not forgetting Captain Noah with his boat full of every animal on earth and yes including dinosaurs.
so The Didache did not make the canon, but is cited by Roman Catholics to support "only procreative sex is allowed / single male priesthood" ideas that arose later, ~AD 1100s...
anachronistic