Christopher Stanley was a pure joy to listen to. I am so glad I listened to the very end. Cause what he said in the last six minutes reached out and snagged me by the britches. It so struck me that it compelled me to listen to the whole thing again. This was a top-notch presentation. Thanks. Let's see more of Christopher.
What a breath of fresh air to listen to a gentle, honest, and friendly Christian with an American accent. I don't know the last time I heard that, but I'm thinking 1997.
Christ is the thief, Christians annihilated all the pagan cultures and karma demands they all get beheaded at the fifth seal in Revelation, just as it is written. It will surely happen at the end of the age of Pisces, just as those who worshipped the golden Calf were slain by Moses in the age of Aries.
@@EmeraldEyesEsoteric The best spaghetti recipes often contain capers and anchovies. Spaghetti alla puttanesca comes to mind. Interestingly, _spaghetti alla puttanesca_ can be translated as "wh*re's spaghetti", because it was a signature dish of Italian prostitutes, who would cook it to signal their business (the dish having a distinctive smell). Now, what does spaghetti alla puttanesca have to do with anything? Nothing at all. But boy is it delicious!
How important do you think is, in the case of Christians in the Roman Empire, the thesis of the cultural anthropologist Marvin Harris that "every social group that isolates itself from the society of which it is a part generates general rejection from the other members of that society"? (The isolation of the early Christians I think has a lot to do with their extreme monotheism and their rejection of any other form of religious worship.)
Back in the "80's, I became a great fan of Cecilia Holland, for the reason that she appeared to be a well-immersed academic historian, with a sublime talent for immersing the novice in historical context to the point where one cannot help but EXPERIENCE a life in the past. There's no better way to actually comprehend the CONTEXT of the historical record. Dr. Stanley is providing a "Revealed Truth" of an actual history that religious proclamation could never equal.
I'm sold on the fictional books. I have ordered the first one on Audible. I'll be interested in seeing if it gives me a good idea of what the historical society was like. If I remember to, when I've finished it, I'll come back and say what I think about it.
Ha! And here I thought I was the only one calling out christians for their celebrating cannibalism and let's not forget their love for incest 🤮 (Sara and Abraham ), I look back at my christian days and Wonder with shame and disgust 🤔😔; thank u D for helping me truly see the light 🥰🇺🇲🎉
Thankyou Dr Stanley and Derek. On Paul alluding to Galli (castrated priests of Cybele) in Galatians, I think it very likely. Paul’s allusion to being “a sounding gong or a tinkling brass” is believed to refer to the Cybele priests musical instruments as they danced down the streets in public. Dr G. C. Fairweather.
One of the reasons christianity never made sense to me, was because of all the "according to Paul" stuff. Much of christianity is Paulism, nothing to do with JC.
For me it is bcz the they teach people that God is His Own Son. This is the most bizzare claim ever that has no valid proof even from the Bible itself.
@@andanandan6061 The phrase "son of God" is a very common one in the bible. It's used multiple times in the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. It just means people who have a special connection to god. Many christians don't even know this. Also, there's nothing special about the supposed virgin birth. That was a very common trope at the time.
I think Paul is excusing the hierarchies. He's saying because of Christ they aren't there, that they don't matter. At the very least, that's how Christians use this today, saying, in effect, it doesn't matter that you're poor, it doesn't matter that you're a slave, just accept the hierarchy because in heaven it all goes away. That's how it functions in the United States at least.
Exactly. Galatians 3:28 sounds egalitarian, but the passage continues to 4:31 where Paul is glorifying mistreating slaves as spiritually (my paraphrase) inferior
I would have liked the school to teach us more about the historical Jesus and the influence of Christianity. In history one has to learn about the Romans, the Greeks and their philosophy.
I really want to read Dr. Stanley's historical fiction. Sounds like it could be a fun read. And wow, charis became grace just like how the Hebrew hesod went from covenantal reciprocal duties became a loving grace.
What extra-biblical / scriptural historical evidence is there for Paul's existence? The more I read & learn, the more he seems heavily mythicized if not completely fictional.
I applaud Christopher Stanley's approach to historical biblical fiction, even though I consider the Bible itself fiction. Out of curiosity, has anyone read "Out of Egypt" by Anne Rice? I found it quite delightful
Questions to Christopher D. Stanley: Could you recommend good scholarly literature on Paul's complex and possibly surreal historical conversion process? Of what actually happened, not as the NT narrates. Do you have reliable information about the clearly Greco-Roman origin of the legal and cultural figure of vicarious death, that is, its Substitutionary atonement of Jesus on which Christianity is based, and its reception by early Christians (especially, by Paul)? What does the Bible say about this substitutionary atonement of the Son? Was it voluntary? Was this ordered and forced by a Father thirsty for revenge and blood? (In any case, as deduced from the Bible, I think that a sordid family affair is described to us in this matter of vicarious death) Thank you very much for his answer.- Fernando.
Paul generally told people to *stay in their oppression* 1 Corinthians 7:17-24 “Were you a slave when you were called?” Paul is then apparently contradictory as to whether slaves should remain slaves, saying in v20 and 24 that they should stay slaves and in v21 that they should get free if they can. But since v22 says they are free under God, it is not clear that v21 means to no longer be the property of a human. Regardless of the meaning of v21, *God assigned slavery to them per **7:17* and Paul explicitly approves of that in at least 2 verses on this brief passage.
Paul is educated enough that he could very well have come from a wealthy family. He talks about studying with Gamaliel and being better than the best students. He talks about how much work he does and how he puts in more effort than anybody else. He's very controlling and won't tolerate any dissent or questioning. In short, he comes across like a massive narcissist. Paul is said to have been a tent maker/leather worker. But he also had a small crew with him. Perhaps the tent making was something relegated to his subordinates and Paul's talk about the nobility of the working man and working by the sweat of his brow etc. is all just the kind of hot air you'd expect from grifting narcissists. When questioned about the large sums of money he is bringing back to his base of operations he essentially says "Shut up." Outside of the textual information we have, we keep seeing this pattern where religious fundamentalists are very susceptible to these kinds of narcissistic, authoritarian behaviors. In some places Paul comes across as fairly progressive for his time. But I think a good question would be to ask, to what end? We've also seen this kind of behavior from narcissists. It's a kind of aggrandizing where you set yourself up as being/having the solution to the common societal ills of the time, "I am the only one who can fix it, so support me." We have all heard this kind of thing in recent times. It would be a good idea to look at Paul and his accomplishments with a much more skeptical eye. If for no other reason than it could lead to avenues of interpretation that haven't really been trod enough.
What 5 narcissistic traits, according to the official DSM-5, do you see in Paul? It takes 5 for an official diagnosis. Some I can cross off the list that Jesus *doesn't* have. He's not materialistic. He doesn't wish to have huge celebration, parades, statues etc in public presentation of his good deeds. He can take and admit criticism. He shows empathy. He doesn't seem to expect relationships to be purely transactional and only likes hanging out with those He deems "better than himself" or profitable.
Authentic religious fervor can motivate people to do amazing to batshit crazy things. When a person believes God really told them so, they are almost unstopable.
