Christianity from Judaism to Constantine: Crash Course Planet History #11


In which John Green teaches you the history of Christianity, from the beginnings of Judaism and the development of monotheism, appropriate up to Paul and how Christianity stormed the Roman Empire in just a few hundred years. Along the way, John will cover Abram/Abraham, the Covenant, the Roman Occupation of Judea, and the birth, life, death and legacy of Jesus of Nazareth. No flame wars! Let’s maintain the commentary civil.

Crash Course Planet History is now available on DVD! http://shop.dftba.com/goods/crashcourse-world-history-the-complete-series-dvd-set

Comply with us!
@thecrashcourse
@realjohngreen
@raoulmeyer
@crashcoursestan
@saysdanica
@thoughtbubbler

Like us! ‪http://www.facebook.com/youtubecrashcourse
Stick to us again! ‪http://thecrashcourse.tumblr.com
Help CrashCourse on Patreon: http://patreon.com/crashcourse

_DSC9738
SONY DSC
By photosam88 on 2012-09-26 23:29:55
tagsarticles

50 thoughts on “Christianity from Judaism to Constantine: Crash Course Planet History #11”

  1. Now this is a crash course 👍… No one view, just history it self. Thanks! For all other questions and comments go to church.

  2. God does not say He is He, in the original text in Hebrew the word used means "It" but with a different meaning implying that He is some sort of "alive It" it was translated into English as He because there is no English word that means "a living person that’s not a mortal".
    And sorry but it was the Jews who insisted on crucifying Jesus when Pilate gave them a choice between Jesus and Barrabas (can’t remember the English spelling for his name) and Pilate did insist that he saw no crime in Jesus the crowd of Jews demanded his crucifixion, so yes the ones who nailed him to the cross where Roman soldiers but the ones who sentenced him were the Jews.
    Please do some research before you educate people, have you even read the Bible?

  3. Okay, forgive me if I’m wrong but Pontious Pilot was the decider of Jesus’ death yes. But the ones who were CALLING for his death and convinced him to kill Jesus were the Jews. Throughout the whole New Testament there is evidence of the Jews despising Jesus and disavowing him. So I would consider the Jews responsible for Jesus’ death

  4. Jesus only lived to an average age if you add infant mortality. Adults back the tended to live near enough as long as we do.

  5. You are to be commended for wanting to teach history and u and your team did a Good unbiased here. I think by the time that fish thing set in things were shifty and you said they used that symbol over other popular ones like the cross however the cross is an idol first century Christians would shun as idolatry, and was instituted after constantine(4th cen.)had a vision of a cross over a battle field in a dream. It’s also interesting to go back through history and see how many people had visions of a cross or swastika or both and how they interpreted it and what course of action they took. Test every inspired expression to see where it originates. They don’t all come from benign entities. A ‘demon’ has every reason to show Someone a ‘cross’.

  6. 1. Christians say Jesus was killed by the Jews, because they were the ones (sauces, pharisees etc.) bothered by his new teachings. So the spoke with the Roman governors to kill Jesus because he was causing trouble and chaos in Jerusalem. So the Romans took care of it and killed Jesus on their traditional way. But the Jews went and made the proposal to Kill Jesus.
    2. Abraham had two sons from two different wives. Now was Isaac from Sarah (the one he was supposed
    to have a child from and the other one is Ishmael born from Haggar (the servant of Sarah). Isaac represents the promised people, but Ishmael doesn’t, though God still blesses him with land. Which is why the Jews and the Muslims still exist.
    3. Jesus is real and he is coming back.

  7. I would like Christians to help Dalits like myself in India who are oppressed everyday in India.Please. We have no faith in government and the Hindu goons beat us up if we change to Christianity.

  8. Well technically the Jews conspired to kill Jesus, but the Romans did it physically, so basically they both were responsible for the death of Jesus.

  9. FYI: the Romans may have performed the crucifixion but it was at the Jews demand. Pilot even said "I wash my hands of this" because the angry Jewish mob changed "Crucify him! Crucify him!" And he feared revolt. Of course, this was all prophecied in the scriptures beforehand. His kingdom is salvation from spiritual death, and it is already here- the age of the church. However, he did mean an actual PHYSICAL Kingdom too, which will come after the end times (Final 7th week prophecied in Daniel, the last 7 years of tribulation), and reign for 1,000 years.

  10. Bro, the Bible says that Jesus was taken before Pontius Pilot among a murder Barabbas and because of I forget if it was a Jewish Holiday or a Roman holiday, one prisoner would be set free, and Pilot allowed the mob to choose, incidentally they were Jews, and they wanted Jesus to be crucified. So in effect, the Jews at that time were responsible, though the Romans DID do the actual crucifying.

  11. Look up how Jesus died on the Youtuber WUUT and you will be surprised.
    P.S Im just saying this for all you wondering who killed him, no hate or 🔥needed.

  12. Why do you depict all jews as brown people? Jews were the whitest nation on earth in ancient times, they only became darker when they were expelled from Israel in 70 AC, and they began mixing with darker nations. Have you even see real jews nowadays? Many of them are whiter than you: Blonde hair (not brown like you have), blue eyes, white skin.

