Podcasts about Markan

Renkler Neden Sadece Bir Görsel Tercih Değil, Bir Strateji?Renkler hayatımızın her alanında bize bir şeyler fısıldar. Duygularımızı tetikler, kararlarımızı etkiler, güven verir ya da heyecanlandırır. Bu yüzden bir markanın rengi asla tesadüf olamaz. Bu bölümde, renklerin insan psikolojisi üzerindeki etkisinden başlayarak markaların neden ve nasıl bu kadar dikkatli şekilde renk stratejisi oluşturduğunu detaylıca konuşacağız.Renklerin İnsan Psikolojisi Üzerindeki EtkisiKırmızı neden iştah açar? Mavi neden güven verir? Yeşil neden huzurla eşleştirilir? Sarı neden dikkat çeker ama aynı zamanda neden rahatsız edici olabilir? Bu soruların yanıtı beynimizin derinliklerinde yatıyor. Renkler, bilinçaltımızla iletişim kuran en güçlü araçlardan biridir. Bu yüzden pazarlamada kullanıldığında, müşterinin karar verme sürecini doğrudan etkiler.Markaların Renk Seçimindeki Stratejik KararlarCoca-Cola'nın kırmızısı, Facebook'un mavisi, Starbucks'ın yeşili… Bunlar sadece estetik tercihler değil, marka kimliğiyle bütünleşmiş bilinçli seçimler. Bu bölümde, dünyaca ünlü markaların neden bu renklere yatırım yaptığını, bu renklerin markaya kattığı değerleri ve tüketiciyle kurduğu bağı detaylı örneklerle ele alıyoruz.Hedef Kitleye Göre Renklerin Anlamı Nasıl Değişir?Bir genç için canlı renkler heyecan vericiyken, bir profesyonel için koyu renkler daha güven verici olabilir. Kadın-erkek, yaş grubu, kültürel arka plan gibi demografik değişkenler renk algısını tamamen değiştirebilir. Bu yüzden renk seçerken sadece “güzel duruyor” demek büyük bir hata olur. Doğru renk, doğru kitleyle duygusal bağ kurar.Duygulara Dokunan Renk Stratejileri Nasıl Oluşturulur?Markanızın ruhunu, değerlerini ve vizyonunu yansıtan renkler seçmek, doğru bir iletişim kurmanın ilk adımıdır. Bu bölümde, sıfırdan bir marka yaratırken renk paletinin nasıl seçilmesi gerektiğini, mevcut bir markada nasıl dönüşüm yapılabileceğini ve sektörel farklılıklara göre hangi renklerin öne çıktığını anlatıyorum.Dönüşüm Odaklı Renk Kullanımı: Sadece Güzel Olması YetmezDijital pazarlamada renk, dönüşüm oranlarını doğrudan etkiler. Özellikle CTA butonlarında kırmızı, turuncu gibi dikkat çekici renkler dönüşümü artırırken; arka plan uyumu, kontrast kullanımı gibi detaylar da önemlidir. Bu bölümde A/B test örnekleriyle hangi sektör için hangi renk daha fazla dönüşüm getirmiş inceliyoruz.Kültürel Farklılıklar: Aynı Renk Her Yerde Aynı Etkiyi YaratmazBatı'da beyaz saflığı, doğu kültürlerinde yas'ı temsil edebilir. Bu yüzden global markalar, renk stratejilerini her ülke için yeniden düzenlemek zorundadır. Özellikle e-ihracat yapan markalar için kültürel renk kodlarını bilmek kritik önemdedir.Sonuç: Marka Kimliğinin Görsel Temsilcisi RenklerdirBu podcast bölümüyle birlikte, marka yaratımında ve dijital pazarlama stratejilerinde renklerin neden bu kadar önemli olduğunu ve nasıl daha bilinçli kullanılabileceğini kapsamlı bir şekilde öğrenmiş olacaksın.Bölümü Beğendiysen…Daha fazla içerik için joykek.com'u ziyaret edebilir, Instagram'da @frktprk hesabımdan beni takip edebilirsin.Sormak istediklerin varsa faruk@joykek.com üzerinden bana ulaşabilirsin.Ve unutma, renkleri doğru kullanan markalar sadece dikkat çekmekle kalmaz, zihinde de kalıcı olur.

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Teknopark Genel Müdürü Dr. Cem Duran konuk oldu.

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Teknopark Genel Müdürü Dr. Cem Duran konuk oldu.

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına Avukat İletişim Hukukçusu Kadir Önalan konuk oldu.

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına Avukat İletişim Hukukçusu Kadir Önalan konuk oldu.

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına Merkezi Kayıt Kuruluşu Kurumsal İletişim Kıdemli Uzmanı Mehmet Fatih Erdoğdu konuk oldu.

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına Merkezi Kayıt Kuruluşu Kurumsal İletişim Kıdemli Uzmanı Mehmet Fatih Erdoğdu konuk oldu.

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına Albayrak Grubu Kurumsal İletişim Koordinatörü Esad Sivri konuk oldu.

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına Albayrak Grubu Kurumsal İletişim Koordinatörü Esad Sivri konuk oldu.

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına İletişimci Wave İletişim Ajans Başkanı Mustafa Özkan konuk oldu.

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına İletişimci Wave İletişim Ajans Başkanı Mustafa Özkan konuk oldu.

In this episode of the Bible and Theology Matters podcast, Dr. Paul Weaver engages with Dr. David Allen Black to discuss the synoptic gospels, the synoptic problem, and the historical origins of the gospels. They explore the significance of external evidence, the role of the Church Fathers, and the implications of Markan priority. Dr. Black presents his fourfold gospel hypothesis, emphasizing the need for historical context in understanding the development of the gospels. The conversation also addresses common concerns regarding the reliability of the gospels and the importance of examining evidence critically.This video explores the **two source hypothesis** related to the origins of the Gospels in the Bible. The speaker explains how understanding this theory can impact the way people interpret biblical texts, and how it is related to the **synoptic problem**.-The term 'synoptic' means to view the gospels together.-The synoptic problem may not be a problem at all. -External evidence is often overlooked in gospel studies.-Markan priority is a dominant theory, but has its challenges. -The early church unanimously believed Matthew was the first gospel.-Historical context is crucial for understanding the gospels.-The Church Fathers provide valuable insights into gospel authorship.-The Q hypothesis is speculative and lacks concrete evidence.-The Christian faith is rooted in historical evidence.-Scholars should be approached with caution; personal investigation is essential.00:00 Introduction to the Podcast and Guest01:31 Understanding the Synoptic Gospels04:59 Exploring the Synoptic Problem05:19 Three Lines of Evidence for Gospel Order 08:32 Questioning Markan Priority10:39 Historical Context of Gospel Development17:50 The Role of Early Church Fathers24:11 The Fourfold Gospel Hypothesis28:08 Unity in the Early Church 29:09 Historical Context of the Gospels30:32 Occasional Nature of New Testament Letters31:58 The Role of the Gospels in Addressing Needs33:13 Critique of Markan Priority35:30 Historical Perspectives on Gospel Origins 36:57 The Importance of Church History39:24 The Enlightenment's Impact on Gospel Scholarship41:09 The Interconnectedness of Biblical Studies43:26 The Role of Language in Understanding the Gospels45:56 Different Styles and Purposes of Gospel Writers52:13 Addressing Lay Concerns about Gospel Reliability

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına Youthside CEO Olcay Aksoy konuk oldu.

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına Youthside CEO Olcay Aksoy konuk oldu.

Kesätoripodcastissa käydään läpi eurofutiksen kuumimmat siirrot ja hulluimmat huhut. * Kaikkien aikojen kaappaukset (2:50)* Viikon kuumat (19:42)* Englanti (35:00)* Italia (48:12)* Muu maailma (01:06:21)* Hullut huhut (01:16:58)Jakso nauhoitettu ke 25.6. Torinreunan kulmapöydässä istuvat tällä kertaa Kimmo Kantola & Pauli Loukola.Seuraa Instagramissa:https://www.instagram.com/seinakolmannelle/ (@seinakolmannelle)X:ssä:x.com/SKolmannelle

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına CXALL Çağrı Merkezi Satış ve Pazarlamadan Sorumlu GMY Serkan Demir konuk oldu.

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına CXALL Çağrı Merkezi Satış ve Pazarlamadan Sorumlu GMY Serkan Demir konuk oldu.

