Видео

The Trinity is a product of man not God. It's of the 👹 🤮💯

Trent, Aquinas or Calvin never were trump cards one could play to cancel out all that came before or after, contrary to what some commenters assume. Their assumption is that discernment ended at some arbitrarily chosen point in church history. St. John’s “testing of the spirits” therefore is ended too, bestowing immunity, seemingly, on blithe accusations of heresy intended to poison the well for those who would drink from the church fathers. These accusers have not read more than a few paragraphs of the ancient or modern fathers, yet presume to pass judgment on their orthodoxy. Thank God this is not how things are done in the Catholic Church! Thank God the binding and loosing it effects, its judgments on sainthood and heresy, come from bishops and councils who do not abandon discernment (or reading). Their flaws are for their successors in authority to deal with. You are not an authority. You lack the gravitas and credibility of an Augustine or Balthasar. You haven’t put in the time, the blood, sweat and tears. (How do I know you haven’t? From many telltale signs, but one is that you never use the heavy ammo Balthasar provides to back some of your antimodernist grievances. If there’s one thing you guys love, it’s ammo.) Especially cringe worthy are those who imagine they can poison the well merely by dropping a woman’s name, or a mystic’s. Catholicism has a centuries long tradition of women mystics, 4 of whom it named authoritative teachers, Doctors of the Church. The church will take decades or centuries to sift and assess Von Speyr, but you guys already know the answer, as usual. (Did you know she was a physician?) And you think it is the obstinacy and recalcitrance of others that slows the growth of your churches. Worry about your own. You’re unhappy in the Catholic Church, but that’s because your principles and your notions of authority are Protestant. Sort it out and choose a path instead of hurling anathemas or whispering insinuations. Stop poisoning the well.

The obvious barrier to this theology being truthr is Prophets, true prophesy (Isaiah, etc) and Revelation. If the Bible is inerrant, Open Theology is just speculation based on an idealistic version of God. Try proving OT with the Bible… it just doesn’t work.

1 Corinthians 13:12 12 We see now through a glass in a dark manner; but then face to face. Now I know in part; but then I shall know even as I am known.

The Purpose of the Universe Fallacy, the universe does not, nor needs a 'purpose' it simply IS. This is presupposition 101.

Why don't you say this in 5 minutes or less? Otherwise we don't have the attention span to sit there for an hour getting this information

This video contributes nothing to understanding of Nietzsche and art...This man repeats what has already been said, just like an intelligent parrot, but nonetheless a parrot.

Life changing!!!

God born a Son Psalm 110 out of Himself, that when the Word became Flesh, He walked in all of the Old Testament and came through Mary with His Body. His Body not of this world Hebrew 9:11-13. Jesus is Bread (His Body) from Heaven John 6:51. Study about bodies, There is two types of Bodies our physical and Spiritual, Jesus had a Spiritual Body and His Blood from heaven 1 Corinthians 15:40-50. If you make Jesus to a canal man, you will worship a creature, not a Creator Romans 1:16-25

Great presenter and presentation.

Excellent explanation. Thank you.

If I am allowed to express my personal opinion: Dostoevsky is one of the most overestimated writers of all time. Really D.? What can one say about Alyosha's theological discussions with a 13 year old boy? What can one think about the ending of Brothers Karamazov, where Alyosha together with some pre-adolescent children (!) are all together cheerfully happy as they celebrate... the coming of the Last Judgement Day!... Seriously? Is this suppose to be good literature? Even a believer reader should have enormous problems with such a literary, such an artistic solution, which is not. In Dostoevsky we find always the following concept: All "good" guys get to be rewarded and all "bad" guys either commit suicide or go to prison or get crazy. Ivan Karamazov, the one that could have saved Dmitri's - his brother's - life, gets crazy one day before the court! And why? Because he is the "atheist" of the novel! Is there anything more p r e d i c t a b l e in whole literature? Do we want our literature to be predictable in that silly way? How can a healthy human mind accept this forced and totally disgusting solution? And this novel is considered by many, many, many "serious" people that read (do they actually read?) serious literature as "the best novel ever written". H o l y cow! After having read Dostoevsky's works again and again I have come to this conclusion: He is the most horrible, boring and kitsch author out there. Not even his language has anything to offer! And although I don't agree with every single critical opinion Nabokov expressed for a number of authors, I totally agree with his opinion on Dostoevsky. There are so many writers out there that are... writers! D. is at least mediocre. And please, for all of you reading this comment and thinking that I am crazy: Read D. anew; don't let yourself repeating "what the world is saying". Shape your own opinion.

Don't waste your time on this second rate account that cuts out mid-sentence and then expects you to fork out the dosh to hear the rest of it. Pathetic.

Great is the mystery of godliness!

