This was absolutely fantastic!! Thank you so much for sharing it! I think it will help a lot of people. I wish I'd had this when I was in college studying the Reformation in a secular university.
I have his book and have only read the first few chapters due to working 2 jobs. Oh boy I can't wait to carve out time and dig into the rest of it! So far!? GET THE BOOK!
"For by these means we shall have strength to overcome our adversaries, like blessed Judith Judith 13:8, when having first exercised herself in fastings and prayers, she overcame the enemies, and killed Olophernes." - Letter 4, St. Athanasius And the Canon was set at both the Council of Rome (382) and Council of Hippo (393). Not sure why this wasn't mentioned...
Saying that Melito included no “Apocrypha” is an assumption. Did Melito consider Baruch to be a part of Jeremiah like many of the later Fathers of the Church did? Why do you assume so for Lamentations? And if Melito did not include Esther, like many, what does that say about the Jewish Canon argument? Melito’s Canon also contains a disputed reference to the Book of Wisdom. Why did the speaker not point this out, and assert confidently that no Apocryphal book was mentioned? The most literal translation of the Greek in Melito’s list is that of Wisdom being separate from Proverbs.
Question: If everything before Moses was not included in the canon, how is the book of Job accounted? Maybe my question is answered later in the talk; I'm only in the 8th minute.
So why don't Reformed churches consider the deutero-canonicals as the ECF they appeal to recommend? No Protestant I have ever met holds the apocypha as beneficial for instruction, rather ... they consider them with contempt, if at all.
The deutero-canonicals are viewed by older/fundamentalist Protestants with contempt because of the Counsel of Trent's, and by extension the Roman Catholic, position. He mentions it at 26:01. Us younger Protestants don't usually recommend them as beneficial for instruction since the totality of Scripture is readily available and we have the works of CS Lewis and other contemporary authors that have more Western/modern audiences in mind. We only ever really read the deutero-canonicals to better understand the culture of First-Century Palestine but even then, other works are far more direct.
No, no more will be uploaded from the conference. But I keep referencing this one so uploaded it to send to people when I undoubtedly refer to it again in the future.
@@WesHuff - Here is our True Savior HalleluYAH translates “Praise ye YaH” YaH is The Heavenly Father YaH arrives via the TENT OF MEETING YaH was Who they Crucified for our sins YaH was Crucified on an Almond TREE Ancient Semitic of Moshe (Moses) Isa Scroll (The Original Isaiah) Isaiah 42:8 "I am YaH; that is my Name! I will not yield my glory to another or my praise to idols.” Isaiah 43:11 “I am YAH, and there is no other Savior but Me.” Isaiah 45:5 “I am YaH, and there is none else.”
Why would Josephus’ criteria matter for Christianity? Josephus was a Jew who sympathized with the Pharisees, recording history from this lens after the establishment of the Church. His position is not the witness of Christianity but of Judaism. Equivocating him with the criteria of the “early Church” is deceptive.
Because he was an early Christian Jew and the Jews already had a closed Old Testament canon during the intertestimental period. It’s important because this predates all the church fathers like Augustine who started a different view of the apocrypha. It’s better historical wise to look at what early Jews viewed as scripture and clearly there is no evidence of any deuterocanonical books in their bibles…
Your statement puzzles me. "Not the witness of Christianity but of Judaism." Isn't Christianity the fulfillment of Jewish law and prophecy? The distinction here would only seem to harm Christianity as a reputable tradition of Abraham.
Wow. This was amazing
Thanks for this. I'm slowly working my way through your back catalogue 👍🏽
This was absolutely fantastic!! Thank you so much for sharing it! I think it will help a lot of people. I wish I'd had this when I was in college studying the Reformation in a secular university.
Very helpful!
I have his book and have only read the first few chapters due to working 2 jobs. Oh boy I can't wait to carve out time and dig into the rest of it!
So far!? GET THE BOOK!
That was great! Thank you so much for this
Awesome video!
Great explanation
"For by these means we shall have strength to overcome our adversaries, like blessed Judith Judith 13:8, when having first exercised herself in fastings and prayers, she overcame the enemies, and killed Olophernes."
- Letter 4, St. Athanasius
And the Canon was set at both the Council of Rome (382) and Council of Hippo (393). Not sure why this wasn't mentioned...
Saying that Melito included no “Apocrypha” is an assumption. Did Melito consider Baruch to be a part of Jeremiah like many of the later Fathers of the Church did? Why do you assume so for Lamentations? And if Melito did not include Esther, like many, what does that say about the Jewish Canon argument?
Melito’s Canon also contains a disputed reference to the Book of Wisdom. Why did the speaker not point this out, and assert confidently that no Apocryphal book was mentioned? The most literal translation of the Greek in Melito’s list is that of Wisdom being separate from Proverbs.
whos melito?
@@oscaralegre3683 Melito of Sardis, a bishop.
@@zeektm1762 thanks
Question: If everything before Moses was not included in the canon, how is the book of Job accounted? Maybe my question is answered later in the talk; I'm only in the 8th minute.
Am I wrong in thinking Trent's canon list was in response to Martin Luther?
Yes
Yes
So why don't Reformed churches consider the deutero-canonicals as the ECF they appeal to recommend?
No Protestant I have ever met holds the apocypha as beneficial for instruction, rather ... they consider them with contempt, if at all.
The deutero-canonicals are viewed by older/fundamentalist Protestants with contempt because of the Counsel of Trent's, and by extension the Roman Catholic, position. He mentions it at 26:01. Us younger Protestants don't usually recommend them as beneficial for instruction since the totality of Scripture is readily available and we have the works of CS Lewis and other contemporary authors that have more Western/modern audiences in mind. We only ever really read the deutero-canonicals to better understand the culture of First-Century Palestine but even then, other works are far more direct.
Are you going to upload all the other videos from this conference? I already bought them off the website. Can I get a refund? 😂
No, no more will be uploaded from the conference. But I keep referencing this one so uploaded it to send to people when I undoubtedly refer to it again in the future.
@@WesHuffI certainly will refer to it as well. Thank you for uploading it.
@@WesHuff - Here is our True Savior
HalleluYAH translates “Praise ye YaH”
YaH is The Heavenly Father
YaH arrives via the TENT OF MEETING
YaH was Who they Crucified for our sins
YaH was Crucified on an Almond TREE
Ancient Semitic of Moshe (Moses)
Isa Scroll (The Original Isaiah)
Isaiah 42:8
"I am YaH; that is my Name! I will not yield my glory to another or my praise to idols.”
Isaiah 43:11
“I am YAH, and there is no other Savior but Me.”
Isaiah 45:5
“I am YaH, and there is none else.”
Where can I purchase the videos from this conference?
Why would Josephus’ criteria matter for Christianity? Josephus was a Jew who sympathized with the Pharisees, recording history from this lens after the establishment of the Church. His position is not the witness of Christianity but of Judaism. Equivocating him with the criteria of the “early Church” is deceptive.
Jews(Israelites) wrote the Bible
Because he was an early Christian Jew and the Jews already had a closed Old Testament canon during the intertestimental period. It’s important because this predates all the church fathers like Augustine who started a different view of the apocrypha. It’s better historical wise to look at what early Jews viewed as scripture and clearly there is no evidence of any deuterocanonical books in their bibles…
Your statement puzzles me. "Not the witness of Christianity but of Judaism." Isn't Christianity the fulfillment of Jewish law and prophecy? The distinction here would only seem to harm Christianity as a reputable tradition of Abraham.