Jesus 26 – Deification Of Jesus Its Evolution 8 Later Councils

Welcome once again to our focus. Today's program is a 26 as soon as it's ingenious to deliberate misuse of our law, as programmers on vacation of Jesus evolution, and our topic today will be the post cast doubt you only have those two shopping lists in here once again, as the Asian versity is that is innovative. So

how about a summary of master's programs, they were summarizing a lot in a few words, but essentially the program was on the Nicene era,

specifically on the very prolonged controversies in the fourth century, which led eventually to the holding of the the second measure church Council in Constantinople in 381.

in which it was decided that the Holy Spirit also is divine, was divine. And as such, we find that the shape of Trinity was completed more or less in a way, which is strikingly another vessel similar to the platonic type of serenity.

We mentioned that

while the council decided on this issue, it did not explain how the divinity and humanity were both combined in Jesus. This was discussed in the third measure Council in emphasis in 431, that's almost 50 years after the Constantinople conference. And one of the main purpose was to condemn an historian who said that Jesus was above the humans above the people because of his character, but he's not divine is not good.

However, this conference, again, was not quite concrete and explaining the nature of Jesus. So the struggle continued again as to whether Jesus had one nature's one nature or to nature's, whether it be it is one nature before incarnation and after incarnation or two before and one After all, this argument that went on back and forth. We indicated, however, that this arguments continued for two years, until before measure, conference, church Council was held in Tulsa down in 451, which sided with the theory that says that Jesus had two natures, but that those two natures are united without change, without division and without separation, which as indicated towards the end of the previous

program, versus a great difficulty as to who died on the cross if the divinity and humanity cannot be separated or cannot be

divided, who then died on the cross unless we assume that God died, which is of course, a blasphemy according to the Bible itself, the Old Testament and according to any simple

straightforward understanding, what was the major telcel following?

Yes, after considering the there was still another major concern, the second Constantinople Council and that took place in the year 553.

Perhaps if I give some background also on the basis of Encyclopedia Britannica, let me clarify what you see when the previous Council in Considine met in 451. By that time, the western parts of the Roman Empire had already begun to break down into smaller

kingdoms, barbarian kingdoms, as they become to be known later.

At that time, there was some move to more or less like canonize the for the first four councils just like the four gospels were canonized, which is also to canonize the first four church councils. That's the last one being calciner.

The problem here is that the Eastern Church

were was continuing to oppose the fourth council can

Stan cuts down. Why? Because the Eastern Church insisted on believing in the one nature of Jesus, whereas the rest of them believed in the true natures.

So some employers try their best

to unite those churches by suggesting that perhaps the first Council in Kassadin, should be dropped, so that they agree at least on the first three to accept the first three, that attempt failed.

Another suggestion was made to only drop some chapters or some parts of the creed decided upon in Sudan or confession of faith, which relate to the two natures of Jesus. But that again, failed, which led eventually to this to the holding of that sip accounts in the second Constantinople.

That comes in, however, different

from the previous Council, the first one. And ultimately, they decided to drop the three chapters, in confidence decisions that talked about the two natures of Jesus,

the Pope, of Rome, as expectedly

did not agree to that. But he was under pressure of the Emperor Justinian to accept and finally accepted grudgingly, even though the Roman Church continued to be committed to the predisposition of believing in the true natures of Jesus.

The dispute or difference between the supporters of the one nature to nature's continued until Islam emerged, because you see that we're talking now, that close to the,

to the spread of Islam. And at that time, the Imperial troops, were not any longer able to force all people within the Empire, especially those who came under Islamic rule, to accept the authority of the church, the Roman Church, or to do with them as they did before, especially in Africa.

However, we find that under the new circumstances with the emergence of Islam, both groups continued to survive. But it did not really end the struggle between the church of Rome on one hand, the western church, and Constantinople.