  13. From the first day that Adam and Eve were born they were Jews, we knew that God was one and He created us. I am a Jew and you will not teach me what in my history God created the Jews and protects us from all evil people like you Muslims Wish God would wipe out all of Gaza

  14. I’m pure European look with light brown hair and Semitic actually I’m Syrian and as everyone knows Syrian Assyrian Jewish Aramaic are the most Semitic people and the pure Arab which Muhammad is from them are also Semitic and I think they are between olive colore to white European color and the misunderstanding comes because the Saudi or Yemeni or Kuwaiti for example which they are a mixture of Semitic and Afro groups from horn Africa and south Egypt and Ethiopia! But it doesn’t matter because color means nothing in Islam or even race and this is why I think god chose the Semitic or later the Semitic Arab to spread the religions because they are not black not white so no one will feel discriminated 🙂Anyway I think Jesus was white I read in sunna book that Muhammad described him as white reddish white ( European look) the Hebrew and Syrian or Syriac language almost same and maybe 90% of coranic Arab language? By the way in I read in the Bible the name of Muhammad and the Muslim description of god is the same Christian or Judi god and almost the same name( Allah ) but coran saying that nothing compares to god and saying nothing look like god or similar and Mohammad intensively said the same and any imagination in our mind is not how is god and it makes sense because no one wants to worship someone or something is a man with balls or woman with breast or anything we can imagine??

  15. Hi
    I just subscribed to your channel, and would appreciate it if you would consider subscribing back.
    God bless you, and thank you for your support!
    Kind regards
    Jim

  16. Without religion involved, too much misconceptions… every answer given is too simplicist. There is way more then that!

  17. Interesting, for the most part you got everything correct. Except a few things on how you think people where thinking but not important. I like your accuracy. Seeing you don’t believe

  18. Cool! Hmm~ Interesting that the Jews had to solidify their beliefs when they were cast out of Judea, giving the opportunity for Christians to make a new start or new religion.

  19. It can be difficult for modern people to understand the motivations of people in the ancient world, unless they have a thorough understanding of ancient culture. It has long been a popular conception that Constantine’s conversion was a sham at worst and a case of cynical political expediency at best.

    This is partly because modern people are used to politicians with ulterior motives and because we tend to be sceptical about overtly religious motivations. But it’s also because of a long-standing Protestant theological tradition that by adopting Christianity, the Emperor effectively hijacked "real" Christianity and corrupted the "true early Church", turning it into the monarchical, hierarchical and imperialist Catholic "Church of Rome". It fits this conception to see Constantine as a cynical manipulator, using Christianity for his own nefarious, political ends. But, in fact, historians have long since abandoned this explanation because it simply doesn’t fit the evidence.

    As far back as 1929 historians have been noting the problems with the neat story of Constantine adopting Christianity out of a political desire to "unite the Empire under one faith". As Norman H. Baynes noted in his Raleigh Lecture of that year, "Constantine the Great and Christian Church", if that was his intention then it is very odd that he would choose Christianity, of all cults, to try to achieve it.

    In the year of Constantine’s conversion, Christianity was a minority faith, comprising of no more than 10-15% of the population, and one embraced largely by the lower classes. It had also undergone several decades of persecution, had been a forbidden and illegal cult for much longer than that and was despised by a large section of the population, especially by the Imperial court circles, the nobility and the equestrian classes. As nominees for a sect that would "unite" the Empire, it would be hard to find a worse candidate.

    Another version of the conversion myths claim that he chose Christianity because it gave him a new popular base. Again, this is wrong. Leaving aside the fact that a mere 10-15% of the population would not make much of a difference, the Roman Empire in the early Fourth Century was not a democracy and was not even a system where popular support by the common people counted for much politically. The common people did as they were told. Power came from the upper echelons, from the Senatorial class, from the even more influential equestrians and from the army’s officers. And they were all far more likely to be anti-Christian than swayed by a potential Emperor adopting this despised peasant faith.

    The idea that Constantine adopted Christianity as a state religion to secure power or to unite the Empire is further undermined by a simple fact – he actually didn’t adopt Christianity as a state religion at all. He could have done so, if he’d chosen to, since he certainly had the power and the authority. After he eliminated his rivals he was in a position to do what he wanted. And he had a precedent for adopting a new state religion – Aurelian had done so back in 271 when he had made the Sol Invictus solar cult the state faith. But Constantine did not make Christianity the state religion and was careful to ensure that traditional pagan inscriptions remained on his coins and pagan symbolism were included on several of his monuments – he maintained continuity precisely because he didn’t want to offend powerful pagans. Christianity didn’t actually become the state religion until decades after his death, when it was declared as such by Theodosius in 380 AD.

    The real reason for his adoption of Christianity as his religion, with the drift towards Christian dominance as a result, was that he had a powerful spiritual experience and through it attributed his victory at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge to the Christian god. In the lead up to his showdown with his imperial rival Maxentius, he seems to have seen some kind of phenomenon in the sky that reminded him of a cross. So he prayed for victory to the Christian god, who he knew via his devoutly Christian mother. When he went on to win an against-all-odds victory and found himself ruler of the Roman Empire, he did what any superstitious Roman soldier would have done – he kept his end of the bargain. He converted to the Christian faith and honoured the god that he considered the source of his victory and his power.

    Modern people may find that kind of motivation hard to grasp and difficult to believe, but Constantine was not a modern person, he was an ancient Roman. The Romans believed in ensuring you honoured the gods that showed you favour and soldiers believed strongly in repaying your debt to a god who granted you victory.

    So while stories about supposed cynical motives might sound more plausible to us, we have to interpret the evidence and do so with an understanding of how people in the time thought. That Constantine was a superstitious Roman soldier keeping a pre-battle oath might be alien to us, but it is the best explanation of the evidence.

  20. I always wondered ,why the christians around the world love the Jews and support them ,Althought they rejected Jesus the christ and called him an imposter, This is not conformity with the Christianity view

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *