I hope you enjoy this video about Athanasius, a towering figure in church history and the development of early Christology. Let me know what you think!

@henryoise185

Ай бұрын

I did. Thanks for making this video. Concise history of a real hero of the faith.

@smeeagain3102

Ай бұрын

The name of my catholic school I went to

@ovidiopopa1227

Ай бұрын

You are a big liar and deceiver. Read the Bible better than your lies

Athanasius is one of Christianity's most underrated saints.

@emadneseem9774

Ай бұрын

Not in our Coptic Orthodox church...❤️❤️❤️❤️

🇪🇬🇻🇦 Saint Athanasius Pray for Us 🙏

We are thankful that the early church fathers, like Athanasius were able to preserve the true faith, and stop the Arians. The Word cannot be changed.

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

As this video shows, the final authority is the Church. He is not "proof" for Sola Scriptura". When the Arains twisted scripture, Athanasius knew the Church's infallible teaching office was required. He devoted his life to implementing the Church's decrees made against the private interpretations of the Arians. Athanasius: Catholic through and through.

@earlysda

2 ай бұрын

@@dougy6237 dougy, the Holy Bible has higher authority than any man.

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

@@earlysdaThe Bible certainly is the written Word, but the interpretations of men are not divinely guaranteed. We know this because each Protestant sect claims the "right interpretation" whilst at the same time arriving at different and opposing doctrinal conclusions to each other, and continually dividing. The Arians privately interpreted Scripture, so when they would not listen to Athanasius' appeal to Scripture, he referred them to the Church. The Church ruled that the Arians private interpretation was wrong. The Final Authority for Athanasius was the Church and NOT private interpretation of Scripture! The Arians were just like the Protestants, placing their interpretations of Scripture above the authority of the Church.

@earlysda

2 ай бұрын

@@dougy6237 dougy, The Roman Catholic Church is far removed from the lowly God-man from Nazareth. Open your eyes! Look at see, then flee Babylon while you can, and start showing your love for Jesus by keeping his commandments like he said (and that includes the 7th day Sabbath commandment).

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

@@earlysda Become a member of the Seventh-day Adventism, or one of the many other thousands of Protestant sects? No thank you. "The church is the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim 3;15) and not the private interpretations of an individual/group.

Thank you for sharing with us. It's always inspiring to hear about those who gave so much of themselves to the person and mission of Jesus Christ.

Thanks. Great. Would love to see one on Gregory of Nyssa.

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

Athanasius loved the written Word, but love of Scripture is no "proof" for Sola Scriptura. When confronted with heretics who twisted scripture Athanasius referred them to the Church. The Church was Athanasius' final authority. That’s why in his letter to the bishops of Africa, Athanasius instructs them to, “Let the faith confessed by the fathers at Nicaea alone hold good among you.”

@ngzchongsoon9147

2 ай бұрын

​@@dougy6237whilewriting this, do u realised Athanasius exiled few times bcs of the church?

@dougy6237

Ай бұрын

@@ngzchongsoon9147 Do I realize Athanasius was "exiled because of the Church"? Haha...did you realize it was the Arian heretics, NOT the Church, that sent St Athanasius into exile? The Arian heretics who controlled certain areas sent him into exile. St Athanasius was on the side of the Church and it's correct understanding of Scripture. The Arians were condemned by the Church and St Athanasius for their practice of SOLA SCRIPTURA and their ERRONEOUS doctrinal conclusions regarding the Trinity, arrived at through Sola Scriptura. Get you facts strait before you try to be smart.

All glory and love be to GOD THE FATHER THE SON THE HOLY SPIRIT THE HOLY TRINITY forever and ever amen 💖✝✝✝

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

Athanasius loved the written Word, but love of Scripture is no "proof" for Sola Scriptura. When confronted with heretics who twisted scripture Athanasius referred them to the Church. The Church was Athanasius' final authority. That’s why in his letter to the bishops of Africa, Athanasius instructs them to, “Let the faith confessed by the fathers at Nicaea alone hold good among you.”