Now, you, you've

thought about this, just talked about this concept? I'd be interested to know, if this was discussed in the labor councils that came up. Yes, it was, in fact, the the Eastern Church was officially forbidden to speak about Jesus in the language of one nature. Especially because of course, we as we said before, the western church believed in the two natures. So the universe did two different ways to express their beliefs. And they say, right, Jesus had one world, but again, they kept saying that

he had one word, but it doesn't mean necessarily that he may not have you know, two natures, they started to explain it in a rather indirect or certain type of way. So as Synod was held in the year 649, in which they said, No, we don't accept that Jesus had problems, just like we say to nature had two wins, not one.

A few years later, in the year 680. Another Council was held six one

address again, with the command or initiative of the Emperor, which condemned anyone who said that Jesus had one will. And he said no, Jesus had two words that resulted in the suppression or the split from the Church of the Maronites 12 years debtors in 692. Another conference was held the third Council in Constantinople

in 787, the second Nicene Council was held to settle the problem of icon worship, which was rampant apparently at that time. And it's quite possible as some historians indicate that the reason why there was this mood, or debate, or controversy about icon worship was because of the influence of Islam because it's very strictly opposed to the worship of any icon or to have any image for God, material or otherwise. So it's quite possible that this was because of the influence of satanic pure monotheistic faith and its insistence on that and they ended up actually with a sort of

lukewarm decision. They said, Yes, icons should not be worshipped but they may be, should not be adored, but they may be revered as the

Adrienne, what's executive adoration and reference?

Anyway, in the period between 870 800 or So between 869 and 817.

Another conference, the eighth one was held in Constantinople. So that's the fourth one in Constantinople in particular.

And that actually was the basis for the suppression of the Eastern Church from the Church of Rome. Perhaps a few remarks on that council might be of interest if I need.

First of all, the previous councils led to splits among Christians in different groups. And the basis for the split, as we have seen was the argument about the nature of Christ. Now, that issue was raised by the Bishop of Constantinople, who said that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father only, okay, the Holy Spirit,

he was opposed by the Bishop of Rome. Because the Bishop of Rome said no, the Holy Spirit proceeds both from the Father and the Son. And each one started to argue this point. Now, each person considered the other as wrong.

It's considered the other extreme then, and to be considered as excommunicated from the church.

So a council was held in Constantinople after its Bishop was removed. In 869. That council finally agreed with the position taken by the church of Rome, that the Holy Spirit proceeded both from the Father and the Son. They also decided that anyone who had any disputes

or question concerning the faith, he must report that or go to Rome, and that all Christians are subject to the decisions to all the decisions made by the pope in Rome.

However, that deposed Bishop of Constantinople was able later to come back and regain his position. And he helped another Council in Constantinople in 879. So that's almost 10 years after he, you know, he was deposed,

in which he refused the previous decision. And he insisted, again, on his previous position, and each side again began to consider the other as unbelievers excommunicated heretical, and all the other titles that used to be exchanged based on difference of understanding or interpretation. As a result of this,

hassle. This, the church was split into basically two

segments, the the Latin or Western church, headed by the pope in Rome. And the eastern sometimes called the Greek church,

which is supported by churches in the east to some small use is still in Istanbul now, which used to be called Constantinople understanding of what exactly does that mean, does this seem gold? Or is this ending?

Well, in a way, yes, you can say that because at least if you were to talk about the previous councils, at least,

by and large, even though sometimes better presentation was not always

equal or balanced. But in a way the previous councils were, you might say, General Counsel, or universal, which included representatives of the various churches within Christendom.

But of course, with the with the previous one that we just talked about, you had really

the Eastern Church called orthodox or Greek also, which did not recognize except the first seven council did not accept the x one, according to the Constantinople Council.

So but the spoke of that, of course, church Council has continued there's perhaps 14 or 15 of them, but this council is later or after the eighth one, after the Seven Fishes will essentially conferences attended only by bishops from the west, and as such, they are only recognized by the Catholic Church. In one of those councils, the one in the US 12 115 it was decided that

the Roman Catholic Church has the right to issue the the index of forgiveness. That's too

absolve you from your sin, I can give it to wherever it wishes.

Another Council was held in 1542. Of course, you can get to this point or reply to Protestantism, which of course was emerging at that time become a very strong contender.

Another one was held in 1869, to affirm the infallibility of the Pope.