What a waste of time. If I had known you were going to take the sound away I would never have bothered to watch. Can be likened to a strip tease and when the interesting part arrives money is demanded. Please either take this down or give a warning at the start. I am not impressed.

That strategy for getting subscriptions just makes me want to unsubscribe. Which i probably going to do now. Im sorry you try to strongarm me and i don't appreciate it.

Well I'm unsubscribing.

So are these timeline videos now just going to be advertisements? 2:51

The other is radically "not me" - she is an absolute other. The other and the me do not form a totality. Nevertheless, the other appears only because I appear, and I appear only because the other appears - but this is not reducing the other to the self- same. This fact arises from infinity, not psychology or being. It invites us into the "nearness" - the "welcome", the "sociality". It is not me welcoming - the welcome, the nearness, the sociality are instructed by infinity. Seing the face of the other brings up infinity. His book "Otherwise than being" is the book to read, as it was written to answer Derrida's critique of "Totality and Infinity". We are both free (Sartre) and "hostage" (of love- election).

I hate the term athiest. Why am I am apportioned a label/pidgeon holed because some members of society are delusional psychotics who believe an omnipotent creator sits in the heavens compiling lists of our actions 24/7 and then assessing them from evil/satanic......very bad.......bad........neutral.......good.......very good.......heavenly

I hate the term athiest. Why am I am apportioned a label/pidgeon holed because some members of society are delusional psychotics who believe an omnipotent creator sits in the heavens compiling lists of our actions 24/7 and then assessing them from evil/satanic......very bad.......bad........neutral.......good.......very good.......heavenly Idiots

I'm sure this has been explored, but I wasn't really hearing it here. Could open theism know the future in that God is able to bring about his desired outcomes through controlling the present where desired. Thus, born in Bethlehem, raised after 3 days ... this can all be believed in as certain because of God's ability to control the present to bring certain prophesies to come about?

Open Theism, and I am very new to this, appeals to me because God becomes active. His benevolence, love and hesed are not pre-fixed. He participates in the affairs of humans, both as provider and director. This falls right in line with how he is characterized in the Bible...engaging, responding, revealing, withholding...even out-witting the rebels who would throw it all in disarray. Lord, bless this humble journey towards you and may we never assume to understand your ways that are not ours.

Xx

i could imagine Samuel Thomas Coleridge speak in this very. accent. So, deliciously Victorian it sounds.

Why are you afraid of something that is different than what you believe?

Gnosticism is a victim religion. They believe everything in the material world to be evil. They believe that the God of Abraham is the demiurge, they believe in multiple gods that form a hierarchy or chain of command. The ancient gnostics would practice self castration, have abortion rituals because they didn't believe in pro creation since the world is just pure evil and nothing good in it. The gospel of thomas says women must be turned to men to get into heaven, so I imagine they'd fit right in nowadays with the trans movement. People are drawn to it because it's a belief where you blame everything but yourself, and it has the attraction of esoteric and occult "secret knowledge". It's a downright evil religion thats similar to Luciferianism and has more in common with mormonism than biblical Christianity.

The Israelites were not originally a monotheistic religion, but rather a monolatry. Their God was the God of gods (Deuteronomy 10:17).