Awesome I was actually talking about a historical biblical fiction the other day . I want these books Conn iggulden has a decent book on Rome but it not biblical in nature
This is a fascinating analysis. A gay novel about Paul hanging out in the bath houses of Ephesus, talking about the thorn in his life, his struggle with young pretty boy Russian soldiers in their pleated mini skirt uniforms would be a screamingly funny embellishment badly needed.
A firend of mine has asked me to explain why Christianity took off so quickly. I think he's trying to convince me that God must have intervened. Which is yet another proof that God exists.
But the religion didn't take off quickly, unless by "quickly" your friend meant nearly 3 centuries from the 30s CE to the reign of Emperor Constantine in the 320s CE.
@@deewesthill1213 I think he is referring to the churches set up by Paul, only a few years after Jesus was taken up. You know he wrote 13 letters to various churches, right ?
@@deewesthill1213 If I went around various cities preaching that Elvis Presley is alive, people would laugh at me. But thousands of tourists have seen him in Las Vegas, so it might be true.
Yes, although i thought scholars consider only seven epistles to be genuinely "Pauline": Romans, I and II Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, I Thessalonians, and Philemon.
@@tedgrant2 Yes, there are many living eyewitnesses who testified to seeing a living EP. Unlike JC, all there is for him is some very old and dubious writings that were anonymously written and not by eyewitnesses.
He learned from mankind, God prompted me to ask him, he taught it to me, It was given to Apostle Paul by God to know everything, in other words he was given the gift to know, and in the Corinthians he speaks of what happened to him
*Slavery is often holy in the Christian Bible* The CB upholds the slave laws of the Tanakh, even adding elements of holiness to them. In Galatians 3:28, Paul starts by implying that there is no distinction under Jesus between free people and slaves, men and women, etc, but the passage continues into chapter 4, where Paul minimizes the suffering of slaves by saying child heirs are just like slaves, and by 4:23-24 he is saying that birth into slavery is part of the covenant of Mt Sinai. In Galatians 4:28-31, possibly paraphrasing the abuse of Hagar in Genesis 16:4-6, Paul *endorses not treating slaves well,* upholds leaving a slave woman _(paidisken_ when referring to Hagar) and her son homeless, and makes the slaves metaphorically ungodly; a separate, destitute class (which contradicts his earlier child-heirs-are-slaves claim). Galatians 4:30 *”The son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman.”* This is a metaphor for not inheriting Yahweh’s promise to Abraham and his people, which is an accurate assessment of the horrible morality of Genesis 16. 1 Corinthians 7:17-24 “Were you a slave when you were called?” Paul is then apparently contradictory as to whether slaves should remain slaves, saying in v20 and 24 that they should stay slaves and in v21 that they should get free if they can. But since v22 says they are free under God, it is not clear that v21 means to no longer be the property of a human. Regardless of the meaning of v21, *God assigned slavery to them per **7:17* and Paul explicitly approves of that in at least 2 verses on this brief passage. Philemon 1:9 and 13, Paul uses slavery as a metaphor for adherence to Jesus. Paul implicitly *upholds the institution of slavery,* even tho Paul expresses a wish that *a specific slave,* Onesimus, could be free. *Paul never mentions Onesimus’ wishes.* So whatever Paul meant by loving Onesimus, it did not include putting Onesimus’ freedom above Philemon’s “property rights” to Onesimus. Colossians 3:22-24 Slaves, obey in everything those who are your fleshly lords _(kyriois),_ not by way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord _(Kyrion)._ Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward. You are serving the Lord Christ. For the wrongdoer will be paid back for the wrong he has done, and there is no partiality. The word Lord for Jesus and for slave master is the same, it’s just capitalized for Jesus. Koine Greek, unlike Biblical Hebrew, had capital letters. Colossians 4:1 again compares slavery to a relationship with God, even as it tells slave masters to treat their slaves “justly and fairly”... thus confirming their rights to own humans. It also implies that the *author thought slavery could be just and fair,* altho it is possible he meant “just and fair relative to to slavery. Ephesians 6:5-9 instructs slaves to *obey and treat their masters as they would Christ* and the masters to treat slaves “well”, an oxymoron overall, but of course there can be relatively kind and cruel slave masters. 1 Timothy 1:10 counts slave *traders* as bad people. Timothy is going to contradict this in the biggest way possible in 6:1. 1 Timothy 6:1 It would be *blasphemy* (“so that God’s name and our teaching may not be slandered”) for slaves *not* to count their masters as worthy of all honor/wealth. Therefore, Timothy is saying *Christian teaching requires slaves to honor their masters.* He is also saying that not honoring a master is a slander to god’s name, which required death by stoning per Leviticus 24:16 and was one of the Ten Commandments. *Timothy is saying that slavery is a necessary part of basic morality.* Matthew 24:45-51 is an approving analogy between *a slave master and god/Jesus as judges over the slaves.* The slave master is righteous and has the authority to judge the fate of the slave. The bad slave is first bad because he doesn’t fear the return of the master (Jesus). So Matthew is saying approvingly that *Jesus is like a slave master and **_vice versa._* Luke 12:37-48 Likens Jesus-Christian relationship to master-servant and *approvingly mentions beating servants.* Luke 12:42-48 Jesus' approving parable of beating disobedient slaves. Luke 15:17-19 This passage does not mention slaves. The servants are hired servants _(misthioi)._ Even if it were talking about slaves, the Prodigal Son’s father feeding his servants well would mean that one master was not cruel to his servants on every way in a parable. It doesn’t change the property relationship in slavery, nor the horrible things Luke, Paul and others say about slavery. And if it were about slavery, it would show the opposite, because the father represents God and/or Jesus and woud own slaves. John 8:35 a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. Titus 2:9-10 Slaves are to be submissive to their own masters in everything; they are to be well-pleasing, not argumentative, not pilfering, but showing all good faith, so that in everything they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior. *Bible: How slaves should behave and masters should treat them:* Galatians 4:30 But what does Scripture say? “Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.” (Genesis 21:30) 1 Peter 2:18 servants (oiketai) should submit even to unreasonable masters. There is no command here to not be a master, let alone an unreasonable one. *General Notes* 2 Timothy 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. So righteousness, even moral perfection includes permission to own slaves, according to Christian scripture 😢 Matthew 5:18, Jesus said every jot and tittle of The Law (the Torah - Genesis thru Deuteronomy) would be fulfilled. In Matthew 10:24 Jesus speaks of the imminent kingdom of Heaven, yet nothing changes about relationships, in fact Paul says *master-slave relationships are ordained by God.* (End holy) John 8:35 Jesus said, “… a slave has no permanent place in the family.” The Greek for slave is _doulos,_ plural _douloi,_ except where otherwise noted.
On Paul coming from an elite family: if you look at the context of Paul’s statement “I know how to abound” it appears to imply to “ generously share my wealth and enjoy life” as if Paul is remembering back to the days when he could do this with material wealth (in Tarsus and while a student in Jerusalem?).
He was halucinating offcourse. You can see His teaching contradicts Jesus. To believe in this Paul guy is basically believe that Jesus was liar and inconsistent
I'm sorry, Dr. Stanley really wanted to unload that he has many publications out for people to check out. In the future I will try to limit how long the promotion takes.
