Orthodoxy & Scripture 3B: History of the New Testament

[Arankor]

Exactly what can happen to anyone who is experiencing Christianity in its own way ... To become like you! I'm not saying you're a bad guy or anything like that, but you have to know that Orthodoxy is the same from the Apostles to the present day, so the story of your is trivial and full of insignificant information!

P.S. Thank you for your attention and God bless!!!

[protochris]

Nice video, but I'm not certain it can be said that Sinaiticus is from the commision of 50 copies by Constantine.

[pandirasbox]

By these bookls I actually meant the "heretical" books (not the canon) oops

[pandirasbox]

Actually Carthage had a council that solidified the Canon and the letter of Athanasius proscribing books did as well. Theodosius I enforced taking these books away later.

[pandirasbox]

2nd John not 2 John, that is how to say it.

[pandirasbox]

Actually only the Byzantine text or Caesarean text can be Constantines Bible. How can you say all 4 (or even 3) ancient 4th century codices are the same Bible. He ordered 50 of the same Bibles! Not variants.

[pandirasbox]

Why do you actually believe their was one tradition passed down faithfully? This is certainly not the case and many traditions within the Church go extinct and go misrepresented and misunderstood at later times in their maturation. Origen presents a very different tradition from Irenaeus and Tertullian, as does Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius. John Chrysostom even. You avoid the earliest time in the church history and rely on 3rd-4th century late inferior information with fatal flaws.

[gambleor]

@pandirasbox "Why do you actually believe their was one tradition passed down faithfully?" You're referring to people other than the Apostles in the arguments that follow this question. Origen presenting a different tradition than Irenaeus and Tertullian, etc. does not mean that the Apostles taught these different traditions. Do you think that Ap. Peter taught a different tradition from Ap. John?

[pandirasbox]

Why do you avoid Irenaeus' canon? Why avoid Marcions? Why avoid Valentinus'? I can show you Valentinus' "canon" of NT books.

[pandirasbox]

Why do you neglect to mention P46?

[pandirasbox]

3Corinthians and Acts of Paul are carnal resurrection supporting and heresy sanitizing writings not from the Apostles and therefore not properly scripture because they actually change the theology, soteriology, cosmology, and doctrines of the Apostolic church. Hermas does the same. Barnabas is fine. The Apocalypse of Peter is a reaction to the Coptic work of the same name by Gnostics.

[pandirasbox]

Philippians was like a Marcionite original and Hebrews was a Valentinian original most likely. 1Thessalonians and 2Thessalonians really first appear in the writing of Irenaeus. (and way later the long versions of Ignatius' letters).

[pandirasbox]

Origen actually rejected the Infancy Gospel of Thomas and called it the Gospel of Thomas. Fix your facts before you mislead someone into thinking otherwise.

[pandirasbox]

Origen had "heretical opinions" being an ex-Valentinian and all

[pandirasbox]

Hermas is a Docetic writing.

[pandirasbox]

Actually, Tertullian rejected the Shepherd of Hermas as the "Shepherd of Adulterers".

[dsr9996]

Can you create a video about Orthodoxy and the Old Testament canon? I would be very interested in that. God bless.

[jlm2525]

@davidpwithun Informative but, when you couple the fact that there is no contemporary evidence of the person of Jesus (big red flag) together with the first appearance of the 4 gospels by name in AD 180 (another red flag) make one think that there is no primary source and therefore it’s all made up!!!

[davidpwithun]

@jlm2525 Actually, both counts are incorrect: there is contemporary evidence for the person of Jesus and all four gospels are mentioned by name earlier than AD 180. I have an ongoing series on early Christian history that you might be interested in -- check out some of my newer videos.

[jlm2525]

@davidpwithun I’m open to truly scholarly scientific work that is filled with citations from the mainstream historical community. I will not accept websites like “dr. dino” that has “scientific” elaboration completely devoid of cited works. Neither an appeal to emotions will work.

But as far as I’m concerned both of those points stand unless someone can present independent secular facts accompanied with cited works. Could you tell me what uploads you have that present such cited evidence?

[davidpwithun]

@jlm2525 lol -- yes, sure -- how about this: go to your local book store and pick up any book by any scholar you can find on early Christian history.

