After 15 years of Protestantism and almost a decade of early Christian studies in academia, these two brothers and reverts to the Catholic faith make the Bible, History, and Theology entertaining, educational, and accessible for a general audience.
I watched that Ortlund video, but it has been a while. At the time, I didn't quite get it. Maybe because by then, I was already looking for and RCIA class to enroll in...
Are you going to delve deeper into the formation of the new testament and dating of the Gospels? This seem relevant to both the Marcionites and the Gnóstics which you covered.
Great presentation, Ive finally caught up and loved every minute. Interestingly you see a lot parallels with Gnosticism in other forms of esotericism, in both Islamic Sufi thought and Jewish Kabbalah. It seems to be more of a case of parallel evolution rather than influence though.
1:16:30, I think Tertullian can be refuted in each & every point regarding the Pagan gods. It seems he starts off by making a lot of assumptions of what rules a divinity is supposed to follow & strictly adhere to. None of which apply. Nice sophistry there but nothing much of substance. He first of all makes a claim that indeed Christians drive out demons posing as pagan gods which no one is there to substantiate on an individual basis. Secondly makes a rhetorical assumption that for a divinity to be true divinity, it has to follow these set of rules which come from a non pagan background/Hebrew texts & hence stand inapplicable on a pagan context.
🎯 Key points for quick navigation: 00:00:09 *❄️ Pontis is depicted as a barbaric and harsh region, known for its tough climate and uncivilized inhabitants.* 00:01:08 *📜 The podcast hosts introduce the topic, focusing on Marcion and his context in early Christian history.* 00:02:31 *🏛️ Pontis, annexed by the Roman Empire, was a region with significant Christian activity and where precedent for Christian persecution was established.* 00:03:56 *⚖️ Concern over guilds and associations in Pontis stemmed from political changes and suspicions of group activities.* 00:04:38 *🐝 Marcion, considered a significant heretic, is widely criticized by early Christian writers for his influential and controversial doctrines.* 00:05:33 *📚 Marcion's negative portrayal is evidenced by numerous writings against him by prominent early Christian figures like Justin Martyr and Tertullian.* 00:06:30 *🌊 Marcion's background in Pontis involved exposure to persecution, Christian mining, and a major controversy leading to his move and teachings in Rome.* 00:09:44 *⛪ Marcion uniquely established a parallel Christian church structure, leading to widespread animosity towards him within the early church.* 00:12:14 *🏺 The Church of San Pudenziana in Rome possibly served as the site where Marcion was excommunicated, highlighting its historical significance.* 00:14:54 *📜 Despite Marcion's excommunication, his movement persisted and thrived, posing a theological challenge to early Christian orthodoxy.* 22:40 *⛪️ Marianites viewed themselves as the original Church, challenging the larger "Great Church."* 23:22 *📜 Accounts of Marianite martyrs illustrate the persecution of early Christian sects, including Marianite bishops.* 23:50 *📚 Mark's writings condemned traditional views of God, showcasing discord between early Christian groups.* 24:29 *✂️ Marcion altered biblical texts, modifying Luke's gospel and St. Paul's letters to fit his doctrines.* 25:12 *🧩 Marcion advocated a form of polytheism, distinguishing between a creative God of judgment and a God of love.* 26:07 *📖 Marcion's doctrine involved selective scripture usage, contrasting with canonical views, yet succeeded in gaining followers.* 27:18 *🏺 Marcion's ideas were influenced by Jewish and Judeo-Christian contexts rather than Gnostic traditions.* 29:04 *⚖️ Debates in Judaism about creation led Marcion to propose a creator deity separate from the supreme God.* 30:13 *🔖 Marcion utilized Jewish traditions' dualistic views to support his doctrine of separate divine entities.* 31:28 *🌍 Marcion exploited post-revolt Jewish despondency to promote his message that the Old Testament God was not supreme.* 33:03 *🕊️ He viewed the Old Testament God as limited, influencing his challenge against mainstream Christian narratives of God's unity.* 34:44 *🤝 Marcionism contrasts with emerging orthodox Christianity, divisive due to its binary God concept.* 36:10 *🕍 Jewish debates over creation likely laid the groundwork for Marcion’s dual-god theory.* 37:52 *⏰ Marcion rejected the Millennium Reign concept, showing divergence from both early and later Christian teachings.* 39:59 *🚪 Marcion’s Christology rejected the Virgin Birth, suggesting Jesus appeared in human form, different from other sects.* 45:13 *⚔️ Despite denying the Virgin Birth, Marcion affirmed Jesus's suffering and resurrection, differing from docetic beliefs.