I'm trying to get thrifty the unenforceable but the introduction is too long. I'm 15 minutes in. Can someone tell me what this is about? What is the argument? & what misconception are they trying to solve or elucidate?
Paul is not the jew Elias but the Egyptian false hebrew prophet Elymas. 'Out of egypt we have called our heir, son ' ( Tiberius and roman senate ). Simon of Gamla = Gamaliel, Paul = Hillel ( helios, Heli, matthias, Mathan ). Ananias and the blessed Zacherias together are the founders of Christianity . James the lesser as the 3rd pillar ' Tertius ' is Samliel, John is Quartus, no. 4.
Did the Midianites worship Yahweh? According to Karel van der Toorn, "By the 14th century BC, before the cult of Yahweh had reached Israel, groups of Edomites and Midianites worshipped Yahweh as their god;" this conclusion is based on identification between Midianites and the Shasu. Who came up with Yahweh? The Masoretes, who from about the 6th to the 10th century ce worked to reproduce the original text of the Hebrew Bible, added to “YHWH” the vowel signs of the Hebrew words Adonai or Elohim.
@@mmss3199 Yes, Jesus is a lot nicer than his dad, who apparently wants to cast me into a furnace of fire. I am hoping to spend eternity in the arms of Jesus, not in the bosom of Abraham. (Luke 16:22)
"Now this wife of yours ... ..?? You say she 'can't' or WOn't come to the book signing??? "My book is..[ cut-off abruptly] "No no no! No, no! Your wife, your Wife! You don't think.. she.. is a problem? I think she is! I think she IS a problem. HMmmn! SHE IS.. your Delilah!" [motions with a click of fingers] How soon can we get her in for a photo shoot? What?? Okay? Okay!! I.. I think we can work with this. Yes yes - this is good! Now tell me Brian" "It's Christopher.." 'Oh! Christ.. .??why did I say Br?. why did I say Brian?? Interesting???.. "
I had been taught possibilities that 1. Pauls' name was originally Saul of Tarsus, who worked as a tax collector for the Romans. 2. He came from a wealthy, rabbinic family and was trained to be a rabbi (Pharisee). The family was considered Roman Jewish citizens. It's also surmised that he was what we would consider a spy for the Romans, responsible for altering the teachings of Jesus to conform with Romes' need to keep its conquered nations complacent & obedient.
Marcia Hertz, that makes sense. He boasts a lot, even boasting about how humble he is and how he suffers for the cause....and seems to be at odds with the original apostles who actually knew Jesus. Something about that never set right with me. It's like he's trying to push his agenda by too hard. Reminds me of a hard sell salesman.
I doubt a Roman spy would have ruthless dedication to spread his message at the cost of risking his life, countless times. He definitely had religious fervor.
Is possible that Paul, could be a pharisee that followed Jesus through out his traveled journeys in the many places that appeared in the Gospels and challenged his actions/teachings. In other words, where was Paul when Jesus was still alive and was he aware of Jesus before his death?
C'mon man, Roman ceramics were not produced in quality & quantity for a thousand years. Who tells you what history is when Jesus says My chattel knows what I tell them, "My sheep hear My voice" ?
According to the story, Saul suffered a stroke in which he lost consciousness and experienced a bright light inside his head and a voice saying "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me"? Paul was rendered blind for several days before his eyesight returned which he credited to a visit to Ananias who was a follower of Jesus. Problems with the story: The light and the voice inside his head was his own own brain reacting to a lack of oxygen helped along by a sense of guilt for what he was doing. The voice he heard could not be Jesus if Jesus is a god who is all powerful and cannot be persecuted by his own creations, but Saul could not manage that kind of reasoning. Paul healed his own eyesight which coincided with a visit to a follower of Jesus (Ananias) so he concluded that Ananias healed him and he was so glad that decided to join the cult. The story of Paul's conversion is a classic example of the NDE (near death experience) that fills the religious, evangelical channels of You Tube and reveals the total lack of understanding among the religious of how their own brain works. You would think the brain wasn't even even there when you listen to how they perceive their connection to the world that surrounds them.
This was an enjoyable episode. I bought the first book. Excuse the ignorance but why didn't you about Dr. Carrier's point that Paul had a Schizophrenia like personality? I think this is word not schizoid. I understand you have to respect people's views but if you don't ask the real-world questions then we end up with a more biased history.
@42:40 The framers of the US Constitution didn't envision a society without a single religion. I think he is reading the 14th Amendment back into the 1st. That only happened in the end of the 19th century. At the founding, each State had its society, ruled by a single religion's ethos. Their idea was to have a nation of unified states. Not a unified society. Big honkin' difference, bub.
*Paul looked down on slaves* Galatians 4:23-31 But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, while the son of the free woman was born through promise. Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia;e she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother. For it is written, “Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear; break forth and cry aloud, you who are not in labor! For the children of the desolate one will be more than those of the one who has a husband.” 28Now you,f brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29But just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now. 30But what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman.” 31So, brothers, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman.
@44:20 this view he presents in a comedic manner actually has biological validity, as the female phenotype is the default human morpheme in the absence of fetal testosterone expression.
Without the woman there would be no offspring. Mesogony is still rampant today. Speaking of the less than women hold is nuts 🥜 crackers no human would be born unless women were part of HaShem’s design. It is ok for women to be beat raped abused? All by weak manfolk no courage to follow Yeshua’s own kindness to women. So much of Paul is arrogant entitled and meant to perpetuate man’s rule over all . Any comments will not be addressed this entire lecture is lost in story telling
Paul taught what Jesus wanted taught. Here is his good advice. 1 Corinthians 4:6.....that through us you may learn the rule: “Do not go beyond the things that are written,” so that you may not be puffed up with pride
@@PeterGregoryKelly : Sorry! That makes no sense. Do we have Paulians or Christians. Romans 1:1 Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus and called to be an apostle, set apart for God’s good news, Paul was a FOLLOWER of Jesus Christ. Acts 9:15 But the Lord said to him: “Go! because this man (ie Saul who became Paul) is a CHOSEN VESSEL to me to bear my name to the nations as well as to kings and the sons of Israel. 16 For I will show him plainly how many things he must suffer for my name.” Paul got himself killed promoting Jesus as the Christ.
@@tongakhan230 But you can not trust everything written in the Pauline epistles. 6 of the 13 epistles were not written by Paul and the others have been variously edited with sections added in or rewritten to fit conflicting agendas. A quote from Acts, like any other book in the bible, is not credible because it is a book in the bible.
@@PeterGregoryKelly : Luke was a historian and NOT a disciple in Jesus. He became a believer when he travelled with the apostles to recount their ACTS. If Luke's accounts were found in a cave would that make it more credible? Just because these were added to the Bible would make them less credible?
@@ministryofchrist568 The essence of El is that his nature is the word/mind that conceives and creates worlds. Nature is the only true book of El. The reification of a jumble of ancient stories into a fixed text that becomes authoritative is actually idolitary. Only nature, not the Vedas, not the Tanark, not the Quoran, not the Bible, not the book of Mormon.. etc is the true book. Nature is logos manifest.