In this conversation, Dr. Will Varner discusses his extensive research on the Gospels, particularly focusing on the authorship of the Gospels and the his belief that Matthew was written first (Matthew Priority rather than Markan Priority) and then Luke, and finally Mark. He explores the historical context of Gospel writing, the influence of higher criticism on the New Testament, and the significance of early church fathers like Papias and Irenaeus. Varner argues for a reevaluation of the traditional views on Gospel authorship, emphasizing the Jewish context of Matthew and the implications of these findings for contemporary biblical scholarship and bible study as well as exegesis and hermeneutics. In this conversation, Dr. William Varner and Dr. Paul Weaver delve into the complexities of the Gospels, particularly focusing on the relationship between Matthew and Mark. They discuss the implications of the unique details found in Mark's Gospel. The conversation also touches on the role of the Holy Spirit in guiding the authors, the debate between Matthew Priority and Mark Priority, and the influence of modern scholarship on these views. Varner recommends several resources for those interested in exploring Matthew Priority further, emphasizing the importance of understanding the Gospels in their historical and theological context.0:00 Introduction02:21 - Dr. Varner's Journey and Insights on the Gospels07:15 - Debating Markan vs. Matthean Priority12:31 - The Role of Early Church Fathers in Establishing Priority19:00 - Understanding Papias and the "Hebrew Dialect" 24:52 - The Synoptic Problem and Mutual Dependence31:03 - Exploring the Influence of Academia on Gospel Studies38:07 - Recommended Resources for Further Study

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına Marka ve İletişim Danışmanı Osman Fatih Cengiz konuk oldu.

Cem Çatpınar'ın hazırlayıp sunduğu Cem Çatpınar ile Markanın Hikayesi programına Marka ve İletişim Danışmanı Osman Fatih Cengiz konuk oldu.

Geleneksel influencer marketing stratejileri artık etkisini yitiriyor. Makro influencer'lara yapılan büyük bütçeli yatırımlar, düşük etkileşim oranları ve zayıf dönüşümlerle markaları hayal kırıklığına uğratıyor. Ancak bu alanda yeni bir yıldız yükseliyor: mikro-influencer'lar.Mikro-Influencer Nedir?Mikro-influencer'lar, genellikle 10.000 ila 100.000 takipçiye sahip, belirli bir konuda içerik üreten ve hedef kitlesiyle yüksek etkileşim kurabilen kişilerden oluşur. Takipçileriyle birebir, samimi bağ kurabildikleri için verdikleri mesajlar daha güvenilir ve etkili olur. Niş topluluklara hitap etmeleri sayesinde marka mesajını daha isabetli iletebilirler.Neden Mikro-Influencer'lar Yükselişte?Yüksek Etkileşim Oranı: Mikro-influencer'ların etkileşim oranları genellikle %4 ila %8 arasındadır. Bu oran, makro influencer'larda çoğu zaman %1'in altına düşer. Daha az takipçiyle daha fazla dönüşüm sağlamak mümkündür.Samimiyet ve Güven: Mikro-influencer'lar, takipçileri tarafından “bir arkadaş” gibi görülür. Bu da markalar adına yapılan paylaşımların daha içten algılanmasını sağlar.Düşük Maliyet, Yüksek Getiri: Mikro-influencer'larla yapılan işbirlikleri, büyük bütçeler gerektirmez. Aynı bütçeyle 10 mikro influencer'la çalışarak çok daha geniş ve hedefli bir kampanya yürütmek mümkündür.Niş Hedefleme: Vegan beslenme, minimalist yaşam, anne-bebek gibi özel alanlara hitap eden içerik üreticileri sayesinde markanız tam da ulaşmak istediğiniz kitleye seslenebilir.Gerçek Bir Kampanya ÖrneğiBir doğal kozmetik markası, 15 farklı mikro-influencer ile yürüttüğü bir kampanyada satışlarını %30, site trafiğini ise %48 artırdı. Etkili içerikler, organik paylaşım ve özgün anlatım sayesinde mikro influencer'lar kampanyayı başarıya ulaştırdı.Mikro-Influencer Seçerken Nelere Dikkat Etmeli?Takipçi Kalitesi: Bot oranı düşük, organik ve ilgi uyandıran kitleye sahip olmalı.Etkileşim Oranı: Paylaşımlara gelen beğeni, yorum ve mesajlar analiz edilmeli.İçerik Uyumu: Influencer'ın paylaşım tarzı ve dilinin markayla örtüşmesi önemli.Samimiyet: Influencer gerçekten markaya inanmalı, aksi halde etkileşim düşük kalır.Strateji ve İşbirliği SüreciBaşarılı bir kampanya için önce hedef kitle netleştirilmeli, ardından platform seçimi (Instagram, TikTok, YouTube) yapılmalı. Influencer'a bire bir ulaşarak kişiselleştirilmiş teklifler sunulmalı. Kampanya sonunda KPI'lar (etkileşim, satış, tıklama vb.) ölçülmeli ve işe yarayan işbirlikleri tekrar planlanmalıdır.Doğru Kişiye, Doğru Zamanda UlaşmakArtık mesele daha fazla kişiye görünmek değil, doğru kişiye doğru zamanda ulaşmak. Mikro-influencer'lar düşük bütçeyle yüksek verim sağlayan stratejik iş ortakları haline geldi. Markanız için etkili bir mikro-influencer planı oluşturmak istiyorsanız, size memnuniyetle destek olurum.Daha fazla bilgi için bana instagram'dan @frktprk ulaşabilirsin.

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Willow Park Church.CONNECT WITH WILLOW PARK CHURCH DOWNTOWN HERE:• Instagram: https://instagram.com/wpdowntown• Facebook: https://facebook.com/wpdowntown• Website: https://willowparkchurch.com/downtown#willowparkchurchdowntown

E-posta pazarlaması, dijital pazarlamanın en yüksek yatırım getirisi sağlayan kanallarından biri olmaya devam ediyor. Ancak klasik “herkese gönder” dönemi artık geride kaldı. Günümüzde başarılı kampanyaların temelinde kişiselleştirme ve otomasyon yer alıyor.Kişiselleştirmenin GücüKullanıcılar, kendilerine özel hissettiren markalara daha fazla sadakat gösteriyor. Adının geçtiği bir e-posta, daha önce incelediği ürünlere özel öneriler ya da doğum gününde gelen özel teklifler, küçük ama etkili dokunuşlardır. Araştırmalara göre kişiselleştirilmiş e-postalar, genel kampanyalara göre %26 daha fazla açılma oranı ve %760 daha fazla gelir artışı sağlıyor.Otomasyon ile Zaman KazanınE-posta pazarlamasında her şeyi manuel yapmak mümkün değil. Bu noktada otomasyon sistemleri devreye giriyor. Kullanıcı davranışlarına göre tetiklenen e-postalarla, hem doğru zamanda iletişim kurabilir hem de iş yükünüzü ciddi şekilde azaltabilirsiniz. Örneğin:Sepetini terk eden kullanıcıya 30 dakika sonra hatırlatma1 haftadır giriş yapmayanlara teşvik e-postasıAbonelik süresi yaklaşanlara yenileme teklifiDoğru Araçlarla Profesyonel ÇözümlerOtomasyon sistemleri için farklı araçlar mevcut:Klaviyo: Shopify veya WooCommerce ile entegre çalışır ve yüksek başarı oranı sunar.Mailchimp: Küçük işletmeler için kullanıcı dostu arayüz sağlar.Kommo CRM: WhatsApp entegrasyonuyla güçlü bir pazarlama ve CRM altyapısı sunar.Özellikle Türkiye'deki kullanıcılar için verilerin yurt içinde saklanması gerektiği unutulmamalı. Bu nedenle, yerli servis sağlayıcıları ve yasal uyumluluk kriterlerine dikkat edilmelidir.Segmentasyon ile Kişiselleştirmeyi DerinleştirinKullanıcıları ilgi alanı, yaş, cinsiyet, davranış ve satın alma geçmişine göre gruplandırarak daha nokta atışı kampanyalar kurgulamak mümkün. Örneğin, cep telefonu kategorisini inceleyen kullanıcıya anne-bebek ürünü göstermek yerine, ilgi duyduğu kategoriye özel öneriler sunmak çok daha etkili olacaktır.Başarılı Örneklerden İlham AlınAmazon'un “şunu da beğenebilirsin” önerileri, Netflix'in “yarım bıraktığın dizi seni bekliyor” hatırlatmaları ya da Trendyol'un “Favori'ne özel indirim” bildirimleri, kişiselleştirme ve otomasyonun en iyi örneklerindendir.Küçük ölçekli işletmeler için de bu stratejiler çalışır. Takı satan bir sitenin, kullanıcının ilgilendiği taş tipine göre öneri göndermesi gibi. Bu e-postalar, kullanıcıda “bu marka beni tanıyor” hissi uyandırır.Yatırım Getirisi (ROI) Çok YüksekDoğru strateji, segmentasyon ve otomasyon uygulamalarıyla e-posta pazarlamasında 40 katına kadar yatırım getirisi sağlamak mümkün. Örneğin, Klaviyo ile ayda 150 dolar yatırım yapan bir marka, 6000 dolarlık gelir elde edebiliyor. ROI'nin bu kadar yüksek olduğu başka bir kanal bulmak oldukça zor.Spam gibi görünen toplu e-postalar yerine, kişiselleştirilmiş ve zamanında ulaşan otomatik mesajlar artık çok daha etkili. Markanızı bu doğrultuda yapılandırırsanız, hem satış hem müşteri sadakati tarafında ciddi sonuçlar alabilirsiniz.Yeni nesil pazarlama için kişiselleştirme ve otomasyonu stratejinizin merkezine koyun!Daha fazla bilgi için beni instagram'da @frktprk takip edebilirsin.