* 01:30:33 *🧩 Discussion on "inviable dignity" impacts views on theological matters like the death penalty and hell.* 01:31:13 *📜 The perceived disunity between the Old and New Testaments raises complex theological questions for Catholics.* 01:31:28 *⚠️ Catholics are urged to remain vigilant about theological developments and not neglect their roots.* 01:32:07 *🔍 The early church opted for theological complexity over simplicity despite significant challenges.* 01:33:01 *🏛️ The Church's decisions on orthodoxy were guided by deeper principles, not just easy routes.* 01:34:10 *📚 Judith Lü's book offers a detailed look at Marcion in the context of theological apologists.* 01:34:37 *📖 Bernard Green's work and church encyclopedias provide concise insights into Marcion and Marcionism.* Made with HARPA AI
Gnosis - does NOT just simply mean 'knowledge' in the modern mundane sense of the word. Gnosis refers to a special, EXPERIENTIAL KNOWLEDGE, especially in regards to the fundamental truths of existence. Real Gnosis comes from the CONSCIOUS EXPERIENCE OF THE TRUTH of Life, Death, and the mysteries that surround us. By 'conscious experience' is meant a form of active, awakened perception that penetrates far more than what is physical. The consciousness - when awakened - can perceive other dimensions. It is here that real Gnosis begins to bloom in the mind and heart, revealing the truth to the Soul. Gnosis is more than just a school or mere doctrine. Gnosis in itself means Knowledge, but a knowledge that is innately within us. All we must do is open ourselves up to this inner wisdom, so that this inner wisdom can begin to devour, envelope, and transform us in order to give us a new experience; a new perception of the world. In the Gnostic tradition, we seek to examine the practical utilization of all religious, mythological symbols, in order for us to harness the very purpose of those symbols and aid us in our own development towards the perfection of our human soul. In other words, Gnosis relies upon the study of myth and theory to empower practice. This is the entire purpose. We do not study religion or spirituality as a diversion or as entertainment, but because we are tired of pain, we are weary of war, we are tired of being in darkness. This process of seeking knowledge, understanding, and wisdom must be more than merely the formation of mental concepts. While the mind and mental-being needs to be involved in the process, the heart and soul-being needs to be primary. As we seek to draw out the Wisdom contained within the Scriptures and seek to draw out the Wisdom from within our holy soul, we need to make ourselves open and sensitive, and seek to enter into the spiritual experience from which the Scriptures itself was written. The heart, with its capacity to feel and intuit, and the soul-being, with its capacity to perceive within metaphysical dimensions through interior senses, are crucial to making the process experiential. When it is experiential, we restore our own Spirit-connectedness and are transformed in the process. We progress in the gospel. What I am describing here is the way initiates of mystical and gnostic Christianity approach the Holy Scriptures and use contemplative meditation on the Scriptures, along with other forms of spiritual practice, as a vehicle of direct self-realization. This is something much more than a religion based on faith in dogmatic doctrine or creed; rather it is an authentic spirituality that seeks gnosis, which is the knowledge acquired through direct spiritual or mystical experience. It is knowledge of higher states of consciousness and the soul of Light within oneself; and it is knowledge of the metaphysical dimensions of the universe and the play of hidden spiritual forces upon which the universe is founded. Ultimately, gnosis is a state of Truth-consciousness in which the Spirit and Truth is inwardly known, hence a state of enlightenment or self-realization. The mission of the Gnostic tradition is to help give us tools, ideas, and theories that can open up our minds; that can open up our perceptions to new broader ways of seeing Life. This is the process of Spiritual Awakening - an inner process of expanding our perceptions; expanding our concepts of Reality and everything that surrounds us. True Religion, True Spirituality, True Gnosticism is NOT in conflict with the world, it is NOT in conflict with the 3-dimensional reality, nor is it in conflict with concepts we have of reality. Rather, old spiritual traditions tend to teach us that we have a very limited perspective and understanding of what Life IS, of how it manifests, and the overall purpose of Life. All of these spiritual traditions teach that we can expand our awareness of Reality - this process of expansion, of development of the consciousness of spiritual growth is referred to as Self-realization.