And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry; Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief. This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief, Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting. (1 Timothy 1:12-13, 15-16) (Paul speaking about his past and the new life he found by faith in Jesus Christ, whom he had blasphemed. God is gracious, not willing that any perish, but that all come to repentence, like Paul (2 Peter 3:9)).
Was Paul speaking or one of his latter editors or someone else entirely? Were words put into Pau's mouth by others with their own agendas? The early writings are really confusing and most destroyed for political reasons.
@@PeterGregoryKelly The Bible is a book unlike any other. It is God’s word which holy men spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost (see 2 Peter 1:21). Over 40 men during a 1,500-year+ time period were given God’s word. Many of the individual books of the Bible bear the names of these men: Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Peter, for example. The Bible shows us how God has been at work in history to provide a Redeemer for mankind in his Son, Jesus Christ. All men need to hear this message and of their need to be saved by Jesus Christ (see Romans 3:23, Romans 6:23, Acts 4:12). God has both given his word and has preserved it for us so that we can benefit from it. Jesus said, Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away (Matthew 24:35). We read in Psalm 68:11, The Lord gave the word: great was the company of those that published it. Jesus fulfilled all of the prophecies concerning his first coming which shows the reliability of the Old Testament; he quoted the Old Testament, again showing its trustworthiness (see Luke 24:27, 44). Billions of copies of the Bible have been printed and distributed so that men might learn of their need to obtain forgiveness by faith in Jesus Christ. Jesus’ earthly life marked the beginning of the New Testament books (NT). God’s word grew as new books were added to the Bible. These books were penned, copied, and spread in the days of the early church as testified in Acts 12:24, But the word of God grew and multiplied. Paul spake many of these NT books as noted by his name in the salutations and in the books’ contents. Among the earliest, most numerous, and geographically widespread extant NT manuscripts and the earliest translations of the Bible into other languages, we find remarkable uniformity. We can have confidence in God’s word-it is demonstrably his word as we can objectively observe in the form of prophecies fulfilled (see Isaiah 46:9-10), in its preservation through history to this very day, and in other ways. Paul certainly spoke of himself in the above passages as we read today, I have no doubt.
@@sm8johnthreesixteen If it's in the bible then it can not be believed. You can not prove the bible by using the bible. that is circular reasoning. If the bible is "demonstrably his word" then we can only conclude that the god in question has multiple personality disorder because the character changes and contradicts himself all over the place. No, it is more consistent with various authors having different "gods" and their own various political agendas. A good hint when responding to an atheist is not to quote the bible. You may as well be quoting Mother Goose.
@@curbroadshow Through faith in Jesus Christ, men can be redeemed from their sin and all of its horrible consequences (see Colossians 1:14, John 6:47). In Christ, we can be redeemed to know God, our Maker as Father; to have everlasting life; to have a home in heaven; to receive an incorruptible inheritance; to have a life full of meaning on earth in service to him and others in this life; and to know rich service to him in the life to come. To know Christ is to know life, joy, hope, love, and peace eternally. (See John 1:12, John 20:17, John 14:1-3, 1 Peter 1:4, 2 Corinthians 5:15, Galatians 5:22-23, Revelation 21:6-7, Revelation 22:1-5, etc.) Apart from faith in Christ, men will perish. They will experience the wrath of God in hell. To be in hell is to know torment and agony with no one to help you bear it, where one longs for even a drop of water (see Luke 16:19-31). It is to know an experience of everlasting destruction (see 2 Thessalonians 1:9). Hell was originally made for the Devil and the angels that joined him in rebellion against God (see Matthew 25:41). Hell is a fearful, true reality of which God warns us to escape through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (see Acts 4:12). It is not God’s will that any man perish, but that all come to repentance and faith in Christ (see 2 Peter 3:9). Jesus Christ was born for the very purpose of one day offering himself as a sacrifice on our behalf that we might be forgiven and have eternal life (see 1 John 4:14, John 1:29, 1 Corinthians 15:3-4). God freely offers the gift of eternal life to all who trust in his Son (see Romans 6:23). Put your trust in him today as Savior!
Jesus didn't come back and rule the world before his disciples died like he said he would in Matthew 16,,,,,,,, Jesus said in Matthew I come not for peace but for the sword,,,,,,,, Jesus said in Matthew 22 the world will not have love or marriage he was wrong don't pray for us we don't need your modern Jesus we rolled the dice love is cool in Danny Gallagher Paradise, CZcams Portugal the man live lala 2018
Well, if you think the world is coming to an end.... Seems like he was rebelling against the wrong things, like, don't wash your hands and sinning sexually in your heart--I know when you're masturbating--and rendering unto the slave masters.
Egypt really wasn't into slaves like people think Rome is ancient to us like Egypt was ancient to Rome you got to remember that and slavery was never okay so I'm starting to get skeptical already and he still hasn't said anything about his book yet
Christopher Stanley was a pure joy to listen to. I am so glad I listened to the very end. Cause what he said in the last six minutes reached out and snagged me by the britches. It so struck me that it compelled me to listen to the whole thing again. This was a top-notch presentation. Thanks. Let's see more of Christopher.
Paul is the founder of todays Christianity
What a breath of fresh air to listen to a gentle, honest, and friendly Christian with an American accent. I don't know the last time I heard that, but I'm thinking 1997.
@Iyas kelu I'm not. If you watch the video, it's mentioned that Christopher D. Stanley is a Christian.
Christ is the thief, Christians annihilated all the pagan cultures and karma demands they all get beheaded at the fifth seal in Revelation, just as it is written. It will surely happen at the end of the age of Pisces, just as those who worshipped the golden Calf were slain by Moses in the age of Aries.
@@EmeraldEyesEsoteric Wow, not sure how you connect that to my comment, but hi.
@@EmeraldEyesEsoteric The best spaghetti recipes often contain capers and anchovies. Spaghetti alla puttanesca comes to mind. Interestingly, _spaghetti alla puttanesca_ can be translated as "wh*re's spaghetti", because it was a signature dish of Italian prostitutes, who would cook it to signal their business (the dish having a distinctive smell).
Now, what does spaghetti alla puttanesca have to do with anything? Nothing at all. But boy is it delicious!
@@Jay_in_Japan Love ya.
How important do you think is, in the case of Christians in the Roman Empire, the thesis of the cultural anthropologist Marvin Harris that "every social group that isolates itself from the society of which it is a part generates general rejection from the other members of that society"?
(The isolation of the early Christians I think has a lot to do with their extreme monotheism and their rejection of any other form of religious worship.)
Back in the "80's, I became a great fan of Cecilia Holland, for the reason that she appeared to be a well-immersed academic historian, with a sublime talent for immersing the novice in historical context to the point where one cannot help but EXPERIENCE a life in the past. There's no better way to actually comprehend the CONTEXT of the historical record. Dr. Stanley is providing a "Revealed Truth" of an actual history that religious proclamation could never equal.
I'm sold on the fictional books. I have ordered the first one on Audible. I'll be interested in seeing if it gives me a good idea of what the historical society was like.
If I remember to, when I've finished it, I'll come back and say what I think about it.
Love the vids\info...binge watch em all...😎🤙🏿
Biblical Truth is an oxymoron.
Truly "stories".