Episode 127In Part 2 of our series on the Synoptic Problem, Zach presents the case for Markan priority—the view that Mark was the first Gospel written. We explore the literary, linguistic, and structural reasons many scholars believe Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source. The discussion also dives into the proposed existence of “Q,” a hypothetical sayings source that may explain the shared material between Matthew and Luke not found in Mark. How do these theories shape our understanding of the Gospel narratives—and why does it matter? Join us as we examine this influential view and continue our journey through the origins of the Gospels.Find our videocast here: https://youtu.be/G1bOibH5qe4Music from #Uppbeat (free for Creators!):⁠https://uppbeat.io/t/reakt-music/deep-stone⁠License code: 2QZOZ2YHZ5UTE7C8Find more Take 2 Theology content at https://take2pod.wordpress.com/

Why does the Gospel of Mark make specific and repeated reference to the compassion of Jesus in the miracle stories? Compassion and the Characterization of the Markan Jesus (Brill, 2024) discusses the function that compassion has in the Markan characterization of Jesus, particularly in how the terminology employed depicts Jesus as entering the suffering of others. In doing so, it underscores how this portrayal is exceptional among the stories of miracle workers in ancient Greco-Roman and Jewish literature. In Mark, this compassion toward the suffering other is a central feature of the kingdom of God, an attribute the Markan audience is challenged to emulate. Jonathan W. Bryant, Ph.D (2023), Loyola University Chicago, is Senior Editor of Bibles and Bible reference works at Tyndale House Publishers and is an ordained minister of The Wesleyan Church. Jonathon Lookadoo is Associate Professor at the Presbyterian University and Theological Seminary in Seoul, South Korea. While his interests range widely over the world of early Christianity, he is the author of books on the Epistle of Barnabas, Ignatius of Antioch, and the Shepherd of Hermas, including The Christology of Ignatius of Antioch (Cascade, 2023). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Why does the Gospel of Mark make specific and repeated reference to the compassion of Jesus in the miracle stories? Compassion and the Characterization of the Markan Jesus (Brill, 2024) discusses the function that compassion has in the Markan characterization of Jesus, particularly in how the terminology employed depicts Jesus as entering the suffering of others. In doing so, it underscores how this portrayal is exceptional among the stories of miracle workers in ancient Greco-Roman and Jewish literature. In Mark, this compassion toward the suffering other is a central feature of the kingdom of God, an attribute the Markan audience is challenged to emulate. Jonathan W. Bryant, Ph.D (2023), Loyola University Chicago, is Senior Editor of Bibles and Bible reference works at Tyndale House Publishers and is an ordained minister of The Wesleyan Church. Jonathon Lookadoo is Associate Professor at the Presbyterian University and Theological Seminary in Seoul, South Korea. While his interests range widely over the world of early Christianity, he is the author of books on the Epistle of Barnabas, Ignatius of Antioch, and the Shepherd of Hermas, including The Christology of Ignatius of Antioch (Cascade, 2023). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biblical-studies

Why does the Gospel of Mark make specific and repeated reference to the compassion of Jesus in the miracle stories? Compassion and the Characterization of the Markan Jesus (Brill, 2024) discusses the function that compassion has in the Markan characterization of Jesus, particularly in how the terminology employed depicts Jesus as entering the suffering of others. In doing so, it underscores how this portrayal is exceptional among the stories of miracle workers in ancient Greco-Roman and Jewish literature. In Mark, this compassion toward the suffering other is a central feature of the kingdom of God, an attribute the Markan audience is challenged to emulate. Jonathan W. Bryant, Ph.D (2023), Loyola University Chicago, is Senior Editor of Bibles and Bible reference works at Tyndale House Publishers and is an ordained minister of The Wesleyan Church. Jonathon Lookadoo is Associate Professor at the Presbyterian University and Theological Seminary in Seoul, South Korea. While his interests range widely over the world of early Christianity, he is the author of books on the Epistle of Barnabas, Ignatius of Antioch, and the Shepherd of Hermas, including The Christology of Ignatius of Antioch (Cascade, 2023). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/christian-studies

Why does the Gospel of Mark make specific and repeated reference to the compassion of Jesus in the miracle stories? Compassion and the Characterization of the Markan Jesus (Brill, 2024) discusses the function that compassion has in the Markan characterization of Jesus, particularly in how the terminology employed depicts Jesus as entering the suffering of others. In doing so, it underscores how this portrayal is exceptional among the stories of miracle workers in ancient Greco-Roman and Jewish literature. In Mark, this compassion toward the suffering other is a central feature of the kingdom of God, an attribute the Markan audience is challenged to emulate. Jonathan W. Bryant, Ph.D (2023), Loyola University Chicago, is Senior Editor of Bibles and Bible reference works at Tyndale House Publishers and is an ordained minister of The Wesleyan Church. Jonathon Lookadoo is Associate Professor at the Presbyterian University and Theological Seminary in Seoul, South Korea. While his interests range widely over the world of early Christianity, he is the author of books on the Epistle of Barnabas, Ignatius of Antioch, and the Shepherd of Hermas, including The Christology of Ignatius of Antioch (Cascade, 2023).

Türkiye'de Dijital Pazarlama podcast'inin bu bölümünde, son dönemde ülkemizde gündemi meşgul eden önemli bir konuyu ele alıyoruz: Espressolab'e yönelik boykot ve bu tür krizlerin markalar üzerindeki etkileri. Bu bölümde, boykotun arka planını, markanın tepkisini, yaşanan gelişmeleri ve genel olarak markaların kriz anlarında nasıl bir yol izlemeleri gerektiğini detaylı bir şekilde inceliyoruz.Espressolab Boykotunun Arka PlanıMart 2025'te, İstanbul Büyükşehir Belediye Başkanı Ekrem İmamoğlu'nun tutuklanmasının ardından, siyasi arenada tansiyon yükseldi. Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi (CHP) Genel Başkanı Özgür Özel, bazı firmalara yönelik boykot çağrısında bulundu ve bu çağrıda Espressolab de hedef alınan markalar arasında yer aldı. Özel, konuşmasında, “Kahvenin her türlüsünü severim… Türk kahvesi, filtre kahve hepsini severim. Hangisini içerseniz için ama bunu sakın Espressolab'den içmeyin!” ifadelerini kullandı.Espressolab'in Tepkisi ve AçıklamasıBoykot çağrısının ardından Espressolab, bir açıklama yaparak neden boykot edildiklerini anlamadıklarını belirtti. Şirket, 2014 yılında bir üniversitenin içinde doğduklarını, herhangi bir siyasi bağlantıya sahip olmadıklarını ve devlet desteği ya da teşviki almadan 15 ülkede faaliyet gösteren bir marka haline geldiklerini ifade etti. Ayrıca, markalarının ardında görünmeyen ortaklar veya gizli destekçilerin olmadığını vurguladılar. Boykotun Markaya EtkisiBoykotların markalar üzerindeki etkisi, tüketicilerin tepkisinin büyüklüğüne ve medyanın ilgisine bağlı olarak değişebilir. Espressolab özelinde, boykotun finansal etkilerine dair net veriler mevcut değildir. Ancak, sosyal medyada ve basında geniş yankı bulduğu göz önüne alındığında, markanın itibarına yönelik olumsuz etkiler yaşanmış olabilir. Örneğin, Ekşi Sözlük'te kullanıcılar, bazı şubelerin boş olduğunu ve müşteri sayısında düşüş yaşandığını belirtmiştir. Markalar Boykot Durumunda Nasıl Hareket Etmeli?Bir markanın boykotla karşılaşması durumunda izleyebileceği stratejiler şunlardır: 1. Şeffaf ve Hızlı İletişim: Marka, boykotun nedenlerini anlamaya çalışmalı ve kamuoyuna şeffaf bir şekilde açıklamalıdır. Hızlı ve doğru bilgi akışı, spekülasyonların önüne geçer. 2. Tüketici Geri Bildirimlerini Dikkate Alma: Tüketicilerin endişelerini dinlemek ve onların değerlerine saygı göstermek, markanın güvenilirliğini artırır. 3. Sosyal Sorumluluk Projeleri: Toplumsal konulara duyarlılık gösteren projeler geliştirmek, markanın olumlu algısını güçlendirebilir. 4. Kriz İletişimi Planı: Olası kriz durumlarına karşı önceden hazırlıklı olmak, markanın hızlı ve etkili bir şekilde tepki vermesini sağlar. 5. Bağımsız Denetimler ve Sertifikalar: Ürün ve hizmetlerin belirli standartlara uygun olduğunu gösteren bağımsız sertifikalar, tüketicilerin güvenini kazanabilir.Espressolab'in Kuruluş Hikayesi ve Genel BilgilerEspressolab, 2014 yılında Esat Kocadağ tarafından İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi'nde ilk mağazasını açarak faaliyetlerine başlamıştır. Kocadağ ailesinin bir girişimi olan marka, Türkiye ve yurt dışında hızla büyüyerek 15 ülkede 360 mağazaya ulaşmıştır. Mağazalarının %93'ü franchise modeliyle işletilmektedir. Çalışan sayısına dair kesin bir bilgi bulunmamakla birlikte, geniş mağaza ağı göz önüne alındığında binlerce kişiye istihdam sağladığı tahmin edilmektedir.SonuçEspressolab'e yönelik boykot, markaların toplumsal ve siyasi olaylar karşısında nasıl konumlandıklarının ve iletişim stratejilerinin önemini bir kez daha göstermektedir. Markaların, tüketicilerle olan ilişkilerinde şeffaf, duyarlı ve proaktif bir yaklaşım sergilemeleri, olası krizlerin etkilerini minimize etmek açısından kritik öneme sahiptir.Bu bölümümüzde, Espressolab boykotu üzerinden markaların kriz yönetimi stratejilerini detaylı bir şekilde ele aldık. Umarız bu bilgiler, markaların benzer durumlarla karşılaştığında nasıl hareket etmeleri gerektiği konusunda faydalı olmuştur.