In the liturgy, you sometimes hear mystery-related wording such as "these mysteries," "the mysteries of our salvation," etc. Did the Church adopt this terminology in the second and third centuries, when mystery cults were popular in some circles, because such wording was very meaningful to people in that culture and at that time? I believe the term doesn't occur much, if at all, in Scripture.
Wait, how could they baptize “in the name of Jesus” if that is not the licit Baptismal formula? Maybe I’m confused - but doesn’t the Church reject that formula as invalid?
I think you guys are missing a VERY important point that current scholar ship is showing that Marcion did NOT change his text. He had older texts and letters of Paul. Marcion was an early fundamentalist that did not like the new Gospels. He didnt like the changes to the faith.
This is fantastic. You guys are embracing the Jewishness of the Bible and our Christian history. Many Catholics overlook this transition by saying the Catholic Church was the original church. But you have clearly shown the original church in the first century was a sect of Judaism. And that helps us understand the teachings of Paul and the points he made, many of which he got from Gamaliel. And were made still in the framework of the law with the accountability brought on from the Holy Spirit now in all of us.
Okay. I have read the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas. But the Epistle of Barnabas.... very interesting. I need to read this one. And the three-fold functions of Apostles, Prophets, and Teachers? (Teachers as those who unveil the Mysteries of Christ.) And the importance of the list of offerings in 1 Corinthians 14 -- not something I thought about before as being of any importance. I am eager to see how you apply these forms of prophecy to today's Church, bearing all this in mind!
Thank you so much for this discussion on prophecy in the Judean understanding! Too often we have the definition of Gentile Prophecy in our minds, the idea that prophecy is limited to foretelling the future. The concept of "sign prophets" -- like Jesus sending out the 12 in poverty and with authority to cast out demons etc. (Mark 6:7-13; Matthew 10; Luke 9:1-5), and again, His sending out the 72 in Luke 10:1-11 -- is helping me understand the "Signs" that Jesus gave that He IS The Prophet. And we are called to be prophets to This Generation. Our opponents tell us that we are too preoccupied with sex and we are deigrated as having dirty minds on that account. But it is part of our need to be prophetic signs. In a less sex-flooded society, our insistence on not bingng on food or not collecting vast amounts of wealth would have been our prophetic signs. Thank you for deepening my understanding!