I'm a moron on oxy's
This was great. The historical and sociocultural details Dr Stanley shares are fascinating. Thanks.
😅
Just got Mr. Stanley's first novel. I needed a "story" rather than just a textbook.
Ha! And here I thought I was the only one calling out christians for their celebrating cannibalism and let's not forget their love for incest 🤮 (Sara and Abraham ), I look back at my christian days and Wonder with shame and disgust 🤔😔; thank u D for helping me truly see the light 🥰🇺🇲🎉
So, because Abraham married Sarah his half sister, it means Christians supports incest? What the heck!
Really nice video! Looks like you spent a ton of time on it
I use that quote from The Go-Between (the one about the past being a foreign country) all the time.
Wacky how often it turns out to be useful.
Thankyou Dr Stanley and Derek. On Paul alluding to Galli (castrated priests of Cybele) in Galatians, I think it very likely. Paul’s allusion to being “a sounding gong or a tinkling brass” is believed to refer to the Cybele priests musical instruments as they danced down the streets in public. Dr G. C. Fairweather.
One of the reasons christianity never made sense to me, was because of all the "according to Paul" stuff. Much of christianity is Paulism, nothing to do with JC.
For me it is bcz the they teach people that God is His Own Son. This is the most bizzare claim ever that has no valid proof even from the Bible itself.
@@andanandan6061 The phrase "son of God" is a very common one in the bible. It's used multiple times in the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. It just means people who have a special connection to god. Many christians don't even know this. Also, there's nothing special about the supposed virgin birth. That was a very common trope at the time.
This was such an engaging, easy to follow, yet informative interview!
This was a great interview. I just purchased the first book.
I think Paul is excusing the hierarchies. He's saying because of Christ they aren't there, that they don't matter. At the very least, that's how Christians use this today, saying, in effect, it doesn't matter that you're poor, it doesn't matter that you're a slave, just accept the hierarchy because in heaven it all goes away. That's how it functions in the United States at least.
Exactly.
Galatians 3:28 sounds egalitarian, but the passage continues to 4:31 where Paul is glorifying mistreating slaves as spiritually (my paraphrase) inferior
I would have liked the school to teach us more about the historical Jesus and the influence of Christianity. In history one has to learn about the Romans, the Greeks and their philosophy.
I really want to read Dr. Stanley's historical fiction. Sounds like it could be a fun read.
And wow, charis became grace just like how the Hebrew hesod went from covenantal reciprocal duties became a loving grace.
What extra-biblical / scriptural historical evidence is there for Paul's existence? The more I read & learn, the more he seems heavily mythicized if not completely fictional.
I applaud Christopher Stanley's approach to historical biblical fiction, even though I consider the Bible itself fiction. Out of curiosity, has anyone read "Out of Egypt" by Anne Rice? I found it quite delightful
New video drop, let’s do this!! 👍
Questions to Christopher D. Stanley:
Could you recommend good scholarly literature on Paul's complex and possibly surreal historical conversion process? Of what actually happened, not as the NT narrates.
Do you have reliable information about the clearly Greco-Roman origin of the legal and cultural figure of vicarious death, that is, its Substitutionary atonement of Jesus on which Christianity is based, and its reception by early Christians (especially, by Paul)?
What does the Bible say about this substitutionary atonement of the Son? Was it voluntary? Was this ordered and forced by a Father thirsty for revenge and blood? (In any case, as deduced from the Bible, I think that a sordid family affair is described to us in this matter of vicarious death)
Thank you very much for his answer.- Fernando.
This was one of my favorite episodes, Derek 😊
Excellent discussion!1
Paul generally told people to *stay in their oppression*
1 Corinthians 7:17-24
“Were you a slave when you were called?”
Paul is then apparently contradictory as to whether slaves should remain slaves, saying in v20 and 24 that they should stay slaves and in v21 that they should get free if they can. But since v22 says they are free under God, it is not clear that v21 means to no longer be the property of a human.
Regardless of the meaning of v21, *God assigned slavery to them per **7:17* and Paul explicitly approves of that in at least 2 verses on this brief passage.
He's a self proclaimed apostle.
Excellent interview!
A-Paul-Lion the Appauling. The Apollo Lion, lord of the Locusts.
Paul is educated enough that he could very well have come from a wealthy family. He talks about studying with Gamaliel and being better than the best students. He talks about how much work he does and how he puts in more effort than anybody else. He's very controlling and won't tolerate any dissent or questioning.
In short, he comes across like a massive narcissist.
Paul is said to have been a tent maker/leather worker. But he also had a small crew with him. Perhaps the tent making was something relegated to his subordinates and Paul's talk about the nobility of the working man and working by the sweat of his brow etc. is all just the kind of hot air you'd expect from grifting narcissists.
When questioned about the large sums of money he is bringing back to his base of operations he essentially says "Shut up."
Outside of the textual information we have, we keep seeing this pattern where religious fundamentalists are very susceptible to these kinds of narcissistic, authoritarian behaviors.
In some places Paul comes across as fairly progressive for his time. But I think a good question would be to ask, to what end?
We've also seen this kind of behavior from narcissists. It's a kind of aggrandizing where you set yourself up as being/having the solution to the common societal ills of the time, "I am the only one who can fix it, so support me." We have all heard this kind of thing in recent times.
It would be a good idea to look at Paul and his accomplishments with a much more skeptical eye. If for no other reason than it could lead to avenues of interpretation that haven't really been trod enough.
What 5 narcissistic traits, according to the official DSM-5, do you see in Paul? It takes 5 for an official diagnosis.
Some I can cross off the list that Jesus *doesn't* have. He's not materialistic. He doesn't wish to have huge celebration, parades, statues etc in public presentation of his good deeds. He can take and admit criticism. He shows empathy. He doesn't seem to expect relationships to be purely transactional and only likes hanging out with those He deems "better than himself" or profitable.
What motivated Paul and the evangelists? We can only assume it was money.
Political interests, causing a massive uprising against Rome and get independence.
Authentic religious fervor can motivate people to do amazing to batshit crazy things.
When a person believes God really told them so, they are almost unstopable.
Please upload these on Spotify aswell
Awesome I was actually talking about a historical biblical fiction the other day . I want these books
Conn iggulden has a decent book on Rome but it not biblical in nature
I am God. You are God. We are God. We create Heaven, or we create Hell, here ’on Earth; God decide's.
"Upside Down cross, the finger is, unless our branch, our forearm, then know, why we is sturdy!
Therefore " finger" is Holy!
Apostle Paul was a meditater. He was also into Kundalini and into the practice of it.
Excellent episode.
This is a fascinating analysis. A gay novel about Paul hanging out in the bath houses of Ephesus, talking about the thorn in his life, his struggle with young pretty boy Russian soldiers in their pleated mini skirt uniforms would be a screamingly funny embellishment badly needed.
A firend of mine has asked me to explain why Christianity took off so quickly.
I think he's trying to convince me that God must have intervened.
Which is yet another proof that God exists.
But the religion didn't take off quickly, unless by "quickly" your friend meant nearly 3 centuries from the 30s CE to the reign of Emperor Constantine in the 320s CE.
@@deewesthill1213
I think he is referring to the churches set up by Paul, only a few years after Jesus was taken up.