Nasıl Olunur'un 234'üncü bölümünde konu menopoz; konuğum Operatör Doktor Banu Çiftçi.Çiftçi, kadın hastalıkları ve doğum uzmanı. Mesleğinin ilk yıllarını da özellikle bu alanda başarılı çalışmalar yaparak, çocuk sahibi olamayan pek çok kişinin anne-baba olmasını sağlayarak geçiriyor. 34 yaşında aniden yaşadığı 'erken menopoz' süreciyle başka bir döneme giriyor. O dönemleri yayına bırakayım...Bugün sadece ve özellikle menopoz üzerine çalışan, sürekli araştıran biri Op. Dr. Banu Çiftçi.Belki konuğum hakkında çok özel bir bilgi verdim ama bu durum hem yayını başkalaştırdı hem de Banu Hanım'ın menopozu anlama, anlatma, kadınlara derman olma çabasının daha iyi anlaşılmasını sağlayacağını düşünüyorum. Bazı konu başlıkları da vereyim: ·      Menopoz nedir? Hastalık mıdır?·      Menopoza girmesek oluyor mu?·      Menopoz dönemleri, yaş aralıkları neler? Menopoz geciktirilebilir mi?·      ‘Aslında' östrojen nedir? Progesteron nedir? Vücutta ne işe yarar, yokluklarında ne gibi sıkıntılar yaratırlar?·      Hormon tedavisinin yeri ve önemi! Nedir, ne değildir?·      Menopoz döneminde devlet desteği·      Erken menopoz nedir?·      Erken menopozdan geri dönüş var mı?·      Menopoz dönemi belirtileri, yapılması gerekenler…·      Biyoeşdeğer hormon tedavisi nedir, ne değildir?·      Menopoz-hormon-kanser ilişkisi hangi dönemde nasıl kuruldu? Bugün neredeyiz?·      Menopoz ile ilgili doktor desteği ne zaman alınmalı, geç kalmak söz konusu mu?Ne mutlu ki, bu bölümde bir de destekçim var: Penti.Konuğum bile belli değildi. Markanın iki yıllık bir çalışma süreci sonunda ‘Benim Menopozum' isminde kolajen içerikli, serinleten, ultraviyole etkili iç çamaşırları, pijama ve atletleri içeren bir serisi olduğunu öğrenince ben aradım onları. Onların araştırmalarını, yaş almayı kucaklayan ‘pro-aging' kavramına yaklaşımlarını da aktarmak istedim. Özetle benim bir #işbirliğim var bu bölümde. Banu Hanım'ın bu durumla bir ilgisi yok ama incelik gösterdi.Bu defa "umarım seversiniz" demeyeceğim bölüm için, umarım "bu bölümden çok faydalanırsınız"; iyi gelsin! Gazeteci#Journalist ~ #Art- #Food- #Travel lover ~ #EnthusiastBooks:

We see in the "Markan sandwich" found in the story of the raising of Jairus' daughter, that Jesus makes us clean in a faith that keeps us. We remember that Jesus has completely saved us and leaves no work to be done. The work of the cross is finished and complete, so we continue in the faith that has us. 

Discussion Questions Sermon Overview: Jesus is pleased when we respond to his worth with extravagant love.1. Those who recognize Jesus' worth respond with extravagant love. (vv. 1-3, 10-11)2. Jesus is pleased by our responsive love. (vv. 4-7)3. Jesus' worth is particularly seen in his death out of love for us. (vv. 8-9)Digging Deeper:    Read Mark 14:1-11  1. Mark (the author of this gospel), frequently “sandwiches” one story into the middle of another (often referred to as a “Markan sandwich”). We see that here in 14:1-11 (vv. 1-2 and vv. 10-11 are “the bread”, vv. 3-9 are “the meat”). What are some of the contrasts this “sandwich” helps us see? 2. Mark goes out of his way to make sure we, his readers, see the extravagant nature of the woman's gift. What are some of the details he includes that help us see this? Why do you think Mark is so determined to help us see this? What does the value of the gift communicate about the worth of the one to whom it is given? 3. Those gathered around the table are scandalized by what in their eyes is the woman's “wastefulness.” (v. 4).  What accounts for this contrast in perspectives (between those grumbling about this “waste” and the woman)? What did the woman see that the others did not? 4. In order to respond (like the woman) to Jesus' worth with extravagant acts of love, we must first recognize his worth.  How does that happen? Are there things we can do to see Jesus' worth more clearly?     5. What gets in the way of you recognizing the worth of Jesus? (This could be other things you're drawn to more than Jesus, distractions, etc).6. While we don't have the opportunity to express a love for Jesus the exact same way the woman did, there are ways we can be extravagant in our outpouring of love for Christ. What are some examples of “extravagant love” for Jesus you have witnessed?  What might it look like for you to display extravagant love for your Savior?7. Why is it crucial that we distinguish between displays of love to Jesus because he loved us, and displays of love to Jesus so that he will love us?  What are some of the disastrous consequences that can result from failing to get this distinction right? 8. Because Jesus loved his people, he died for them (vv. 8-9), showing his worth. What are some ways we can seek to be regularly mindful of and grateful for Jesus' loving sacrifice for us?9. A life of extravagant love for Jesus is a life that will not look “normal”; it will be markedly different from the lives of those around us.  How might our acts of love for Christ (e.g. - extravagant uses of our time, energy, money) point those who don't know Jesus in our lives to the worth of Christ? Prayer

The world of insights is continuously expanding. But what does that mean for insights professionals? And what skills do you need to stay ahead as the industry evolves?In this episode, we dive deep into these topics with Bipul Markan, Head of Research and Insights MENA at Assembly Global. He encourages insights leaders to broaden their capabilities, embrace new tools, and foster a culture of learning within their teams to navigate the shifts in consumer behavior and the world of insights.We also discuss: How synthetic data offers valuable opportunities in market research, especially for experimentation and data augmentation.How to supplement traditional research methods with newer methodologies.Why advanced analytics are worth the investment.

Reading Mark 16:14-20, finishing up our study of the Markan appendix, the longer ending of the gospel of Mark that wasn't included in the earliest manuscripts. Visit wwutt.com for all our videos!

Reading Mark 16:9-13 in the longer ending of Mark, also considering the different women who were at the resurrection, and where these extra passages came from. Visit wwutt.com for all our videos!

Pastor Erina kicks off our fall sermon series by providing us some historical context for the imperial backdrop of the Markan narrative and examining the beginnings of Jesus's ministry in Mark 1. How does the arrival of Jesus- in movements of belonging, belovedness, and vulnerability- provide us an antidote to Empire? How does Jesus provide us new understandings of messiahship that defy the expectations of rule based in power and domination? *Note: The sermon recording starts a little late. 

Hedef Holding iştiraki Info Yatırım'ın yeni mobil uygulaması Infox, yatırım dünyasında kullanıcılarına kapsamlı çözümler sunmayı hedefliyor. Yeni ürünün detaylarını ürün geliştirme direktörü Elçin ile konuştuk ve yatırımın her yönüne hitap eden uygulamayı ondan dinledik. Elçin İnan Ballı: https://www.linkedin.com/in/el%C3%A7in-inan-ball%C4%B1-99298448/ Infox: https://infoyatirim.com/islem-platformlari/infox 00:00:00 - Swipeline Intro 00:00:42 - Infox nedir? 00:04:05 - Markanın ismi nereden geliyor? 00:05:50 - Uygulamanın kapsamı 00:12:25 - Yapay zeka entegrasyonu 00:15:48 - İlk ay sonundaki rakamlar 00:17:30 - Gelecek planınız neler? 00:20:02 - Swipeline Outro - *GÜNLÜK E-POSTA BÜLTENİMİZ*

Opening Question Who is more in need of immediate care: a person with a cold, or someone suffering a heart stroke? Introduction Several “boat scenes” in Mark's gospel reveal misunderstandings of the disciples and give Jesus ample opportunity to teach and rebuke. The first is found at the end of Mark 4. Chapter 5 continues the exorcism stories, and concludes with another Markan “sandwich story” about two daughters healed by Jesus' touch and another Messianic secret “hushing.” Chapter 6 includes yet another “sandwich story,” explaining the death of John the Baptist. Mark 4:35-41 When the storm on the sea arises, Jesus is sleeping. The ...