@grasonicus

2 ай бұрын

To @savedbymylovegodthelordjes8394 _“GOD THE FATHER THE SON THE HOLY SPIRIT THE HOLY TRINITY”_ Can you point me to any *explicit* Biblical passages establishing the Trinity doctrine? Note the word, *explicit.* You do realise the mathematical foundation of the Trinity doctrine is 1+1+1=1? Not even farm animals are stupid enough to believe that. What? Oh, you'll invoke a miracle and everything will be hunky-dory.

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

@@grasonicus I am not sure if you meant your post for me?

@Stauroforos12

2 ай бұрын

Genesis 1 God created through His Word and Spirit. This is what is meant by the Holy Trinity ​@@grasonicus

@Stauroforos12

2 ай бұрын

​You look at God with mathematical calculations, but God is metaphysical, if we follow your logic then if there are 100 sick people praying in different cities and they say in their prayers that *may God visit them and heal them* / *God is with me,* then according to your logic that looks at God with mathematical logic, God is 100, a separate 100 God calculate with mathematical numbers?​

A great yarn about the men that left Christianity in the mess that has survived to this day. The minds of worldly men were considered more important than the Spirit of Truth promised by Christ before he returned to His Father.

I love reciting the Athanasius Creed

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

Athanasius knew Scripture was valuable, but you said he thought is was "alone-sufficient". If we look what he did we can clearly see your statement is false. He knew Scripture is only useful so far as the other person accepts it's clear meaning. He appealed to the Arians on the basis of Scripture, and then he saw how they privately interpreted Scripture and did not accept it's meaning as held by the Church. So Athanasius then referred the Arians to the Church. He was instrumental in the 1st Church Council of Nicaea which was convened to deal with the Arians private interpretations, and which over-ruled the Arians interpretations of Scripture. And He devoted his life to implementing these rulings of the Council. Athanasius was the Catholic because for him Church was Final Authority OVER private interpretation of Scripture. The Arians with their private interpretation of Scripture, were just like the Protestants.

@HappyDadof3

Ай бұрын

FYI, “protestants” too view Arian as a heretic.

As a Pope of Alexandria and Patriarch of Africa before Chalcedon, he was chief theologian for the Orthodox Church; it was at Chalcedon that the function of chief theologian was transferred to the Pope of Rome and Patriarch of the West (this, of course, was long before the Germans created the Catholic Church).

Thanks for the video. Just started my journey into church history so I've been gobbling up all the info I can get my wretched little hands on. Do you have any book suggestions for leisure reading?

@rickintexas1584

2 ай бұрын

Do a KZread search for Bruce Gore early church history. He has a fascinating series on it. It is approximately 50 1 hour lectures. It is very detailed. It goes from early church history up to modern times.

@jimyoung9262

2 ай бұрын

I've been going through Dr. Bird's book with NT Wright "The New Testament in its World" and it is fantastic. The first quarter is mostly history and then the remainder is a survey of the NT with very useful historical background. One of the best books I've ever read. Written at an accessible level for pastors and the layout is top notch. I bought a copy for the other pastors at my church I like it so much.

@Brett.D

2 ай бұрын

David Pawson is brilliant - he has 11 videos on KZread about church history...

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

Athanasius knew Scripture was valuable, but you said he thought is was "alone-sufficient". If we look what he did we can clearly see your statement is false. He knew Scripture is only useful so far as the other person accepts it's clear meaning. He appealed to the Arians on the basis of Scripture, and then he saw how they privately interpreted Scripture and did not accept it's meaning as held by the Church. So Athanasius then referred the Arians to the Church. He was instrumental in the 1st Church Council of Nicaea which was convened to deal with the Arians private interpretations, and which over-ruled the Arians interpretations of Scripture. And He devoted his life to implementing these rulings of the Council. Athanasius was the Catholic because for him Church was Final Authority OVER private interpretation of Scripture. The Arians with their private interpretation of Scripture, were just like the Protestants.

❤❤❤amen

Book recommendations?

@earlychristianhistorywithm8684

Ай бұрын

Yes, read his Incarnation, and Louis Farag's book about him.