Most Christians believe the doctrine of the Trinity to be biblical, and they cite Matthew 28:18-20 or 1 John 5:7. But is the following the original quote of Christ? “And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” These verses are the modern-day rendition identifying an interpolation, so the question must be asked, “Did Christ speak every word found in these verses?” The first Church Historian Eusebius (quotes Matthew 28:19 as it appeared in the early 4th century, Christ said, “Go and make disciples of all nations in My name” (Matthew 28:19, as it was originally quoted, Eusebius, The History of the Church, p. 68, Penguin Classics, 1965). Note, He never said, “...baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.” Which commandment did the disciples hear? It appears the latter quoted by Eusebius from an original manuscript of the NT, for there is no instance of the disciples ever baptizing anyone “In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost,” according to the New Testament! On baptisms specifically were done in the name of {YAHSHUA}, Martin Luther notes, “The apostles certainly used this formula in baptizing in the name of Christ only, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles,’ citing Acts 2:38; 10:48; and 19:5” (Erik H. Herrmann, Paul W. Robinson, The Annotated Luther, Volume 3: Church and Sacraments. Fortress Press. p. 66, 2016). In a documented sermon, Martin Luther made this astonishing statement, “It is indeed true that the name ‘Trinity’ is nowhere to be found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and invented by man” (The Sermons of Martin Luther, Vol. 3, 1988, p. 406). The disciples of Christ in the first two or more centuries did not know of any doctrine of the Trinity. Historically, “There is no evidence that the apostles of Jesus ever heard of the trinity-at any rate from him” (H. G. Wells, The Outline of History, Vol. 2, p. 499, 1920). Therefore, without a doubt, The so-called Great Commission, as written is an interpolation: "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19, the words “...in the name of the Father and of the Son, and the Holy Ghost” were added centuries later). The disciples were to make disciples in His name, and they were baptized in the name of Christ only as the NT gives evidence. The formula is mentioned in the Didache (7:1-3), and it is mostly accepted as authentic due to its supporting manuscript evidence (Everett Ferguson, Baptism in the Early Church, 2013, pp. 134-5). Nevertheless, some scholars have held the view that the passage in the Didache is an interpolation as it is absent from the first few centuries of early Christian quotations, in which case it is believed it would be part of an apostolic or early Christian oral tradition from which both the received texts of Matthew and the Didache emerged, however, the conclusion is the church only baptized in the name of Christ. The view of the passage as an interpolation was in recent times maintained, and this particular line of opposing arguments by Trinitarians is pure eisegesis, meaning the process of interpreting a text in such a way as to introduce one's presuppositions, agendas, or biases, that artificially supports the Trinitarian formula, and based on interpolated verses added to the New Testament. Catholics and Protestants would agree with Protestant Theologian James White, who writes, “We hang a person’s very salvation upon the acceptance of the doctrine…We must know, understand, and love the Trinity to be fully completely Christian” (The Forgotten Trinity, pp. 14-15). And yet most other scholars know that the Trinity is beyond human understanding, “The mind of man cannot fully understand the mystery of the Trinity. He who has tried to understand the mystery fully will lose his mind, but he who would deny the Trinity will lose his soul” (Harold Lindsell and Charles Woodbridge, A Christian Handbook, pp. 51-52, 1953). Nowhere in the New Testament is believing in the Trinity a prerequisite for one’s salvation. Nowhere in the Bible did the LORD ever reveal Himself as a Trinity, or Triune God. Interpolations exist in the New Testament, which are words added later to prove the Trinity. Matthew 28:19 and 1 John 5:7 are proven interpolations, and therefore not of the original Scriptures. 1 John 5:7 is known as “The Johannine comma,” due to a sequence of extra words in 1 John 5:7-8 which appear in later versions of the Bible, but not in earlier Scriptures. Compare these words below in italics in the KJV and the same verse from the newer ESV. "For there are three that bear record (witness) in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one" (1 John 5:7-8 KJV). "For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree" (1 John 5:7-8, ESV). These extra words are generally absent from the early Greek manuscripts. They only appear in the text in late medieval manuscripts, which were done by Trinitarians to bolster the man-made doctrine of the Trinity. The Trinitarian doctrine only existed since the 4th century! A religion unexamined is not worth having. Besides, most Christians when questioned about the Trinity prove to be Modalists, not Trinitarians (The Forgotten Trinity, p. 16). Christians have given examples of the Trinity, and one is the steam, water, and ice, which is not a good example for it only proves modalism. The Trinity is not so much a mystery as it is the doctrine of confusion, and we know that God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33).

HE HAS TO START RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING! STAY WITH THE TEN COMMANDMENTS FOR HIMSELF AND THE PEOPLE HE IS TRYING TO TEACH SOMETHING ABOUT THEOLOGIE !

There is no audio after 5: 00.. or about close to that..

I understand why, but cutting off sound mid-video might not be the most encouraging way to get people to support this channel?

Can you fix the sound?

Thank you!

S.T. Coleridge was nominally a Unitarian, but not in reality. It was too cold and impersonal for him. In fact he came to openly hate it.

This was an awful explanation. Da Vinci code got nothing to do with gnosticism ,and he twisted facts..

Excellent, well informed and articulated video, but lots of spelling errors that could have been caught by proofreading...for example "true" was spelled "ture".

Reason is language? What the fuck does that mean? Not a great lecturer.

Von Balthazar’s teachings are based on the mystic he promoted Adrienne Von speyr and especially on her version of the decent into Hell by Jesus which is contrary to the council of Trent which says Jesus descended into the paradise of the bosom of Abraham the hell of waiting, and Bishop challenor wrote on this too, St. John of the cross warned of trusting in mysticism.

Christianity is an obvious plagiarism of Plato’s ideas There’s so much evidence it’s almost certain

It amazes me how our western cultures find it so hard to comprehend the sacrifce of Jesus as an act of love, forguiveness, justice (not retributive justice), mercy, restoration and reconciliation rather than enforcing wrath, punishment, payment, death, penatly and debt. Our sense of justice based on the roman law has distorted the meaning of God's work on the cross through Jesus. Jesus is fulfilling all the jewish tradition had spoken about the Lord's day in which God would begin a new creation (in Luke 4 Jesus acomplhishes Isaiah 61). “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, 19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” How can we distort and turn the good news of God's favor into some bloody killing sacrifice required to satisty his wrath. We lost something along the way. We have gone too far away from the concept of justice demonstrated through the hebrew tradition.

