Comments by "SuperPope Gaming" (@SuperpopeGaming) on "Early Christian Schisms - Before Imperium - Extra History - Part 1" video.

  1. This is a great video, and I'm glad you made it. However, one criticism I have is the way you portray the motives of the early Christians. Intentionally or not, you make their desire to spread the gospel of Christ sound like a business venture instead of a truth they were so convinced of that they were willing to die for it. For example, John wasn't arguing for Christ "in the flesh" because he felt the story needed to have real sacrifice in order to tug at people's heart strings and get them to sign up. It's because he LITERALLY KNEW Christ. He was squashing rumors.
    45
  2. +stardude692001 This video doesn't cite the Gospel of John, but his letters to the church (1 2 and 3 John), although their themes of Christ being God "in the flesh" are the same, as is the date of authorship. John was an old man, you're right, but he was still a contemporary and personal friend of Christ. He was the only disciple to not be killed for his beliefs, only exiled. He's writing at this point to people who already believe, to correct their errors. As for Judas, he sold Christ out and then immediately regretted it to the point of suicide. That's his only word to us, but it speaks plenty.
    4
  3. +Carewolf Paul didn't live "long after" Jesus. It was the same century. Regardless, I'm still trying to figure out if you're arguing that Christ was a spirit.
    3
  4. +stardude692001 Agreed. But I'm referring to the writings of John as mentioned in this video. He wasn't a second or third century Christian trying to bend the story to fit his agenda. He was a guy who had actually known Christ.
    3
  5. +stardude692001 Kinda unfair to blame a guy for not being killed by an angry mob, isn't it? :D They all split up and shared the gospel in different regions. Martyrdom just wasn't how things turned out for him. Regardless, my main point is that talking about John's letters and Constantine in the same breath paints an inaccurate picture. It's like asserting that George Washington and Donald Trump are contemporaries with the same goals in mind.
    3
  6. +Carewolf Really? You're arguing? Huh.
    2
  7. +Ireallyreally Hategoogle It's difficult to study history at all with that level of skepticism. :) Many of the earliest extant texts we have about historical figures were written hundreds of years after their deaths, but I've heard no one arguing that - for example - Alexander the Great never existed.
    2
  8. +Carewolf Not sure what you're saying. You think Jesus was a ghost and John just wanted to believe that his friend was a human being?
    1
  9. +AirCooledMan2006 You're generalizing while missing the point of my comment.
    1