The final authority is not the Church but God and His Word.

@user-tn1xv1vc2d

2 ай бұрын

At that time there was No Bible as we know it today. There were Scriptures used but no Compilation of the Bible. Silly Protestants. I guess Ignorance is Bliss. There is No Salvation in Ignorance.

@premodernprejudices3027

2 ай бұрын

Oh, go away.

@PInk77W1

2 ай бұрын

“I just know Jesus and the Church are one.” St Joan of Arc

@PInk77W1

2 ай бұрын

God and His word, speak thru the CHURCH

Denying the Incarnation puts the world back where it was before...same old same old without hope, without Grace, without the dignity of all human beings regardless of race or income or status.

The Jehovah's Witnesses now teach a belief similar to Arianism. However this only dates back to the late 19th century. In the earlier church Arianism was strongest in north Africa, which suggests it morphed into Islam [which is even more strongly anti-Trinitarian]. I think I have read somewhere that the long Athanasian Creed used to be read at Mass annually on Trinity Sunday instead of the Nicene Creed [perhaps someone will confirm or correct this].

Do one entitled ST. BERGOGLIO: THE BISHOP WHO DEIFIED THE WORLD.

@sgabig

Ай бұрын

I'm not certain if BERGOGLIO defied the world so much as conformed to it violating Romans 12:2

@medicalmisinformation

Ай бұрын

@@sgabig Look at what I wrote. Did I write the word "defied?"

@medicalmisinformation

Ай бұрын

@@sgabig Do you see an uppercase "I" after the "E" but before "F?"

@sgabig

Ай бұрын

@@medicalmisinformation ah...OK, I missed your puntastic pun ...as you were...carry on

Above all , the truth , In the beginning itself many believed in the Erranous "Faith Only' , amounting to mis interpreting Paul for the reason James came out with his epistle as a correction specifically stating it is not "Faith only" This Error of "Faith Only " was again brought in through the Protestant reformation even unto Martin Luther rejecting James cause it was a hinderance to his erranous understanding of salvation, Only to. serve the Prophesied Apostasy come through leavening off the Faith by not giving unto God what is to God - FAITH, but a leavened/corrupted Faith,

He was a Roman Catholic bishop

Which AI tool did you use to create this video?

As this video shows, the final authority is the Church. When the Arains twisted scripture, Athanasius knew the Church's infallible teaching office was required. He devoted his life to implementing the Church's decrees made against the private interpretations of the Arians. Athanasius: Catholic through and through.

@Tanjaicholan

2 ай бұрын

The Romanist church is aligned with Cardinal John Henry Newman rather than with Athanasius of Alexandria (A.D. 296-373). His list of canonical books was published as part of his Thirty-Ninth Festal Epistle of A.D. 367. After the list he declares, “these are the wells of salvation, so that he who thirsts may be satisfied with the sayings in these. Let no one add to these. Let nothing be taken away.” 4. There are, then, of the Old Testament, twenty-two books in number; for, as I have heard, it is handed down that this is the number of the letters among the Hebrews; their respective order and names being as follows. The first is Genesis, then Exodus, next Leviticus, after that Numbers, and then Deuteronomy. Following these there is Joshua the son of Nun, then Judges, then Ruth. And again, after these four books of Kings, the first and second 1 being reckoned as one book, and so likewise the third and fourth 2 as one book. And again, the first and second of the Chronicles are reckoned as one book. Again Ezra, the first and second 3 are similarly one book. After these there is the book of Psalms, then the Proverbs, next Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. Job follows, then the Prophets, the Twelve [minor prophets] being reckoned as one book. Then Isaiah, one book, then Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations and the Epistle, one book; afterwards Ezekiel and Daniel, each one book. Thus far constitutes the Old Testament.