But of course, in recent years, relatively recent years, I should say 1965, a very important one was called the Second Vatican Council, which for the first time began to establish some kind of recognition of other world religions, in their description, actually, on Catholic Muslim religions, which unfortunately, has not been fully implemented in terms of dialogue and mutual understanding that yes, you're right, the really the era of general counsel's individually with the seventh one, because after that, you had to measure splits, that became quite deeply, this is not possible for one group to prevail over the other, as we've seen in the past, like you need to force them to

follow the

well, the situation by that time was a little different from the early days, for example, the days of Constantine, when the Imperial troops, you know, could go there. And, you know,

it's when massacre people do, as we see we've seen before in some previous programs, because at that time, of course, the the Roman Empire was already split into eastern and western sections. And then another important factor, in fact, as some historians refer to, is the spread of Islam, because Islam began to spread quite fast in the middle of the seventh century. And the tolerance that Islam provided for the followers of other religions and different sets,

which gives them a sense of protection, even though they might have been dissenting from their main churches.

One of the most important examples of this photo is that when the Crusaders, Christian themselves, invaded Jerusalem,

whose church at that time, as you know, was under the Eastern Church, they very severely persecuted the followers of the Eastern Church, who are just their fellow Christians.

No wonder we find some historians say that the eastern Christians, after they have seen the tolerance of Muslim rulers, even though they are not of the same religion, used to say, the turban of Sultan Mohammed, the Congress, you know, the Turkish Sultan, the the turban of Sultan, Mohammed, the Conqueror, is better than the crown of the Trinitarian Pope. And obviously, to say that I you know, I prefer to be under the role of Muslims who are of different religion than to be under the role of other

Christians that the Western Roman Church is in itself a testimony of the tolerance and freedom of conscience, freedom of practice of religion, and Muslim holy. Now, you've mentioned the split in speaking of speech, it might be useful to lighten up on the spirit within the universe to church. And maybe we can start off with the reasons behind the requirement. Well, of course, this is a big topic by itself.

Our purpose here is not to give any details.

Know history of the church itself, I think the main purpose has been for sure that the idea of deification of Jesus is not really ingrained in his teaching, not ingrained in the Bible, but something that has historically developed over time. It's man's ideas. And as such, we're not required to accept it because humans also are fallible no matter how good intentioned they may, they may have. But just since we're talking about development, if we were to give a very brief summary of that, we can say that there are at least a number of reasons that many historians even among the Christian themselves, who have indicated

as to why the Reformation movement began to be, you know, pushed, why, what kind of underlying reasons or motives behind it, and there are volumes written on that. So this was just like I said, a very simple summary. One,

that historians say that the position of the church the absence of tolerance, with respect to those who differ with their understanding and interpretation and calling them heretics excommunicating them person and, you know, condemning them

even though it's just a matter of difference of interpretation of the same scripture,

and led to a position where the church more or less can

To be the only infallible interpreter in Scripture, other people has no right even though they could be also learned as well.

And that the Bible can only be presented by them. And we know historically that this intolerance has taken a variety of forms, exciting, harassment, burning of books, and very important works. Inquisition of torture, we have seen many examples in some programs. And there are lots, this is not the main thing we're really focusing about of killing masses of people even because they didn't accept the church's interpretation. As we know, some were burnt alive. And sometimes the killing was on a horrible scale.

I mean, the

information on that are quite plentiful. A second possible reason behind that with the position of the church against not only those with different with the interpretation of the church in the matter of faith or theology, but even in the matter of science, and empirical knowledge as what happened to Galileo, for example, and others, some scientists were tortured, in prison to the essence, some even killed, because they said something in science, which, again, the church thought is unscriptural. A third reason is the position that the church took towards governments and kings, left in later days when the Roman Empire weakened and became very split. And when the Roman Empire became segmented,

there was no longer an authority of an overall improve over the Pope. On the contrary, the pope himself developed power over kings, in some cases, even deciding to, to remove them, like what happened, for example, in the Council of lions in France, in the US, toward 145. A fourth reason was, as some historians say, imposition of too much tariffs and taxes on people, sometimes even on the push, to supply or to provide funds for the for the Central Church. And in some cases, even as we're known, historically, filling of the edicts of forgiveness of absolution, that you go to church and you receive a document that your sins are forgiven, you know, pay some money for debt. A fifth