Mark interweaves 2 miracle stories which tell us about 2 forms of prayer.  (Chris Muglia - Lord, I Need You (Chris Tomlin) )The homilies of Msgr. Stephen J. AvilaPastor, St. Joseph, Guardian of the Holy Family Parish, Falmouth, MAThanks for listening! May God's Word find a home in you.

Sermon preached by Dr. B.J. Hutto at Hendricks Avenue Baptist Church on Sunday, June 9, 2024.

The hypothesis that the Gospel of Mark was the first of the three synoptic gospels to be written, and was used as a source by the other two (Matthew and Luke), is known as Markan Priority. In recent times, some skeptics have said the four canonical Gospels were written so late after Jesus, they aren't reliable. Tradition, Church teaching, and historical sources teach us much about when the original texts were actually penned. Enjoy this Encore presentation!  Jimmy Akin's Mysterious World podcast available at https://amzn.to/3YJpTqZ Books by Jimmy Akin available at https://amzn.to/3shLkD8     THANKS for the many wonderful comments, messages, ratings and reviews. All of them are regularly posted for your reading pleasure on https://patreon.com/markvinet where you can also get exclusive access to Bonus episodes, Ad-Free content, Extra materials, and an eBook Welcome Gift when joining our growing community on Patreon or Donate on PayPal at https://bit.ly/3cx9OOL and receive an eBook GIFT. SUPPORT this series by purchasing any product on Amazon using this FREE entry LINK https://amzn.to/3POlrUD (Amazon gives us credit at no extra charge to you). It costs you nothing to shop using this FREE store entry link and by doing so encourages & helps us create more quality content. Thanks! Mark Vinet's HISTORY OF NORTH AMERICA podcast: www.parthenonpodcast.com/history-of-north-america                                                  Mark's TIMELINE video channel: https://youtube.com/c/TIMELINE_MarkVinet      Website: https://markvinet.com/podcast Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/denarynovels  Twitter: https://twitter.com/HistoricalJesu   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mark.vinet.9  YouTube Podcast Playlist: https://www.bit.ly/34tBizu  TikTok: https://tiktok.com/@historyofnorthamerica  Books: https://amzn.to/3k8qrGM  Linktree: https://linktr.ee/WadeOrganization                                                                  Audio Credit: When Were the Gospels Written? (The Dates of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) from Jimmy Akin's Mysterious World podcast with Dom Bettinelli. Audio excerpts reproduced under the Fair Use (Fair Dealings) Legal Doctrine for purposes such as criticism, comment, teaching, education, scholarship, research and news reporting.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, Erin Warren teaches through Mark 15-16 and wraps up this study called Unexpected Savior. It is hard to read these verses and see what our Savior suffered on our behalf, but we must press in. Mark pulls out all of his juxtapositions here: irony, insider/outsider motifs, the secret gospel and one final Markan sandwich to put an exclamation point on his account of Jesus' life. His final verses remind us of who Jesus is and how He accomplished His mission, and the account comes to an intentionally abrupt close that forces us to make our decision about Jesus and ultimately, our lives. The Gospel of Mark challenges the expected ideal of the Messiah—not a conquering king or a wish-granting genie, but rather a man of sorrows and a suffering servant. This short yet impactful account of Jesus' life reveals the character of the One who came to save us. Jesus was not what they were expecting; He was better. This podcast is a companion teaching to the Feasting on Truth Bible study. You can find more information, including a link to purchase the study book, at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠FeastingOnTruth.com/Mark⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Links Mentioned in this Episode: Enjoy God's Word Conference: https://ehw--katieorr.thrivecart.com/enjoy-gods-word-2024-ephesians/  For more info on "Feasting On Truth: Savor the Life-giving Word of God" or Erin's other Bible studies: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠FeastingOnTruth.com/Books⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Fulfilled: The Unexpected Story of the Redeemer: FeastingOnTruth.com/Fulfilled The Garden, The Curtain, and The Cross: FeastingOnTruth.com/Resources Sign up for emails: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠FeastingOnTruth.com⁠⁠

In this episode, Erin Warren teaches through Mark 14 - all 72 verses! The time has come. This chapter is packed with the last days before the cross. Jesus is anointed in Bethany, shares the Passover meal with disciples, and prays in the Garden of Gethsemane. He is arrested and His trial begins. These are familiar stories, but with three Markan sandwiches, our challenge is to read this within Mark's structure and better understand our Unexpected Savior. The Gospel of Mark challenges the expected ideal of the Messiah—not a conquering king or a wish-granting genie, but rather a man of sorrows and a suffering servant. This short yet impactful account of Jesus' life reveals the character of the One who came to save us. Jesus was not what they were expecting; He was better. This podcast is a companion teaching to the Feasting on Truth Bible study. You can find more information, including a link to purchase the study book, at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠FeastingOnTruth.com/Mark⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Links Mentioned in this Episode:The Rose Guide to the Tabernacle: FeastingOnTruth.com/Resources Further Teaching on parallels to Isaiah 53: https://youtu.be/g5kr9xnW-_g For more info on Everyday Prayers for Faith or Erin's other books: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠FeastingOnTruth.com/Books⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Sign up for emails: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠FeastingOnTruth.com⁠⁠

Today BibleWorm reads from the Markan apocalypse, Mark 13:1-8 and 24-37 - a vision of the thorough undoing of the world as we have come to know it. The most grand of buildings will fall. The weather patterns that sustain our food and water will falter. Even heaven and earth will not endure.  Our persistent question reading these texts was – for better and for worse, is - what do people do when they think the world is going to end? How can this knowledge root us in the teachings of the Torah, or the word of Jesus, without prompting us to shrink back from a world that still needs us?

When Jesus sends the disciples to do ministry in the Gospel of Mark, the story of their ministerial exploits is interrupted by a flashback to the death of John the Baptist. We continue our series on a unique aspect of the Gospel of Mark where one story is hidden inside of another in something called a Markan sandwich. What does Mark have to teach us about the cost of following Christ? And if the cost is so high, what do we get in return?

When Jesus sends the disciples to do ministry in the Gospel of Mark, the story of their ministerial exploits is interrupted by a flashback to the death of John the Baptist. We continue our series on a unique aspect of the Gospel of Mark where one story is hidden inside of another in something called a Markan sandwich. What does Mark have to teach us about the cost of following Christ? And if the cost is so high, what do we get in return?

Pastor Jen kicks off our Lenten sermon series by introducing the concept of a Markan sandwich and invites us to examine two stories that are intentionally placed together in the Gospel of Mark. What is Mark trying to tell us about Jesus' purpose through the lens of these healings?

Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts Let's face it the New Testament probably calls Jesus God (or god) a couple of times and so do early Christian authors in the second century. However, no one offers much of an explanation for what they mean by the title. Did early Christians think Jesus was God because he represented Yahweh? Did they think he was God because he shared the same eternal being as the Father? Did they think he was a god because that's just what they would call any immortalized human who lived in heaven? In this presentation I focus on the question from the perspective of Greco-Roman theology. Drawing on the work of David Litwa, Andrew Perriman, Barry Blackburn, and tons of ancient sources I seek to show how Mediterranean converts to Christianity would have perceived Jesus based on their cultural and religious assumptions. This presentation is from the 3rd Unitarian Christian Alliance Conference on October 20, 2023 in Springfield, OH. Here is the original pdf of this paper. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5Z3QbQ7dHc —— Links —— See more scholarly articles by Sean Finnegan Get the transcript of this episode Support Restitutio by donating here Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Sean Finnegan on Twitter @RestitutioSF Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play them out on the air Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library. Who is Sean Finnegan?  Read his bio here Introduction When early Christian authors called Jesus “god” (or “God”) what did they mean?[1] Modern apologists routinely point to pre-Nicene quotations in order to prove that early Christians always believed in the deity of Christ, by which they mean that he is of the same substance (homoousios) as the Father. However, most historians agree that Christians before the fourth century simply didn't have the cognitive categories available yet to think of Christ in Nicene or Chalcedonian ways. If this consensus is correct, it behooves us to consider other options for defining what early Christian authors meant. The obvious place to go to get an answer to our initial question is the New Testament. However, as is well known, the handful of instances in which authors unambiguously applied god (θεός) to Christ are fraught with textual uncertainty, grammatical ambiguity, and hermeneutical elasticity.[2]  What's more, granting that these contested texts[3] all call Jesus “god” provides little insight into what they might mean by that phrase. Turning to the second century, the earliest handful of texts that say Jesus is god are likewise textually uncertain or terse.[4] We must wait until the second half of the second century and beyond to have more helpful material to examine. We know that in the meanwhile some Christians were saying Jesus was god. What did they mean? One promising approach is to analyze biblical texts that call others gods. We find helpful parallels with the word god (אֱלֹהִים) applied to Moses (Exod 7.1; 4.16), judges (Exod 21.6; 22.8-9), kings (Is 9.6; Ps 45.6), the divine council (Ps 82.1, 6), and angels (Ps 8.6). These are texts in which God imbues his agents with his authority to represent him in some way. This rare though significant way of calling a representative “god,” continues in the NT with Jesus' clever defense to his accusers in John 10.34-36. Lexicons[5] have long recognized this “Hebraistic” usage and recent study tools such as the New English Translation (NET)[6] and the Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentary[7] also note this phenomenon. But, even if this agency perspective is the most natural reading of texts like Heb 1.8, later Christians, apart from one or two exceptions appear to be ignorant of this usage.[8] This interpretation was likely a casualty of the so-called parting of the ways whereby Christianity transitioned from a second-temple-Jewish movement to a Gentile-majority religion. As such, to grasp what early postapostolic Christians believed, we must turn our attention elsewhere. Michael Bird is right when he says, “Christian discourses about deity belong incontrovertibly in the Greco-Roman context because it provided the cultural encyclopedia that, in diverse ways, shaped the early church's Christological conceptuality and vocabulary.”[9] Learning Greco-Roman theology is not only important because that was the context in which early Christians wrote, but also because from the late first century onward, most of our Christian authors converted from that worldview. Rather than talking about the Hellenization of Christianity, we should begin by asking how Hellenists experienced Christianization. In other words, Greco-Roman beliefs about the gods were the default lens through which converts first saw Christ. In order to explore how Greco-Roman theology shaped what people believed about Jesus as god, we do well to begin by asking how they defined a god. Andrew Perriman offers a helpful starting point. “The gods,” he writes, “are mostly understood as corporeal beings, blessed with immortality, larger, more beautiful, and more powerful than their mortal analogues.”[10] Furthermore, there were lots of them! The sublunar realm was, in the words of Paula Fredriksen, “a god-congested place.”[11] What's more, “[S]harp lines and clearly demarcated boundaries between divinity and humanity were lacking."[12] Gods could appear as people and people could ascend to become gods. Comprehending what Greco-Roman people believed about gods coming down and humans going up will occupy the first part of this paper. Only once we've adjusted our thinking to their culture, will we walk through key moments in the life of Jesus of Nazareth to hear the story with ancient Mediterranean ears. Lastly, we'll consider the evidence from sources that think of Jesus in Greco-Roman categories. Bringing this all together we'll enumerate the primary ways to interpret the phrase “Jesus is god” available to Christians in the pre-Nicene period. Gods Coming Down and Humans Going Up The idea that a god would visit someone is not as unusual as it first sounds. We find plenty of examples of Yahweh himself or non-human representatives visiting people in the Hebrew Bible.[13] One psalmist even referred to angels or “heavenly beings” (ESV) as אֱלֹהִים (gods).[14] The Greco-Roman world too told stories about divine entities coming down to interact with people. Euripides tells about the time Zeus forced the god Apollo to become a human servant in the house of Admetus, performing menial labor as punishment for killing the Cyclopes (Alcestis 1). Baucis and Philemon offered hospitality to Jupiter and Mercury when they appeared in human form (Ovid, Metamorphoses 8.26-34). In Homer's Odyssey onlookers warn Antinous for flinging a stool against a stranger since “the gods do take on the look of strangers dropping in from abroad”[15] (17.534-9). Because they believed the boundary between the divine realm and the Earth was so permeable, Mediterranean people were always on guard for an encounter with a god in disguise. In addition to gods coming down, in special circumstances, humans could ascend and become gods too. Diodorus of Sicily demarcated two types of gods: those who are “eternal and imperishable, such as the sun and the moon” and “the other gods…terrestrial beings who attained to immortal honour”[16] (The Historical Library of Diodorus the Sicilian 6.1). By some accounts, even the Olympian gods, including Kronos and Uranus were once mortal men.[17] Among humans who could become divine, we find several distinguishable categories, including heroes, miracle workers, and rulers. We'll look at each briefly before considering how the story of Jesus would resonate with those holding a Greco-Roman worldview. Deified Heroes Cornutus the Stoic said, “[T]he ancients called heroes those who were so strong in body and soul that they seemed to be part of a divine race.” (Greek Theology 31)[18] At first this statement appears to be a mere simile, but he goes on to say of Heracles (Hercules), the Greek hero par excellence, “his services had earned him apotheosis” (ibid.). Apotheosis (or deification) is the process by which a human ascends into the divine realm. Beyond Heracles and his feats of strength, other exceptional individuals became deified for various reasons. Amphiarus was a seer who died in the battle at Thebes. After opening a chasm in the earth to swallow him in battle, “Zeus made him immortal”[19] (Apollodorus, Library of Greek Mythology 3.6). Pausanias says the custom of the inhabitants of Oropos was to drop coins into Amphiarus' spring “because this is where they say Amphiarus rose up as a god”[20] (Guide to Greece 1.34). Likewise, Strabo speaks about a shrine for Calchas, a deceased diviner from the Trojan war (Homer, Illiad 1.79-84), “where those consulting the oracle sacrifice a black ram to the dead and sleep in its hide”[21] (Strabo, Geography 6.3.9). Though the great majority of the dead were locked away in the lower world of Hades, leading a shadowy pitiful existence, the exceptional few could visit or speak from beyond the grave. Lastly, there was Zoroaster the Persian prophet who, according to Dio Chrysostom, was enveloped by fire while he meditated upon a mountain. He was unharmed and gave advice on how to properly make offerings to the gods (Dio Chrysostom, Discourses 36.40). The Psuedo-Clementine Homilies include a story about a lightning bolt striking and killing Zoroaster. After his devotees buried his body, they built a temple on the site, thinking that “his soul had been sent for by lightning” and they “worshipped him as a god”[22] (Homily 9.5.2). Thus, a hero could have extraordinary strength, foresight, or closeness to the gods resulting in apotheosis and ongoing worship and communication. Deified Miracle Workers Beyond heroes, Greco-Roman people loved to tell stories about deified miracle workers. Twice Orpheus rescued a ship from a storm by praying to the gods (Diodorus of Sicily 4.43.1f; 48.5f). After his death, surviving inscriptions indicate that he both received worship and was regarded as a god in several cities.[23] Epimenides “fell asleep in a cave for fifty-seven years”[24] (Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers 1.109). He also predicted a ten-year period of reprieve from Persian attack in Athens (Plato Laws 1.642D-E). Plato called him a divine man (θεῖος ἀνήρ) (ibid.) and Diogenes talked of Cretans sacrificing to him as a god (Diogenes, Lives 1.114). Iamblichus said Pythagoras was the son of Apollo and a mortal woman (Life of Pythagoras 2). Nonetheless, the soul of Pythagoras enjoyed multiple lives, having originally been “sent to mankind from the empire of Apollo”[25] (Life 2). Diogenes and Lucian enumerate the lives the pre-existent Pythagoras led, including Aethalides, Euphorbus, Hermotimus, and Pyrrhus (Diogenes, Life of Pythagoras 4; Lucian, The Cock 16-20). Hermes had granted Pythagoras the gift of “perpetual transmigration of his soul”[26] so he could remember his lives while living or dead (Diogenes, Life 4). Ancient sources are replete with Pythagorean miracle stories.