@Tanjaicholan

2 ай бұрын

What is it in Athananius’ statement that is difficult for you to understand that you must wilfully deny simple comprehension that he championed Scripture above the Church. Contra Mundum! Athanasius states that in defending doctrine, the scriptures are all-sufficient! In the Arian theological wars, Athanasius uses scripture not tradition as a first line of attack! "Now one might write at great length concerning these things, if one desired to go rate details respecting them; for the impiety and perverseness of heresies will appear to be manifold and various, and the craft of the deceivers to be very terrible. But since holy Scripture is of all things most sufficient for us, therefore recommending to those who desire to know more of these matters, to read the Divine word, I now hasten to set before you that which most claims attention, and for the sake of which principally I have written these things." (Athanasius, To the Bishops of Egypt, Ch 1, 4) Veneration came in 787CE and was not in existence in the early church. The Romanist claim to tradition is bogus. If Athananius had experienced Romanist veneration in his lifetime, he would’ve cried out like Paul and Barnabas, “Men, why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you, and preach the gospel to you that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, - Acts 14:15 [excerpted] He catholic [universal] and not Romanist.

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

@@Tanjaicholan You are misrepresenting Athanasius. You are twisting his words. He knew Scripture was valuable, but you said he thought is was "alone-sufficient". If we look what he did we can clearly see your statement is false. He knew Scripture is only useful so far as the other person accepts it's clear meaning. He appealed to the Arians on the basis of Scripture, and then he saw how they privately interpreted Scripture and did not accept it's meaning as held by the Church. So Athanasius then referred the Arians to the Church. He was instrumental in the 1st Church Council of Nicaea which was convened to deal with the Arians private interpretations, and which over-ruled the Arians interpretations of Scripture. And He devoted his life to implementing these rulings of the Council. Athanasius was the Catholic because for him Church was Final Authority OVER private interpretation of Scripture. The Arians with their private interpretation of Scripture, were just like the Protestants.

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

@@Tanjaicholan It is you who finds Athanasius' word difficult. He said the following, and then as history proclaims he referred the Arians and their private interpretation of Scripture to the Church in the 1st Council of Nicaea: Athanasius is saying that Scripture is sufficient to defend the truth, only if the other person accepts its ACTUAL MEANING, and that the reader rightly necessitates instruction on interpretation, and the interpretation must agree with the Church's held apostolic tradition. "For although the sacred and inspired Scriptures are sufficient to declare the truth-while there are other works of our blessed teachers compiled for this purpose, if he meet with which a man will gain some knowledge of the interpretation of the Scriptures, and be able to learn what he wishes to know-still, as we have not at present in our hands the compositions of our teachers, we must communicate in writing to you what we learned from them-the faith, namely, of Christ the Savior; lest any should hold cheap the doctrine taught among us, or think this faith unreasonable".

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

@@Tanjaicholan Furthermore, if Athanasius practiced Sola Scriptura, what will you say of his communication to the Arians on the doctrine on the Perpetual Virginity of Mary? You will drop him like a hot potato! See how at the end of the day all you are doing is including or excluding beliefs, based on your private interpretation of Scripture: “Let those, therefore, who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his essence deny also that he took true human flesh from the ever-virgin Mary” (Discourses Against the Arians 2:70 [A.D. 360]).

Furthermore, if Athanasius practiced Sola Scripture (he didn't and his final authority was the Church), what will the Protestant say of his communication to the Arians on the doctrine on the Perpetual Virginity of Mary? The Protestant drops him like a hot potato! See how at the end of the day all the Protestant is doing is including or excluding beliefs, based on their private interpretation of Scripture: “Let those, therefore, who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his essence deny also that he took true human flesh from the ever-virgin Mary” (Discourses Against the Arians 2:70 [A.D. 360]).

@justchilling704

26 күн бұрын

Some Protestants affirm perpetual virginity and Protestantism isn’t a church, it’s a collective term that denotes several traditions. However there is no good evidence that Mary was a perpetual virgin, at least h have seen any.