You know he wrote 13 letters to various churches, right ?
@@deewesthill1213
If I went around various cities preaching that Elvis Presley is alive, people would laugh at me.
But thousands of tourists have seen him in Las Vegas, so it might be true.
Yes, although i thought scholars consider only seven epistles to be genuinely "Pauline": Romans, I and II Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, I Thessalonians, and Philemon.
@@tedgrant2 Yes, there are many living eyewitnesses who testified to seeing a living EP. Unlike JC, all there is for him is some very old and dubious writings that were anonymously written and not by eyewitnesses.
The beard looks good Derek
He learned from mankind, God prompted me to ask him, he taught it to me, It was given to Apostle Paul by God to know everything, in other words he was given the gift to know, and in the Corinthians he speaks of what happened to him
I'll help His Grace spread all over you.
Life under a conquered, brutal Roman empire that aggressively sought to bleach out all native cultures, religions, and values in their identities.
*Slavery is often holy in the Christian Bible*
The CB upholds the slave laws of the Tanakh, even adding elements of holiness to them.
In Galatians 3:28, Paul starts by implying that there is no distinction under Jesus between free people and slaves, men and women, etc, but the passage continues into chapter 4, where Paul minimizes the suffering of slaves by saying child heirs are just like slaves, and by 4:23-24 he is saying that birth into slavery is part of the covenant of Mt Sinai. In Galatians 4:28-31, possibly paraphrasing the abuse of Hagar in Genesis 16:4-6, Paul *endorses not treating slaves well,* upholds leaving a slave woman _(paidisken_ when referring to Hagar) and her son homeless, and makes the slaves metaphorically ungodly; a separate, destitute class (which contradicts his earlier child-heirs-are-slaves claim). Galatians 4:30 *”The son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman.”* This is a metaphor for not inheriting Yahweh’s promise to Abraham and his people, which is an accurate assessment of the horrible morality of Genesis 16.
1 Corinthians 7:17-24
“Were you a slave when you were called?”
Paul is then apparently contradictory as to whether slaves should remain slaves, saying in v20 and 24 that they should stay slaves and in v21 that they should get free if they can. But since v22 says they are free under God, it is not clear that v21 means to no longer be the property of a human.
Regardless of the meaning of v21, *God assigned slavery to them per **7:17* and Paul explicitly approves of that in at least 2 verses on this brief passage.
Philemon 1:9 and 13, Paul uses slavery as a metaphor for adherence to Jesus. Paul implicitly *upholds the institution of slavery,* even tho Paul expresses a wish that *a specific slave,* Onesimus, could be free. *Paul never mentions Onesimus’ wishes.*
So whatever Paul meant by loving Onesimus, it did not include putting Onesimus’ freedom above Philemon’s “property rights” to Onesimus.
Colossians 3:22-24 Slaves, obey in everything those who are your fleshly lords _(kyriois),_ not by way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord _(Kyrion)._ Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward. You are serving the Lord Christ. For the wrongdoer will be paid back for the wrong he has done, and there is no partiality.
The word Lord for Jesus and for slave master is the same, it’s just capitalized for Jesus. Koine Greek, unlike Biblical Hebrew, had capital letters.
Colossians 4:1 again compares slavery to a relationship with God, even as it tells slave masters to treat their slaves “justly and fairly”... thus confirming their rights to own humans. It also implies that the *author thought slavery could be just and fair,* altho it is possible he meant “just and fair relative to to slavery.
Ephesians 6:5-9 instructs slaves to *obey and treat their masters as they would Christ* and the masters to treat slaves “well”, an oxymoron overall, but of course there can be relatively kind and cruel slave masters.
1 Timothy 1:10 counts slave *traders* as bad people. Timothy is going to contradict this in the biggest way possible in 6:1.
1 Timothy 6:1 It would be *blasphemy* (“so that God’s name and our teaching may not be slandered”) for slaves *not* to count their masters as worthy of all honor/wealth.
Therefore, Timothy is saying *Christian teaching requires slaves to honor their masters.* He is also saying that not honoring a master is a slander to god’s name, which required death by stoning per Leviticus 24:16 and was one of the Ten Commandments. *Timothy is saying that slavery is a necessary part of basic morality.*
Matthew 24:45-51 is an approving analogy between *a slave master and god/Jesus as judges over the slaves.*
The slave master is righteous and has the authority to judge the fate of the slave. The bad slave is first bad because he doesn’t fear the return of the master (Jesus). So Matthew is saying approvingly that *Jesus is like a slave master and **_vice versa._*
Luke 12:37-48 Likens Jesus-Christian relationship to master-servant and *approvingly mentions beating servants.*
Luke 12:42-48 Jesus' approving parable of beating disobedient slaves.
Luke 15:17-19 This passage does not mention slaves. The servants are hired servants _(misthioi)._ Even if it were talking about slaves, the Prodigal Son’s father feeding his servants well would mean that one master was not cruel to his servants on every way in a parable. It doesn’t change the property relationship in slavery, nor the horrible things Luke, Paul and others say about slavery. And if it were about slavery, it would show the opposite, because the father represents God and/or Jesus and woud own slaves.
John 8:35 a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever.
Titus 2:9-10 Slaves are to be submissive to their own masters in everything; they are to be well-pleasing, not argumentative, not pilfering, but showing all good faith, so that in everything they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior.
*Bible: How slaves should behave and masters should treat them:*
Galatians 4:30
But what does Scripture say? “Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.” (Genesis 21:30)
1 Peter 2:18 servants (oiketai) should submit even to unreasonable masters.
There is no command here to not be a master, let alone an unreasonable one.
*General Notes*
2 Timothy 3:16-17
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
So righteousness, even moral perfection includes permission to own slaves, according to Christian scripture 😢
Matthew 5:18, Jesus said every jot and tittle of The Law (the Torah - Genesis thru Deuteronomy) would be fulfilled.
In Matthew 10:24 Jesus speaks of the imminent kingdom of Heaven, yet nothing changes about relationships, in fact Paul says *master-slave relationships are ordained by God.*
(End holy)
John 8:35 Jesus said, “… a slave has no permanent place in the family.”
The Greek for slave is _doulos,_ plural _douloi,_ except where otherwise noted.
Humans are good storytellers!
On Paul coming from an elite family: if you look at the context of Paul’s statement “I know how to abound” it appears to imply to “ generously share my wealth and enjoy life” as if Paul is remembering back to the days when he could do this with material wealth (in Tarsus and while a student in Jerusalem?).
his status as a citizen was evidence of some standing in society.
Grandeur.
Some people might say god put those ideas in his head....🤔
Others might say he was hallucinating.
He was halucinating offcourse. You can see His teaching contradicts Jesus. To believe in this Paul guy is basically believe that Jesus was liar and inconsistent
wow 6.5 minutes of commercials up front. dude!!!
I'm sorry, Dr. Stanley really wanted to unload that he has many publications out for people to check out. In the future I will try to limit how long the promotion takes.
It’s just the intro man. 😂 The full video’s well over an hour.
Derek, recall him 'in Andrew Bordens' place.
❤❤❤
¡Hail Poppa Smurf!
I'm trying to get thrifty the unenforceable but the introduction is too long. I'm 15 minutes in. Can someone tell me what this is about? What is the argument? & what misconception are they trying to solve or elucidate?
Paul is not the jew Elias but the Egyptian false hebrew prophet Elymas.
'Out of egypt we have called our heir, son ' ( Tiberius and roman senate ).
Simon of Gamla = Gamaliel, Paul = Hillel ( helios, Heli, matthias, Mathan ).
Ananias and the blessed Zacherias together are the founders of Christianity .
James the lesser as the 3rd pillar ' Tertius ' is Samliel, John is Quartus, no. 4.
Ho Lei Fook.
Derek really knows how to make my day with these videos.
You're doing the work of God's work Derek. Lol
Good stuff.
Did the Midianites worship Yahweh?
According to Karel van der Toorn, "By the 14th century BC, before the cult of Yahweh had reached Israel, groups of Edomites and Midianites worshipped Yahweh as their god;" this conclusion is based on identification between Midianites and the Shasu.
Who came up with Yahweh?
The Masoretes, who from about the 6th to the 10th century ce worked to reproduce the original text of the Hebrew Bible, added to “YHWH” the vowel signs of the Hebrew words Adonai or Elohim.
My response so far is, I don't know.
He says I am hiding behind my ignorance.
Help !
@@mmss3199
Yes, Jesus is a lot nicer than his dad, who apparently wants to cast me into a furnace of fire.
I am hoping to spend eternity in the arms of Jesus, not in the bosom of Abraham.
(Luke 16:22)
CDS looks like Paul also.
Half an hour in, not yet one word about Paul. Just a guy shilling for his book.
"Now this wife of yours ... ..?? You say she 'can't' or WOn't come to the book signing???
"My book is..[ cut-off abruptly]
"No no no! No, no! Your wife, your Wife! You don't think.. she.. is a problem? I think she is! I think she IS a problem. HMmmn! SHE IS.. your Delilah!"
[motions with a click of fingers]
How soon can we get her in for a photo shoot? What?? Okay? Okay!! I.. I think we can work with this. Yes yes - this is good! Now tell me Brian"
"It's Christopher.."
'Oh! Christ.. .??why did I say Br?. why did I say Brian?? Interesting???.. "
I had been taught possibilities that
1. Pauls' name was originally Saul of Tarsus, who worked as a tax collector for the Romans.
2. He came from a wealthy, rabbinic family and was trained to be a rabbi (Pharisee). The family was considered Roman Jewish citizens.
It's also surmised that he was what we would consider a spy for the Romans, responsible for altering the teachings of Jesus to conform with Romes' need to keep its conquered nations complacent & obedient.
Marcia Hertz, that makes sense. He boasts a lot, even boasting about how humble he is and how he suffers for the cause....and seems to be at odds with the original apostles who actually knew Jesus. Something about that never set right with me. It's like he's trying to push his agenda by too hard. Reminds me of a hard sell salesman.
I doubt a Roman spy would have ruthless dedication to spread his message at the cost of risking his life, countless times. He definitely had religious fervor.
Is possible that Paul, could be a pharisee that followed Jesus through out his traveled journeys in the many places that appeared in the Gospels and challenged his actions/teachings. In other words, where was Paul when Jesus was still alive and was he aware of Jesus before his death?
Paul the wolf in sheep clothing Jesus warned about. taught opposite of Jesus greatest command [monotheism]
As much time as Paul spends boasting I think if he ever met Jesus even once we'd be hearing about it in all his letters.
Don't make opinion. There was only 12 companions of Jesus and Paul was not one of them.
C'mon man, Roman ceramics were not produced in quality & quantity for a thousand years. Who tells you what history is when Jesus says My chattel knows what I tell them, "My sheep hear My voice" ?
The sheep hear Paul instead
According to the story, Saul suffered a stroke in which he lost consciousness and experienced a bright light inside his head and a voice saying "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me"?
Paul was rendered blind for several days before his eyesight returned which he credited to a visit to Ananias who was a follower of Jesus.
Problems with the story:
The light and the voice inside his head was his own own brain reacting to a lack of oxygen helped along by a sense of guilt for what he was doing.
The voice he heard could not be Jesus if Jesus is a god who is all powerful and cannot be persecuted by his own creations, but Saul could not manage that kind of reasoning.
Paul healed his own eyesight which coincided with a visit to a follower of Jesus (Ananias) so he concluded that Ananias healed him and he was so glad that decided to join the cult.
The story of Paul's conversion is a classic example of the NDE (near death experience) that fills the religious, evangelical channels of You Tube and reveals the total lack of understanding among the religious of how their own brain works. You would think the brain wasn't even even there when you listen to how they perceive their connection to the world that surrounds them.
This was an enjoyable episode. I bought the first book. Excuse the ignorance but why didn't you about Dr. Carrier's point that Paul had a Schizophrenia like personality? I think this is word not schizoid. I understand you have to respect people's views but if you don't ask the real-world questions then we end up with a more biased history.
@42:40 The framers of the US Constitution didn't envision a society without a single religion. I think he is reading the 14th Amendment back into the 1st. That only happened in the end of the 19th century. At the founding, each State had its society, ruled by a single religion's ethos. Their idea was to have a nation of unified states. Not a unified society. Big honkin' difference, bub.
It seems Paul is the most popular person on this channel. 🤣🤣🤣
He looks like the apostle paul
I put no faith in an extended life warranty by taking advise from superstitions old guys from 2000 years ago..
Finish this sentence. "From Christ to crack, then to ___________."
*Paul looked down on slaves*
Galatians 4:23-31
But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, while the son of the free woman was born through promise.
Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar.
Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia;e she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.
But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother.
For it is written, “Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear;
break forth and cry aloud, you who are not in labor! For the children of the desolate one will be more than those of the one who has a husband.”
28Now you,f brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29But just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now. 30But what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman.” 31So, brothers, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman.
¡Kill the wabbit; ,¡kill the wabbit!
@44:20 this view he presents in a comedic manner actually has biological validity, as the female phenotype is the default human morpheme in the absence of fetal testosterone expression.
Without the woman there would be no offspring. Mesogony is still rampant today. Speaking of the less than women hold is nuts 🥜 crackers no human would be born unless women were part of HaShem’s design.
It is ok for women to be beat raped abused? All by weak manfolk no courage to follow Yeshua’s own kindness to women.
So much of Paul is arrogant entitled and meant to perpetuate man’s rule over all .
Any comments will not be addressed this entire lecture is lost in story telling
Paul taught what Jesus wanted taught.
Here is his good advice.
1 Corinthians 4:6.....that through us you may learn the rule: “Do not go beyond the things that are written,” so that you may not be puffed up with pride
Paul taught what Paul wanted taught. They have overlapped by chance but different ideas.
@@PeterGregoryKelly : Sorry! That makes no sense.
Do we have Paulians or Christians.
Romans 1:1 Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus and called to be an apostle, set apart for God’s good news,
Paul was a FOLLOWER of Jesus Christ.
Acts 9:15 But the Lord said to him: “Go! because this man (ie Saul who became Paul) is a CHOSEN VESSEL to me to bear my name to the nations as well as to kings and the sons of Israel. 16 For I will show him plainly how many things he must suffer for my name.”
Paul got himself killed promoting Jesus as the Christ.
@@tongakhan230 But you can not trust everything written in the Pauline epistles. 6 of the 13 epistles were not written by Paul and the others have been variously edited with sections added in or rewritten to fit conflicting agendas. A quote from Acts, like any other book in the bible, is not credible because it is a book in the bible.
@@PeterGregoryKelly : Luke was a historian and NOT a disciple in Jesus. He became a believer when he travelled with the apostles to recount their ACTS.
If Luke's accounts were found in a cave would that make it more credible?
Just because these were added to the Bible would make them less credible?
was Jesus bipolar ? Jesus ' worship our lord the one god only ' Paul ' worship trinity 3 coequal godheads'
These videos are way too long.
This channel is the epitome of what Paul is talking about in 2 Timothy 3:7
Lol, like learning that Paul was long dead when he wrote 2 Timothy?
@@michaelfuller34 That's not true, where are you getting that lie from?
If only he had actually written it...
@@Loenthall88 Actually it doesn't matter who wrote it, the important thing is that it's true.
@@ministryofchrist568 The essence of El is that his nature is the word/mind that conceives and creates worlds. Nature is the only true book of El. The reification of a jumble of ancient stories into a fixed text that becomes authoritative is actually idolitary. Only nature, not the Vedas, not the Tanark, not the Quoran, not the Bible, not the book of Mormon.. etc is the true book. Nature is logos manifest.
You are shounding a bit Shcottish today
You probably BELIEVE in pseudo Pauline epistles. So WHICH "PAUL" are We describing?
And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry; Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.
This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief, Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting. (1 Timothy 1:12-13, 15-16)
(Paul speaking about his past and the new life he found by faith in Jesus Christ, whom he had blasphemed. God is gracious, not willing that any perish, but that all come to repentence, like Paul (2 Peter 3:9)).
Was Paul speaking or one of his latter editors or someone else entirely? Were words put into Pau's mouth by others with their own agendas? The early writings are really confusing and most destroyed for political reasons.
@@PeterGregoryKelly The Bible is a book unlike any other. It is God’s word which holy men spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost (see 2 Peter 1:21). Over 40 men during a 1,500-year+ time period were given God’s word. Many of the individual books of the Bible bear the names of these men: Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Peter, for example. The Bible shows us how God has been at work in history to provide a Redeemer for mankind in his Son, Jesus Christ. All men need to hear this message and of their need to be saved by Jesus Christ (see Romans 3:23, Romans 6:23, Acts 4:12).
God has both given his word and has preserved it for us so that we can benefit from it. Jesus said, Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away (Matthew 24:35). We read in Psalm 68:11, The Lord gave the word: great was the company of those that published it. Jesus fulfilled all of the prophecies concerning his first coming which shows the reliability of the Old Testament; he quoted the Old Testament, again showing its trustworthiness (see Luke 24:27, 44). Billions of copies of the Bible have been printed and distributed so that men might learn of their need to obtain forgiveness by faith in Jesus Christ.
Jesus’ earthly life marked the beginning of the New Testament books (NT). God’s word grew as new books were added to the Bible. These books were penned, copied, and spread in the days of the early church as testified in Acts 12:24, But the word of God grew and multiplied. Paul spake many of these NT books as noted by his name in the salutations and in the books’ contents. Among the earliest, most numerous, and geographically widespread extant NT manuscripts and the earliest translations of the Bible into other languages, we find remarkable uniformity.
We can have confidence in God’s word-it is demonstrably his word as we can objectively observe in the form of prophecies fulfilled (see Isaiah 46:9-10), in its preservation through history to this very day, and in other ways. Paul certainly spoke of himself in the above passages as we read today, I have no doubt.
@@sm8johnthreesixteen If it's in the bible then it can not be believed. You can not prove the bible by using the bible. that is circular reasoning. If the bible is "demonstrably his word" then we can only conclude that the god in question has multiple personality disorder because the character changes and contradicts himself all over the place. No, it is more consistent with various authors having different "gods" and their own various political agendas.
A good hint when responding to an atheist is not to quote the bible. You may as well be quoting Mother Goose.
@@sm8johnthreesixteen redeemed for what?
@@curbroadshow Through faith in Jesus Christ, men can be redeemed from their sin and all of its horrible consequences (see Colossians 1:14, John 6:47). In Christ, we can be redeemed to know God, our Maker as Father; to have everlasting life; to have a home in heaven; to receive an incorruptible inheritance; to have a life full of meaning on earth in service to him and others in this life; and to know rich service to him in the life to come. To know Christ is to know life, joy, hope, love, and peace eternally. (See John 1:12, John 20:17, John 14:1-3, 1 Peter 1:4, 2 Corinthians 5:15, Galatians 5:22-23, Revelation 21:6-7, Revelation 22:1-5, etc.)
Apart from faith in Christ, men will perish. They will experience the wrath of God in hell. To be in hell is to know torment and agony with no one to help you bear it, where one longs for even a drop of water (see Luke 16:19-31). It is to know an experience of everlasting destruction (see 2 Thessalonians 1:9). Hell was originally made for the Devil and the angels that joined him in rebellion against God (see Matthew 25:41). Hell is a fearful, true reality of which God warns us to escape through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (see Acts 4:12).
It is not God’s will that any man perish, but that all come to repentance and faith in Christ (see 2 Peter 3:9). Jesus Christ was born for the very purpose of one day offering himself as a sacrifice on our behalf that we might be forgiven and have eternal life (see 1 John 4:14, John 1:29, 1 Corinthians 15:3-4). God freely offers the gift of eternal life to all who trust in his Son (see Romans 6:23). Put your trust in him today as Savior!
Repent and believe the Gospel of John3,3,6,!
none of the gospels were even written by any apostle. bart e
lol dude you're waaaay behind to come and preach here
Jesus didn't come back and rule the world before his disciples died like he said he would in Matthew 16,,,,,,,, Jesus said in Matthew I come not for peace but for the sword,,,,,,,, Jesus said in Matthew 22 the world will not have love or marriage he was wrong don't pray for us we don't need your modern Jesus we rolled the dice love is cool in Danny Gallagher Paradise, CZcams Portugal the man live lala 2018
😶
Listen to them laugh at Jesus, CZcams Portugal the man live lala 2018
Well, if you think the world is coming to an end.... Seems like he was rebelling against the wrong things, like, don't wash your hands and sinning sexually in your heart--I know when you're masturbating--and rendering unto the slave masters.
@@danielgallagher3333 to be honest, your grammar is pretty funny too. 😄
Sounds like he's talking crap
No thats Paul the one who did that
Well I haven't heard him talk about anything yet I hope he realizes that ancient Egypt really was ancient Egypt to the Roman Greco's
Egypt really wasn't into slaves like people think Rome is ancient to us like Egypt was ancient to Rome you got to remember that and slavery was never okay so I'm starting to get skeptical already and he still hasn't said anything about his book yet
Sorry bro a lot of your shows are excellent but this one I got to turn it off I don't like bigots
Why is he a “bigot” ?
I'm prejudiced against liars. I must be a bigot too!