[27] Porphyry mentions several, including taming a bear, persuading an ox to stop eating beans, and accurately predicting a catch of fish (Life of Pythagoras 23-25). Porphyry said Pythagoras accurately predicted earthquakes and “chased away a pestilence, suppressed violent winds and hail, [and] calmed storms on rivers and on seas” (Life 29).[28] Such miracles, argued the Pythagoreans made Pythagoras “a being superior to man, and not to a mere man” (Iamblichus, Life 28).[29] Iamblichus lays out the views of Pythagoras' followers, including that he was a god, a philanthropic daemon, the Pythian, the Hyperborean Apollo, a Paeon, a daemon inhabiting the moon, or an Olympian god (Life 6). Another pre-Socratic philosopher was Empedocles who studied under Pythagoras. To him sources attribute several miracles, including stopping a damaging wind, restoring the wind, bringing dry weather, causing it to rain, and even bringing someone back from Hades (Diogenes, Lives 8.59).[30] Diogenes records an incident in which Empedocles put a woman into a trance for thirty days before sending her away alive (8.61). He also includes a poem in which Empedocles says, “I am a deathless god, no longer mortal, I go among you honored by all, as is right”[31] (8.62). Asclepius was a son of the god Apollo and a human woman (Cornutus, Greek Theology 33). He was known for healing people from diseases and injuries (Pindar, Pythian 3.47-50). “[H]e invented any medicine he wished for the sick, and raised up the dead”[32] (Pausanias, Guide to Greece 2.26.4). However, as Diodorus relates, Hades complained to Zeus on account of Asclepius' diminishing his realm, which resulted in Zeus zapping Asclepius with a thunderbolt, killing him (4.71.2-3). Nevertheless, Asclepius later ascended into heaven to become a god (Hyginus, Fables 224; Cicero, Nature of the Gods 2.62).[33] Apollonius of Tyana was a famous first century miracle worker. According to Philostratus' account, the locals of Tyana regard Apollonius to be the son of Zeus (Life 1.6). Apollonius predicted many events, interpreted dreams, and knew private facts about people. He rebuked and ridiculed a demon, causing it to flee, shrieking as it went (Life 2.4).[34] He even once stopped a funeral procession and raised the deceased to life (Life 4.45). What's more he knew every human language (Life 1.19) and could understand what sparrows chirped to each other (Life 4.3). Once he instantaneously transported himself from Smyrna to Ephesus (Life 4.10). He claimed knowledge of his previous incarnation as the captain of an Egyptian ship (Life 3.23) and, in the end, Apollonius entered the temple of Athena and vanished, ascending from earth into heaven to the sound of a choir singing (Life 8.30). We have plenty of literary evidence that contemporaries and those who lived later regarded him as a divine man (Letters 48.3)[35] or godlike (ἰσόθεος) (Letters 44.1) or even just a god (θεός) (Life 5.24). Deified Rulers Our last category of deified humans to consider before seeing how this all relates to Jesus is rulers. Egyptians, as indicated from the hieroglyphs left in the pyramids, believed their deceased kings to enjoy afterlives as gods. They could become star gods or even hunt and consume other gods to absorb their powers.[36] The famous Macedonian conqueror, Alexander the Great, carried himself as a god towards the Persians though Plutarch opines, “[he] was not at all vain or deluded but rather used belief in his divinity to enslave others”[37] (Life of Alexander 28). This worship continued after his death, especially in Alexandria where Ptolemy built a tomb and established a priesthood to conduct religious honors to the deified ruler. Even the emperor Trajan offered a sacrifice to the spirit of Alexander (Cassius Dio, Roman History 68.30). Another interesting example is Antiochus I of Comagene who called himself “Antiochus the just [and] manifest god, friend of the Romans [and] friend of the Greeks.”[38] His tomb boasted four colossal figures seated on thrones: Zeus, Heracles, Apollo, and himself. The message was clear: Antiochus I wanted his subjects to recognize his place among the gods after death. Of course, the most relevant rulers for the Christian era were the Roman emperors. The first official Roman emperor Augustus deified his predecessor, Julius Caesar, celebrating his apotheosis with games (Suetonius, Life of Julius Caesar 88). Only five years after Augustus died, eastern inhabitants of the Roman Empire at Priene happily declared “the birthday of the god Augustus” (ἡ γενέθλιος ἡμέρα τοῦ θεοῦ)[39] to be the start of their provincial year. By the time of Tacitus, a century after Augustus died, the wealthy in Rome had statues of the first emperor in their gardens for worship (Annals 1.73). The Roman historian Appian explained that the Romans regularly deify emperors at death “provided he has not been a despot or a disgrace”[40] (The Civil Wars 2.148).  In other words, deification was the default setting for deceased emperors. Pliny the Younger lays it on pretty thick when he describes the process. He says Nero deified Claudius to expose him; Titus deified Vespasian and Domitian so he could be the son and brother of gods. However, Trajan deified Nerva because he genuinely believed him to be more than a human (Panegyric 11). In our little survey, we've seen three main categories of deified humans: heroes, miracle workers, and good rulers. These “conceptions of deity,” writes David Litwa, “were part of the “preunderstanding” of Hellenistic culture.”[41] He continues: If actual cases of deification were rare, traditions of deification were not. They were the stuff of heroic epic, lyric song, ancient mythology, cultic hymns, Hellenistic novels, and popular plays all over the first-century Mediterranean world. Such discourses were part of mainstream, urban culture to which most early Christians belonged. If Christians were socialized in predominantly Greco-Roman environments, it is no surprise that they employed and adapted common traits of deities and deified men to exalt their lord to divine status.[42] Now that we've attuned our thinking to Mediterranean sensibilities about gods coming down in the shape of humans and humans experiencing apotheosis to permanently dwell as gods in the divine realm, our ears are attuned to hear the story of Jesus with Greco-Roman ears. Hearing the Story of Jesus with Greco-Roman Ears How would second or third century inhabitants of the Roman empire have categorized Jesus? Taking my cue from Litwa's treatment in Iesus Deus, I'll briefly work through Jesus' conception, transfiguration, miracles, resurrection, and ascension. Miraculous Conception Although set within the context of Jewish messianism, Christ's miraculous birth would have resonated differently with Greco-Roman people. Stories of gods coming down and having intercourse with women are common in classical literature. That these stories made sense of why certain individuals were so exceptional is obvious. For example, Origen related a story about Apollo impregnating Amphictione who then gave birth to Plato (Against Celsus 1.37). Though Mary's conception did not come about through intercourse with a divine visitor, the fact that Jesus had no human father would call to mind divine sonship like Pythagoras or Asclepius. Celsus pointed out that the ancients “attributed a divine origin to Perseus, and Amphion, and Aeacus, and Minos” (Origen, Against Celsus 1.67). Philostratus records a story of the Egyptian god Proteus saying to Apollonius' mother that she would give birth to himself (Life of Apollonius of Tyana 1.4). Since people were primed to connect miraculous origins with divinity, typical hearers of the birth narratives of Matthew or Luke would likely think that this baby might be either be a descended god or a man destined to ascend to become a god. Miracles and Healing As we've seen, Jesus' miracles would not have sounded unbelievable or even unprecedent to Mediterranean people. Like Jesus, Orpheus and Empedocles calmed storms, rescuing ships. Though Jesus provided miraculous guidance on how to catch fish, Pythagoras foretold the number of fish in a great catch. After the fishermen painstakingly counted them all, they were astounded that when they threw them back in, they were still alive (Porphyry, Life 23-25). Jesus' ability to foretell the future, know people's thoughts, and cast out demons all find parallels in Apollonius of Tyana. As for resurrecting the dead, we have the stories of Empedocles, Asclepius, and Apollonius. The last of which even stopped a funeral procession to raise the dead, calling to mind Jesus' deeds in Luke 7.11-17. When Lycaonians witnessed Paul's healing of a man crippled from birth, they cried out, “The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men” (Acts 14.11). Another time when no harm befell Paul after a poisonous snake bit him on Malta, Gentile onlookers concluded “he was a god” (Acts 28.6). Barry Blackburn makes the following observation: [I]n view of the tendency, most clearly seen in the Epimenidean, Pythagorean, and Apollonian traditions, to correlate impressive miracle-working with divine status, one may justifiably conclude that the evangelical miracle traditions would have helped numerous gentile Christians to arrive at and maintain belief in Jesus' divine status.