Athanasius words are often cherry-picked by the Protestants in support of their doctrine of Sola Scriptura, but Athanasius is saying that Scripture is sufficient to defend the truth, but the reader rightly necessitates instruction on interpretation, and the interpretation must agree with the tradition of the apostles. "For although the sacred and inspired Scriptures are sufficient to declare the truth-while there are other works of our blessed teachers compiled for this purpose, if he meet with which a man will gain some knowledge of the interpretation of the Scriptures, and be able to learn what he wishes to know-still, as we have not at present in our hands the compositions of our teachers, we must communicate in writing to you what we learned from them-the faith, namely, of Christ the Savior; lest any should hold cheap the doctrine taught among us, or think this faith unreasonable".

@paulhudson4319

2 ай бұрын

Protestants agree with Athanasius on the nature of Christ. Anglicans recite his creed every Sunday. The policy of "do nothing without the bishop" was adopted before Athanasius to defend the faith against heresy. However, where a bishop or church directly contradicts the clear teaching of the New Testament apostles, then we must follow the scriptures, even if the pope says different. Interpretation must not override clear biblical doctrine.

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

@@paulhudson4319 You are in denial. The Arians practiced private interpretation of Scripture. Where as Athanasius held that the Church was Final Authority, sitting ABOVE private interpretation of Scripture. The use of Scripture was only useful for Athanasius in so far as the other person accepts the actual meaning of Scripture. When this fails the Church deliberates infallibly. So Athanasius then referred the Arains to the Church. He was instrumental in the 1st Church Council of Nicaea which was convened to deal with the Arians private interpretations, and which over-ruled the Arians interpretations of Scripture. And He devoted his life to implementing these rulings of the Council. Athanasius was the Catholic because for him Church was Final Authority OVER private interpretation of Scripture. The Arians with their private interpretation of Scripture, were just like the Protestants.

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

Furthermore, if Athanasius practiced Sola Scriptura, what will you say of his communication to the Arians on the doctrine on the Perpetual Virginity of Mary? You will drop him like a hot potato. See how at the end of the day all you are doing is including or excluding beliefs, based on your private interpretation of Scripture: “Let those, therefore, who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his essence deny also that he took true human flesh from the ever-virgin Mary” (Discourses Against the Arians 2:70 [A.D. 360]).

@earlysda

2 ай бұрын

@@paulhudson4319 Very true, paul.