18:11 and following, you speak of Peter as being apostle to the Circumcised and Paul to the Uncircumcised, which is what Paul says in Galatians 2:7. But Peter claims that *he* was the apostle to the Gentiles in Acts 15:7. As far as I can figure (and I beg you to correct me if I am mistaken) Paul would have written to the Galatians shortly after the confrontation in Antioch, when Paul was on his way to Jerusalem, in the heat of his feeling of betrayal by those who came from "James" and at Peter's false actions. When Luke came to write Acts 15, of the events in Antioch and the subsequent resolution of the problem, approximately 10 years would have passed. So it may only be that Luke was putting on Peter's lips the later understanding of Peter's mission to the Gentiles. But Luke also lays heavy emphasis on Peter's Vision (repeated at length twice in Acts 10 and 11), and Luke does seem careful not to carelessly report anachronisms -- James calls Peter "Simon" rather than by the title-like name of "Peter" that Luke as narrator employs, or "Cephas", as Paul speaks of him -- James being Peter's equal, in a way, being the cousin or adoptive brother of Jesus. So I am wondering if, when Peter leaves Jerusalem "to another place" (Luke not wanting to give away his location to his enemies) as recorded in Acts 12:17, could he have gone to Rome? We have no clear date for the expulsion of the followers of "Chrestus" from Rome. Is it possible that Peter had been in Rome, become one of the major disputants, and therefore one of the first to be exiled under Claudius? While perhaps Aquila and Priscilla were able to stay on in Rome a little longer (Acts 18:2)? If Peter were newly come from Rome when he arrived in Antioch, he may have been unsure of what had occurred while he was away from Jerusalem, and thus more easily swayed by those who appeared to have come from James (who referred to him in such a familiar way as "Simon"). It just seems to me that Paul's deference to Rome in his letter to the Romans might indicate a very deep connection between Rome and Peter -- to whom Paul had felt a sense of deference before the confrontation at Antioch (indicated in Galatians 1:18 and again in Galatians 2:2 and following. Paul would certainly have renewed his deference after the Council of Jerusalem. (Hence Paul's decision to have Timothy circumcised, as reported in Acts 16:3.) And therefore, Peer was the actual primary Apostle to the Gentiles? Sorry about how long this comment is. I am just musing.
Wonderful explanation of all this and in near perfect alignment with what I have concluded from my looking at the Hebrew of the OT. Where I differ is that I believe Wisdom is in Jesus, but Wisdom is the Holy Spirit, a she and the Mother to the Son and Queen to the Father, who is King. When Moses lays his hands on Joshua, he imparts Wisdom. When the Apostles lay their hands on people, they impart the Holy Spirit. They are the same. But overall, this video was just such a great impartation of Truth. Great job!
In the Targums, “the Word” is identified with God. These are Jewish traditions that pre-date the birth of Christ. John’s “Logos Theology” is Palestinian, not Greek!
Thank you for the strong argument for infant baptism! And for the explanation of the Didache being a baptismal manual, with the Eucharist therein being a baptismal liturgy. I find the Didache fascinating.
It almost sounds like Judaism was "denominational," in a sense, with the Pharisees, Saducees and Essenes all representing factions of the same religion. Why then wouldn't Christianity be factional or denominational? Why does it need to be one Catholic Church?
@@sarahstice3544 no, because it’s a better covenant built on better promises, and the Church is not merely an institution but is the Bride and Body of Christ. And the Body of Christ cannot be divided, nor can Christ have more than one Bride.
Thank you for all the details -- somehow, knowing that Upper City of Jerusalem was filled with Mikvaot helps me visualize better the events of Pentecost.and the Council of Jerusalem.
The Cathars were a peaceful, spiritual and virtuous gnostic community in Southern France,they bothered nobody. But the brutal, totalitarian Catholic Church couldn't STAND any dissent. Dominican psychopaths led an army of brutish, illiterate knights against them in one of the first acts of genocide in post-classical European history, slaughtering a million innocent men, women and children, usually in HORRIBLE ways, like burning. But Catholicism won. Yay. 😥 And you people have the balls to want everyone to convert to Catholicism?? I'll never convert to a Church as blood-soaked as that.
Exactly. It's kind of hard to deny the reality of the horrific and brutal history of the Catholic Church. Even the modern history of pedophelia is horrific. Unfortunately many of the same people who believe in "Democracy," believe in the Catholic church, which ruled by forceful conversion. This is the same reason people rail against Islam (rightfully so). The various gnostic sects were hunted down and executed as "heretics", which the original etymology simply means "able to choose". So according to the Catholic church you had no ABILITY TO CHOOSE. That being said, I do have many Catholic friends, who I never try to convert to Taoism or Gnosticism. If it has a positive impact on their life, I let them be. That is all to say that we should love our neighbor and do our best to live in harmony with one another. As a Gnostic, I simply consider myself Christian, and if your beliefs are not hurting others and bringing death and destruction to our reality, then I will look at you like a brother.
Catholicism leads to atheism and materialism, especially since Aquinas, who absorbed Aristotle's materialistic philosophy and unsuccessfully tried to blend it with Catholicism. Gnosticism is a search for the spiritual. It is rooted in Middle Platonism and Pythagoreanism. The whole world lost when orthodoxy, which is the worship of raw power at heart, triumphed over Gnosticism, the search for God.
It is interesting that the restoration of Gnostic though came through the secularists of protestantism, not the Church's secularists which died after Aquinas. Your timeline needs work
LOL, hard to be more wrong than your comment. Catholic orthodoxy worships a person who rejected all worldly power and yet you claim it " is the worship of raw power at heart"?? Catholicism investigates and affirms the miraculous and puts forward the evangelical counsels of poverty, obedience, and chastity as perfect imitations of its divine Lord, and yet you claim it "leads to atheism and materialism"??
It wasn't the Gnostics who murdered, tortured, conquered and forcibly converted under threat of death millions of people since Constantine. It was the Catholics. And some Protestants (but not that many). I can't help but speculate that if the Gnostics prevailed we would have had a less bloody, totalitarian and cruel form of Christianity in the world.
I like the way you show what might have been the thinking behind Peter's actions in Galatians 11-14! It seems to me that Peter was the very one who taught Paul table-fellowship with Gentile Christians. Acts 11:2-3, Peter was already explaining to those of the Circumcision Party how he came to be eating with the Gentile Christians. So when Paul visited Jerusalem (Acts 11:30 and 12:25 and Galatians 2:1-10), Peter would also have told Paul about Cornelius, and Paul then carried this Good News to the cities of Galatia (Acts 13-14). So Paul would have felt personally this "betrayal" by Peter (and by James from whom he felt the Judaizers came, as he says in Galatians 2:12). And this explains how very bitter Paul sounds, as he casts doubt on whether these pillars of the Church deserve to be esteemed (Galatians 2:6).
Thank you for starting this segment with the first verses of 1 John 1. It encourages me to think of joining with the early Christian heroes, the Saints.
It is good to be reminded that the Temple imagery is all through the New Testament writings. And that we who have eaten and drunk at the Eucharistic Table are His witnesses today, *because* we have met Our Savior and Our Sacrifice there.
Sirach and the "Symposium" time of gentile feasts? Very interesting! And Paul's 1 Corinthians 10-11 as being like the ritual banquet (with the Symposium part being the hymn to Agape Love), paralleled in the Didache. And Hebrews 12. And James 2:2. This is rather exciting!
Haha...the catholic "church" is a corrupt joke, as most if not all are. Your current leader is "heretic", as defined by his own words and teachings. Then there is the issue of the pervasive and rampant abuse of children by the church clergy and its affiliates, the harming of children was emphasized in the bible to be especially grievous. Fake miracles and saints, the list goes on...... No, if there is a "true church" it's most certainly NOT the roman catholic church. You people floating around looking for the structure of an organization to give you purpose will never find the truth.
Thank you for the reality check about the early Church membership -- about how Jesus called people from the various first century Judaisms, who each had their own ways of Prayer -- of fulfilling Paul's injunction to "pray always." And thank you for the visual of Jesus as High Priest, praying the Psalms and making His Sacrifice on the Cross.
This is a really good series! It needs to be commented upon so that it will appear on more "suggestion" lists. Remembering what the different Judaisms were in the first century is very important when trying to understand Christianity today.