[taliesin939939]

@jlm2525 so you think all those men had everything figured out at all their meetings of humans deciding dogma because they were inspired by your holy ghost. well, im going to school to be a religious studies professor. not too much more to go.. and.. i find your posts informative, but biased. you present history as coming from a greek orthodox. why present history as history? that shows we are looking through a lense when we watch your videos.

[taliesin939939]

@jlm2525 i couldnt agree more!!! im going to school to teach. and of all the stuff ive seen... this guy is biased towards the bible and the orthodox church being true. that is not how scholarship (unbiased) is done. you are right.

[gtepp031387]

@taliesin939939 Well if your intrested I would suggest you look into the writtings of Papias, that we have left, he talks a little about the gosples, and he knew and was taught by John the apostle. It would also be wise to read Clement, Ignatius,and Polycarp, who where all ordained and taught by the apostles face to face, and see what they used from the writtings of the apostles.

[KeroroGunsouTX]

All these videos have done is convinced me even more that religion in general and Christianity in particular is BS. Why would God seek to communicate with all of humanity in such a convoluted manner?

[davidpwithun]

@KeroroGunsouTX What is convoluted about God's communication to man?

[ijannaknowthetruth]

@davidpwithun Listen, It is all bullshit! All of it! An all knowing god, if he were to write a book, would've writen a perfect book understood by all in one version. It would never need to be re-written, added on to or have anything taken away from it. it would've always existed and been know through out history. It could never be debated because all said facts would be exact and perfect. This is called ''CRITICAL THINKING'' sheeple. Or common sence.

[davidpwithun]

@ijannaknowthetruth I never said that God wrote the Bible, did I? I'm certain that I didn't. Please don't put words in my mouth, that's very disrespectful. You may want to learn more about something before you attempt to criticize it so that you don't end up making yourself like foolish like this.

[m1tchish]

Great work...

[maghdhd]

David would it be safe to say, that there is more evidence that the Divine Liturgies and sacraments are apostolic over some of the books we have in the NT?

It seems Revelation and Hebrews had a hard time settling in, while the liturgy and sacraments didnt have really many hiccups. What do you think?

[davidpwithun]

I absolutely agree. In fact, whether or not a particular book was being used in the worship of the Church and, especially, whether or not it agreed with the worship of the Church, were two big points, for the Fathers, when it came to deciding what was or wasn't Scripture.

Lex orandi, lex credendi (as we worship, so we believe) is probably the oldest shorthand rule of Faith in Christianity. And it was certainly put to use when it came to the formation of the New Testament.

[davidpwithun]

We also know that the Liturgies of the Church were written and standardized well before the NT. St. Paul even quotes from some early Christian hymns in his letters (such as Galations 3:27-29, which hymn is still used at every Baptism in the Orthodox Church).

The worship of the Orthodox Church, especially as reflected in the Liturgies of Sts. James and Mark, bears a very close resemblance to the services that would have been held in the Temple, as well as those held in Jewish synagogues today.

[maghdhd]

These scripture videos really helped. i finally understood how scripture it self was a tradition.

I already knew how most of the ECF never disputed with each other on the liturgies and sacrament, and now that i see lots of the books in the NT had trouble being universally accepted, then how can i dare question the worship traditions. Plus ''the way we worship is the way we believe'' does seem by far the best method to preserve the faith in an oral tradition society in the early years.

[davidpwithun]

Orthodox Christians and Jews both draw from the common 1st century heritage in our respective liturgical traditions.

Protestants, who have changed the order of the liturgy and largely eliminated the weekly Eucharist, have essentially Judaized their services, eliminating that part of the service which Christians added to the rubrics from the Temple/Synagogue services: the Liturgy of the Faithful, which includes, most importantly, the Anaphora.

But I've gotten way off topic, so I'll stop here!

[MashuticLeb]

Would you like to say to me what sort Orthodoxy Church you visit? I go to Russian Orthodoxy Church.

Sorry for my English )))

It's a great video. We watch it in Russia.

[davidpwithun]

I go to an Antiochian Orthodox Church.

Thank you for watching! I'm very happy that you enjoyed it.

[OrthodoxyIsTruth]

Another great video!

God Bless.

[davidpwithun]

Thanks very much!

[weirdschool]

keep up the great videos. Greeting from a Catechumen in San Antonio +

[davidpwithun]

Thanks and welcome to the Holy Orthodox Church!