@darrenharriott2120

2 ай бұрын

Sola Scriptura is the only way God would have us interpret scripture. It is not an idea starting in the 15 th century. It has always been the foundational truth for all believers. Premise of Bible 1. The first step is to understand that the Bible never disagrees with itself because it is the WORD of God. ( 1 John 1:1-5) 2. Second we need to believe that we need the Holy Spirit to understand scripture and discern truth. ( 1 Corinthians 2:9-16) 3. Third we need to believe that God is the author and the prophets and apostles are writers and did not input any personal bias . ( 2 Peter 1:19-20) 4. Fourth the entire Bible is the everlasting gospel perfect for every generation. ( 2 Timothy 3:16-17) 5. Fifth, the Bible is self- sufficient to explain itself to anyone through the guidance of the Holy Spirit . ( Isaiah 28:9-10; John 16:13; James 1:5) I) Biblical Sola scriptura is Biblical. Jesus when tempted by Satan stated clearly the only thing in authority that determines Man ‘s decision was the word of God ( Matthew 4:4; Deuteronomy 8:3). There are some that will say that we are to also rely on the traditions oral/ written outside of scripture and that the Bible supports this idea ( 2 Thessalonians 2:15). In Truth this is a twisted interpretation of scripture. What are we to teach ? The Great Commission found in Matthew 28:19 -20 says to teach all things commanded by Jesus. Where are Jesus’s commands? Only in scripture which testify of Him ( John 5:39). In Leviticus 10:10-11 God tells his people that to be able to discern good from evil one must teach one’s children God’s statutes spoken to Moses and written ( Malachi 4:4-6). No mention of additional non scripture or purely oral is mentioned as an alternative authority. God’s revelation to his prophets is the sole ultimate authority. We should not rely on what people say are authoritative sources such as the early church fathers teachings which take us away from how we are to interpret the Bible! The traditions referenced in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 are those taught from the word ( Jesus is the word/scripture) and the epistles which the Holy Spirit considers to be equal because it is scripture. Matthew 4:4 KJV [4] But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 KJV - Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. Matthew 28:19-20 KJV - Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. Leviticus 10:10-11 KJV - And that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean; 11 And that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the LORD hath spoken unto them by the hand of Moses. II) Testify of Jesus Jesus orders us to search the scriptures because they testify of Jesus ! Nothing else does Jesus order us to read to learn of God’s character. ( John 5:39; 2 Timothy 3:14-15). Jesus taught after his resurrection’s only from the scriptures. ( John 5:39 KJV [39] Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. III) Tradition vs scripture . Jesus speaks against uplifting tradition over the scriptures. The uplifting of traditions over scripture was one of the identifying practices of the Jewish church its apostasy . It was this theology that the Jewish leaders practiced that led to the rejection of Jesus and his doctrine . It blinded their eyes to the truth, rejection of the Holy Spirit, and created contradictions in their thoughts and actions . Mark 7:9 KJV [9] And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. Matthew 15:3,7-9 KJV [3] But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? [7] Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, [8] This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. [9] But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. IV) Church Magistrate Authority God warned us against any religious belief that was based on the ideal that God would only speak to specific men ( leaders) who would then interpret and tell you what to do . God speaks of a faith that everyone has a personal relationship with God and he will write his laws on our hearts ! ( Ezekiel 36:24-27; Ezekiel 11:17-21) .The ideal that the traditions of the church are an absolute requirement has been shown to lead God’ people away from scripture . ( Mark 7:5-13) Hebrews 8:10-12 KJV [10] For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: [11] And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. [12] For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. V) Scripture timing Timing of when scripture was considered scripture. We see in 2 Peter 3:16 that the writings of Paul and the others are already considered scripture according to the Holy Spirit . It was not determined 300 years later . We also see in Daniel 9:1-2 that the writings of Jeremiah were considered scripture as it fulfilled the requirement of being inspired by the Holy Spirit . As for the confusion about the Apocrypha books the fact that it is a separate set of books testifies that it was never considered scripture or else it would not have been carved out. 2 Peter 3:14-18 KJV - Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. 15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. 18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen. 1 Thessalonians 5:27 KJV - I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read unto all the holy brethren VI) Oral Tradition The Bible says in Acts 5:28-32 we are to obey God rather than men so the epistle ( 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15 ) was testifying that this word was from God and thus scripture and we were to obey the written epistle and not some outside oral tradition . 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15 KJV - And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. 15 Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. Acts 5:28-32 KJV - Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us. 29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. 30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. 31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. 32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him. VII) Apostolic authority In response to the idea we are to submit to the Church’s interpretation of the word due to its Apostolic authority or being designated by God as the final authority. Or that if people were allowed to just interpret the scripture we would have chaos are ignoring God’s promise and who truly reveals truth ( John 16:13-14 ) . It is the Holy Spirit and gives wisdom to all who ask (James 1:5-8). The scripture states that when the Bereans heard the word from Paul and Silas that they searched the scriptures daily for themselves to determine if it was true ( Acts 17:10-11). Each individual is to claim the promise of the Holy Spirit and to try the Spirits ( 1 John 4:1) . Acts 17:10-11 KJV - And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so John 16:13-14 KJV - Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. James 1:5-8 KJV - If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. 6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. 7 For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord. 8 A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

Close but not exact. John 1:1 In the Beginning was The Word. The Word "was" God: Elohim. (wait for it) Genesis 1:1 In the Beginning Elohim created the Heavens and the earth. When Elohim said, Let There Be Light! Elohim became Yahweh (Genesis 2:4) and His Words became the Light of the world. John 8:12 The Word is "with" God. John 1:1 Deuteronomy 10:17 Yahweh is elohe of elohim... Yahweh is God of Gods and Lord of lords. Revelation 17:14 The Lamb is Lord of lords and King of kings. Both Lords because They are Both God, along with the Holy Spirit. God is a Kingdom. Luke 17:21

Just like biblical and historical evidence proves that jesus and his apostles were vegatarians biblical and historical evidence also proves that the trinity, atonement, original sin and hell are very late misinterpretations and are not supported by the early creed hence its not a part of Christianity I pray that Allah swt revives Christianity both inside and out preserves and protects it and makes its massage be witnessed by all people but at the right moment, place and time The secred text of the Bible says ye shall know them by their fruits So too that I say to my christian brothers and sisters be fruitful and multiply Best regards from a Muslim ( line of ismail )

@davidfinley7392

2 ай бұрын

You seem to have missed the facts that the disciples and Jesus ate fish on many occasions but also that several of the apostles were fishermen.