325 AD Constitine Made Dec 26 Mithras Bday into Jesus Bday . Mithra also was Born of Virgin Son of God Resurrection after death. How is Paul's epistles written before the Gospels. It's probably no coincidence that Jesus sayings is completely different than Paul's Gospel.

Where can I get the full video of this clip?

Why do we think we can wrap our finite minds around the infinite Creator. Peter, however fulfilled his role as the Rock upon whom God would build his church when he fulfilled Christ's command to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Peter baptized in the name of Jesus. Jesus is clearly the revealed name of the most high in Acts 2:38. He spoke to mankind so he is the living word of God to man. There is one God. Peter was given the keys to God's kingdom , and revealed the name of Father, Son , and Holy Spirit as the fulfillment of Christ's command found in Matt 28:19

Prophets taught that there is only one true God Jesus taught us to pray to the only true God, his God and our God. Scholars of each religion like to boast and claim that their prophet is the best prophet and that they have the only way for salvation Some scholars exaggerate more and claim that Jesus is the only son of God Some scholars exaggerate more and claim that Jesus is God But the fact is that Jesus denied his divinity: In Mark 10:18, Luke 18:18-19, Matthew 19:17, Jesus was asked: “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus said: “Why do you call me good? No one is good-except God alone”. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.” There is no mention of the original sin, atonement, sin inheritance, salvation by faith alone, or accepting Jesus as savior, but inheriting eternal life by obedience. That is also confirmed in Luke 10:28 “Do this and you will live.” And in Luke 10:37 “Go and do the same.” Most churches boast about the miracles of Jesus. Scribes and scholars have invented many stories for boasting and to make the bible attractive and interesting Jesus was not proud of miracles; he condemned those who asked him to show miracles in Matthew 12:39, Mark 8:12, and Luke 11:29 ‘A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign!’ Jesus did not claim to be a God, he did not ask the disciples to worship him as a God, he asked them to pray to the only true God (his God and their God). When the scribes wanted to support the doctrine of Trinity; they have added verses like 1 John 5:7 “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” The bible footnotes explain that verse 1 John 5:7 was not in the original old scriptures. When the scribes wanted to support the doctrine of Trinity; they have added verses like Matthew 28:19 which is copied from Mark 16:9-20 Bible footnotes confirm that [The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have verses Mark 16:9-20] The bible footnotes show many other additions in King James Version which were added to support the claims of the trinity and which were not in the old scripture; examples are: In I John 4:3 ‘CHRIST is come in the flesh’ is an addition In Matthew 8:2, 9:18, 15:25, 18:26, 20:20, Mark 5:6 the word ‘bow down' was changed to ‘worshiped’. Jesus referred to himself as “son of man”. Jesus was not all-knowledgeable and he prayed to GOD, so this is enough to say that he wasn’t God nor did God come down to earth to be Jesus. Jesus said, “And this is life eternal, that they might know You the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.” John 17:3 Jesus said that he does not know everything; he said that only God knows But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father Mark 13:32 Jesus said that he is not equal to God “I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.” John 5:30 Jesus said, “The Father is greater than I.” John 14:28 “Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.” John 7:16 Jesus prayed to God as written in Mark 1:35, Luke 5:16, John 17:11, Matthew 26:39, Luke 10:21, Luke 22:44 “my Father and your Father; my God and your God” John 20:17 The disciples did not pray to Jesus, they prayed to the God and Father of Jesus “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ…” 1 Peter 1:3 Jesus introduced himself as a Prophet and people accepted him as a prophet, not as a God in Matthew 13:57, John 9:17, Matthew 21:11, Luke 7:16, Luke 24:19, John 6:14, Matthew 14:5, Matthew 21:46, John 7:40-41, and in Matthew 24:36 In John 17:6-8 and John 13:3 Jesus explained that God has given power and authority, he did not own it John 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say John 14:24 Anyone who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me In Matthew 19:16-17 and Luke 18:19 Jesus denied being good in the sense that God is good. ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.’ Jesus is called a “Man” many times in the Bible of John 8:40, Acts 17:31, Matthew 27:54, Luke 23:47, Mark 15:39 ‘a man who has told you the truth’ The disciples have introduced Jesus as a “Man” in Acts 2:22 and Acts 2:23

Excellent 😊

I prefer the alternative Catholic Orthodoxy of Bl John Duns Scotus. I’m always surprised that this venerable minority view never gets discussed. I think it answers many objections

ok i subscribed! where is the sound? Why is there any sound at all instead of no sound whatsoever? huh?

The sound disappeared half way through!

"As I was saying, before I was so rudely interrupted!" Calm down, bro. This is a concern of mine in the philosophical community - so articulate in speech & knowledge, but arrogant & mean spirited in how they treat people.