reason some historians refer to was the person and behavior of some which is not overgeneralize. But some of the leaders of the church who are not always, you know, holy or without ulterior motive. In fact, some historians indicate that some of the major church leaders have,

even though they practice celibacy, officially, have had many questionable relationship, you know, in the nature of sex, and some of them were living in luxury. And that was quite a different picture from some of the early fathers who were very simple, who sacrificed everything, including even putting their lives on the line. A sixth reason,

invest also in the period of the domination of the church over the people, the Islamic civilization, was actually the superpower of the world at that time. And many of the thinkers and scientists from the west, were able to find refuge in Muslim land were able to find centers of learning in Muslim University, which is, was by far ahead of what was there in Europe, actually, it was thought ahead.

And by

exchanging views and meeting with Muslims, and learning about the teaching of Islam,

this idea seems to have been taken with them to the west, ideas or values that this term pretty much emphasizes that there is no official church that claimed to be the exclusive interpreter of the Word of God, the emphasis of Islam about individual conscious, and his or her own responsibility before, before God, the fact that nobody can grant forgiveness not a prophet, not at birth, or living prophet or death of a prophet, that only the person would have to stand as a responsible being before God and that they have gentlemen, the right of people to understand and study the Scriptures. So many of those thinkers, scientists from the west, very much admired those standard values when

they saw it in action. And it looks like

some historians say that they tried to

somehow infuse those refreshing ideas or values into the

their own situation.

You just touched upon briefly

movement? How did it come up?

Well, in the beginning, the reaction of the church to this kind of, you know, reformation demands were very, very severe and at times quite brutal.

For example, by reference to HG Wells, outline of history,

he indicates that in the year 415,

a Czech person was actually also a religious, very religious person, he was a priest, old Sophia, by the name of john hus, he

was actually burned alive.

And he died as well describes him, a Masters, not for any specific doctrine, but for the free intelligence and free consciousness of mankind.

Even the bones of the British reformer who was also a priest by the name of john whitecliff, WYC, Li, he, even his bones were condemned to be burnt.

So but despite all of this pressure, or suppression of

dissenting views, you might say or our interpretation, there was there was still many

you might say the former's, which is to bring about the formation in a peaceful manner. This was also the period for the emergence of a very important person, the German reformist Martin Luther, who was born in 1482. Actually, Mr. Luthor was not really against the church as such as some might think. In the beginning, actually, he used to very much respect the church, to the point that he even made a pilgrimage to Rome, imagining that the church leaders are just like angels walking on Earth. But of course, when he went there, he was severely shocked by their behavior and their, you know, attitudes intolerance.

So he continued his, of course claim for the forms.

He noted, for example, later that Pope Leo needed some money to collect some money to build the Peter's Peter's Cathedral in Rome. So he started selling those edicts of forgiveness, you receiving the documents for forgiveness, and getting money out there that must be destroyed, didn't really like that at all. And he wrote actually, on churches that this is wrong, that forgiveness can be only secured by your repentance to God. And then he continued later on to be very strict in his opposition to say that the pope really is not infallible. Of course, he was under all kinds of threats to be deprived from his religious position as well as even civil rights.

A similar personality, of course, very well known as Calvin, who was born in 1609, who had a very important role in continuing the work of Luther. But finally, we know that reformation prevailed.

So we'll see you soon.

Principles of information, in very brief way, if we were to summarize, things that could be mentioned in much greater detail, first, that the Bible is the basis and all ideas and church counseling, decisions and orders of the Church must be, you know, tested against the Bible, to the bishop be no general leadership of the church, there is no power that is derived directly from the disciple of Christ, believe that a man of religion or priest has no right to grant forgiveness only God can give. And also, they oppose the idea of celibacy. There were also other differences and other development, but this essentially represent the core of reformation. Tell us about a time and

thank you very much for being a stickler

for shooting questions or comments you may have our number four men will be appearing on your screen.