@jesserhernandez4182

2 ай бұрын

OMG! Really, Allah? Stop it already. LOL. Please read where you fail in believing that. Christianity is peace, it is not false and not war/death. it is Jesus. It is all God. Your stuff is false. Blind Faith is doom. Read on your Faith with an open mind.

@theguyver4934

2 ай бұрын

@@davidfinley7392 Okay i may be wrong about jesus and his apostles being vegetarian but i'm 100% right about the trinity, PSA, original sin & hell

@Stauroforos12

2 ай бұрын

Another heretic spreading lies and deceit like their false deity khairul makirin, Have a dignity and repent from for following the most obvious false prophet in history

@Stauroforos12

2 ай бұрын

​@@theguyver4934allah the hubal with tree daughters? Allah and his angles pray for muhammad a Makhluq? telling satan to bow down to adam? Bro focus on your religion and stop spreading lies about other people religion

“Nimrod-reborn as Tammuz was associated with the Tau symbol in the pre-Christian, pagan worship of the ancient Babylonians, Orientals, Philistines, and Egyptians. It crept into what became the Roman Catholic Church and then was adopted by the various Protestant denominations. The pagan Tau now adorns most church buildings and priestly costumes-just as it did in the ancient, pagan world! But it never adorned Christ, the Apostles, or the membership of the original New Testament Church. To argue that this heathen symbol “is now OK to use and honor because the meaning now points to Christ,” is not only to ignore that Jesus Christ and the Apostles and the original New Testament Church never worshipped or revered the cross (they saw it for what it was-a pagan symbol and a cruel instrument of death), but is also to ignore the words of Jeremiah the prophet-“Thus saith the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen” (Jeremiah 10:2, King James Version). While human memory is short, and most simply do not understand the pagan history of the cross, the Almighty God does remember where the symbol came from! He remembers the cry of burning infants sacrificed to Baal (Ezekiel 16:20-21)! He remembers the cruel instrument of crucifixion upon which many died, even including His Son. For more on how ancient pagan Babylonish practices have been adopted into modern false Christianity, read the Tomorrow’s World article “The Lady of Nations,” the study paper, “Who is the Harlot of Revelation 17?,” and the booklet The Beast of Revelation: Myth, Metaphor or Soon-Coming Reality?”

Soft mick. Cousin to jack

Arias was right and that takes nothing from Jesus, the son of man and Son of God who is the way shower who na ages God’s plan for humans’ salvation.

The Bible never mentioned about this man. Why so many lies? Why?

@fmayer1507

Ай бұрын

What? The Bible was finalized before the Saint defended the very clear doctrine that is clearly implied by Jesus Christ Our Lord being the Eternal Word of God. Arianism is an anathema to True Christians.

Athanasius loved the written Word, but love of Scripture is no "proof" for Sola Scriptura. When confronted with heretics who twisted scripture Athanasius referred them to the Church. The Church was Athanasius' final authority. That’s why in his letter to the bishops of Africa, Athanasius instructs them to, “Let the faith confessed by the fathers at Nicaea alone hold good among you.”

These are only big big lies and idolatry!!!

When people confronted Athanasius with 1+1+1=1, the mathematical foundation of the Trinity doctrine, his response was, in essence, don't ask questions, just believe. He used many more words to say the same thing. Verbosity and bullshitting go hand in hand. Athanasius also had thugs to beat up and intimidate his opponents, e.g. the Melitians.

@christophermanley3602

2 ай бұрын

I’m not theologian, but 1+1+1=1 is not how the Trinity works, because you’re not adding individuals together.

@krzysztofciuba271

2 ай бұрын

Where (source)? I did not see it. His writings are also full of contradictions; he did not know how to avoid noncontradictions. E.g. If Jesus is God, then any Christian is God". Your "3=1" is not "a mathematical foundation of The Trinity doctrine"! It is your@dumb pastors and their opponents' interpretation! He knew better a plain Stoic logic than Arius as "father" and "son" are relative names and not individual or general,i.e. they cannot exist by themselves; hence, the relation between them is eternal (there is no "before" and "after" as in any logical theorem. If one knows The Bible, one knows Jesus never claims to be God (Mark 10:18; in the NT the term "God" applies only to "FAther".

@earlysda

2 ай бұрын

Your putdown of Athanasius is misdirected.

@grasonicus

2 ай бұрын

@@earlysda You mean unfounded. But that it's not. Do a bit of research, and you'll see everything I said is true. I directed the comment at this video, and that's where it ended up.

@earlysda

2 ай бұрын

@@grasonicus Chris, your telling me what I meant is almost amusing. . Your "1+1+1=1" mistake should be directed at those who made the mistake. But here you are, promoting their mistake!

He did a bad job

@RockyRoadtrips

2 ай бұрын

Convincing argument

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

@@RockyRoadtrips Athanasius knew Scripture was valuable, but you said he thought is was "alone-sufficient". If we look what he did we can clearly see your statement is false. He knew Scripture is only useful so far as the other person accepts it's clear meaning. He appealed to the Arians on the basis of Scripture, and then he saw how they privately interpreted Scripture and did not accept it's meaning as held by the Church. So Athanasius then referred the Arians to the Church. He was instrumental in the 1st Church Council of Nicaea which was convened to deal with the Arians private interpretations, and which over-ruled the Arians interpretations of Scripture. And He devoted his life to implementing these rulings of the Council. Athanasius was the Catholic because for him Church was Final Authority OVER private interpretation of Scripture. The Arians with their private interpretation of Scripture, were just like the Protestants.

@RockyRoadtrips

2 ай бұрын

@@dougy6237 I think you’re responding to the wrong person

@dougy6237

2 ай бұрын

@@RockyRoadtrips If you are Protestant it was meant for you.

Arius got it right. Jesus never claimed to be almighty god. Just read everything that he said. And who did he pray to? The father

There's more chance of this dude "Athanasius" being real - heck, it might have even been his real name....than a magic dude who walks on water, feeds 5000 with a couple of McFish burgers and can't keep himself alive in spite of being able to raise others from the dead

@barrymoore4470

2 ай бұрын

I commend your skepticism of Christian myth, but in fairness to the religion's doctrine, Christ's death was essential to the divine redemption of man through the sacrifice of the crucifixion and the following resurrection. Jesus' historicity, by the way, is almost universally conceded by serious scholars, though the supernatural and miraculous accounts of his life test modern credulity. Athanasius was an indisputable historical figure, well attested through surviving records and evidence.

@henryoise185

Ай бұрын

Jesus Christ is not a myth. He is the resurrected Lord who showed Himself alive to more than five hundred persons as well as encountering Paul on the road to Damascus.

@zhengfuukusheng9238

Ай бұрын

A book of fantastic tales says there were 500 witnesses. It does not mean this really happened

@barrymoore4470

Ай бұрын

@@zhengfuukusheng9238 I agree that scriptural assertion does not necessarily equate with historical fact. Indeed, there are several incidents in the Bible that simply cannot be reconciled with modern scientific understanding of reality. Also, Paul's conversion experience could just as easily have been a psychotic episode as the purported supernatural intervention that the Christian faithful accept.

@zhengfuukusheng9238

Ай бұрын

@@barrymoore4470 The Paul described in the bible is most likely a literary character. Its eerie his shipwreck episode resembles the similar experience of Josephus (which Josephus allegedly had) It almost suggests Josephus wrote Paul, although the story of Josephus' own life is so fantastic that he could just as easily have been made up himself.

Athanasius is heretic.