[43] Transfiguration Ancient Mediterranean inhabitants believed that the gods occasionally came down disguised as people. Only when gods revealed their inner brilliant natures could people know that they weren't mere humans. After his ship grounded on the sands of Krisa, Apollo leaped from the ship emitting flashes of fire “like a star in the middle of day…his radiance shot to heaven”[44] (Homeric Hymns, Hymn to Apollo 440). Likewise, Aphrodite appeared in shining garments, brighter than a fire and shimmering like the moon (Hymn to Aphrodite 85-89). When Demeter appeared to Metaneira, she initially looked like an old woman, but she transformed herself before her. “Casting old age away…a delightful perfume spread…a radiance shone out far from the goddess' immortal flesh…and the solid-made house was filled with a light like the lightning-flash”[45] (Hymn to Demeter 275-280). Homer wrote about Odysseus' transformation at the golden wand of Athena in which his clothes became clean, he became taller, and his skin looked younger. His son, Telemachus cried out, “Surely you are some god who rules the vaulting skies”[46] (Odyssey 16.206). Each time the observers conclude the transfigured person is a god. Resurrection & Ascension In defending the resurrection of Jesus, Theophilus of Antioch said, “[Y]ou believe that Hercules, who burned himself, lives; and that Aesculapius [Asclepius], who was struck with lightning, was raised”[47] (Autolycus 1.13). Although Hercules' physical body burnt, his transformed pneumatic body continued on as the poet Callimachus said, “under a Phrygian oak his limbs had been deified”[48] (Callimachus, Hymn to Artemis 159). Others thought Hercules ascended to heaven in his burnt body, which Asclepius subsequently healed (Lucian, Dialogue of the Gods 13). After his ascent, Diodorus relates how the people first sacrificed to him “as to a hero” then in Athens they began to honor him “with sacrifices like as to a god”[49] (The Historical Library 4.39). As for Asclepius, his ascension resulted in his deification as Cyprian said, “Aesculapius is struck by lightning, that he may rise into a god”[50] (On the Vanity of Idols 2). Romulus too “was torn to pieces by the hands of a hundred senators”[51] and after death ascended into heaven and received worship (Arnobius, Against the Heathen 1.41). Livy tells of how Romulus was “carried up on high by a whirlwind” and that immediately afterward “every man present hailed him as a god and son of a god”[52] (The Early History of Rome 1.16). As we can see from these three cases—Hercules, Asclepius, and Romulus—ascent into heaven was a common way of talking about deification. For Cicero, this was an obvious fact. People “who conferred outstanding benefits were translated to heaven through their fame and our gratitude”[53] (Nature 2.62). Consequently, Jesus' own resurrection and ascension would have triggered Gentiles to intuit his divinity. Commenting on the appearance of the immortalized Christ to the eleven in Galilee, Wendy Cotter said, “It is fair to say that the scene found in [Mat] 28:16-20 would be understood by a Greco-Roman audience, Jew or Gentile, as an apotheosis of Jesus.”[54] Although I beg to differ with Cotter's whole cloth inclusion of Jews here, it's hard to see how else non-Jews would have regarded the risen Christ. Litwa adds Rev 1.13-16 “[W]here he [Jesus] appears with all the accoutrements of the divine: a shining face, an overwhelming voice, luminescent clothing, and so on.”[55] In this brief survey we've seen that several key events in the story of Jesus told in the Gospels would have caused Greco-Roman hearers to intuit deity, including his divine conception, miracles, healing ministry, transfiguration, resurrection, and ascension. In their original context of second temple Judaism, these very same incidents would have resonated quite differently. His divine conception authenticated Jesus as the second Adam (Luke 3.38; Rom 5.14; 1 Cor 15.45) and God's Davidic son (2 Sam 7.14; Ps 2.7; Lk 1.32, 35). If Matthew or Luke wanted readers to understand that Jesus was divine based on his conception and birth, they failed to make such intentions explicit in the text. Rather, the birth narratives appear to have a much more modest aim—to persuade readers that Jesus had a credible claim to be Israel's messiah. His miracles show that “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power…for God was with him” (Acts 10.38; cf. Jn 3.2; 10.32, 38). Rather than concluding Jesus to be a god, Jewish witnesses to his healing of a paralyzed man “glorified God, who had given such authority to men” (Mat 9.8). Over and over, especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus directs people's attention to his Father who was doing the works in and through him (Jn 5.19, 30; 8.28; 12.49; 14.10). Seeing Jesus raise someone from the dead suggested to his original Jewish audience that “a great prophet has arisen among us” (Lk 7.16). The transfiguration, in its original setting, is an eschatological vision not a divine epiphany. Placement in the synoptic Gospels just after Jesus' promise that some there would not die before seeing the kingdom come sets the hermeneutical frame. “The transfiguration,” says William Lane, “was a momentary, but real (and witnessed) manifestation of Jesus' sovereign power which pointed beyond itself to the Parousia, when he will come ‘with power and glory.'”[56] If eschatology is the foreground, the background for the transfiguration was Moses' ascent of Sinai when he also encountered God and became radiant.[57] Viewed from the lenses of Moses' ascent and the eschaton, the transfiguration of Jesus is about his identity as God's definitive chosen ruler, not about any kind of innate divinity. Lastly, the resurrection and ascension validated Jesus' messianic claims to be the ruler of the age to come (Acts 17.31; Rom 1.4). Rather than concluding Jesus was deity, early Jewish Christians concluded these events showed that “God has made him both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2.36). The interpretative backgrounds for Jesus' ascension were not stories about Heracles, Asclepius, or Romulus. No, the key oracle that framed the Israelite understanding was the messianic psalm in which Yahweh told David's Lord to “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool” (Psalm 110.1). The idea is of a temporary sojourn in heaven until exercising the authority of his scepter to rule over earth from Zion. Once again, the biblical texts remain completely silent about deification. But even if the original meanings of Jesus' birth, ministry, transfiguration, resurrection, and ascension have messianic overtones when interpreted within the Jewish milieu, these same stories began to communicate various ideas of deity to Gentile converts in the generations that followed. We find little snippets from historical sources beginning in the second century and growing with time. Evidence of Belief in Jesus' as a Greco-Roman Deity To begin with, we have two non-Christian instances where Romans regarded Jesus as a deity within typical Greco-Roman categories. The first comes to us from Tertullian and Eusebius who mention an intriguing story about Tiberius' request to the Roman senate to deify Christ. Convinced by “intelligence from Palestine of events which had clearly shown the truth of Christ's divinity”[58] Tiberius proposed the matter to the senate (Apology 5). Eusebius adds that Tiberius learned that “many believed him to be a god in rising from the dead”[59] (Church History 2.2). As expected, the senate rejected the proposal. I mention this story, not because I can establish its historicity, but because it portrays how Tiberius would have thought about Jesus if he had heard about his miracles and resurrection. Another important incident is from one of the governor Pliny the Younger's letters to the emperor Trajan. Having investigated some people accused of Christianity, he found “they had met regularly before dawn on a fixed day to chant verses alternately amongst themselves in honour of Christ as if to a god”[60] (Letter 96). To an outside imperial observer like Pliny, the Christians believed in a man who had performed miracles, defeated death, and now lived in heaven. Calling him a god was just the natural way of talking about such a person. Pliny would not have thought Jesus was superior to the deified Roman emperors much less Zeus or the Olympic gods. If he believed in Jesus at all, he would have regarded him as another Mediterranean prophet who escaped Hades to enjoy apotheosis. Another interesting text to consider is the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. This apocryphal text tells the story of Jesus' childhood between the ages of five and twelve. Jesus is impetuous, powerful, and brilliant. Unsure to conclude that Jesus was “either god or angel,”[61] his teacher remands him to Joseph's custody (7). Later, a crowd of onlookers ponders whether the child is a god or a heavenly messenger after he raises an infant from the dead (17). A year later Jesus raised a construction man who had fallen to his death back to life (18). Once again, the crowd asked if the child was from heaven. Although some historians are quick to assume the lofty conceptions of Justin and his successors about the logos were commonplace in the early Christianity, Litwa points out, “The spell of the Logos could only bewitch a very small circle of Christian elites… In IGT, we find a Jesus who is divine according to different canons, the canons of popular Mediterranean theology.”[62] Another important though often overlooked scholarly group of Christians in the second century was led by a certain Theodotus of Byzantium.[63] Typically referred to by their heresiological label “Theodotians,” these dynamic monarchians lived in Rome and claimed that they held to the original Christology before it had been corrupted under Bishop Zephyrinus (Eusebius, Church History 5.28). Theodotus believed in the virgin birth, but not in his pre-existence or that he was god/God (Pseudo-Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.35.1-2; 10.23.1-2). He thought that Jesus was not able to perform any miracles until his baptism when he received the Christ/Spirit. Pseudo-Hippolytus goes on to say, “But they do not want him to have become a god when the Spirit descended. Others say that he became a god after he rose from the dead.”[64] This last tantalizing remark implies that the Theodotians could affirm Jesus as a god after his resurrection though they denied his pre-existence. Although strict unitarians, they could regard Jesus as a god in that he was an ascended immortalized being who lived in heaven—not equal to the Father, but far superior to all humans on earth. Justin Martyr presents another interesting case to consider. Thoroughly acquainted with Greco-Roman literature and especially the philosophy of Plato, Justin sees Christ as a god whom the Father begot before all other creatures. He calls him “son, or wisdom, or angel, or god, or lord, or word”[65] (Dialogue with Trypho 61).  For Justin Christ is “at the same time angel and god and lord and man”[66] (59). Jesus was “of old the Word, appearing at one time in the form of fire, at another under the guise of incorporeal beings, but now, at the will of God, after becoming man for mankind”[67] (First Apology 63). In fact, Justin is quite comfortable to compare Christ to deified heroes and emperors. He says, “[W]e propose nothing new or different from that which you say about the so-called sons of Jupiter [Zeus] by your respected writers… And what about the emperors who die among you, whom you think worthy to be deified?”[68] (21). He readily accepts the parallels with Mercury, Perseus, Asclepius, Bacchus, and Hercules, but argues that Jesus is superior to them (22).[69] Nevertheless, he considered Jesus to be in “a place second to the unchanging and eternal God”[70] (13). The Father is “the Most True God” whereas the Son is he “who came forth from Him”[71] (6). Even as lates as Origen, Greco-Roman concepts of deity persist. In responding to Celsus' claim that no god or son of God has ever come down, Origen responds by stating such a statement would overthrow the stories of Pythian Apollo, Asclepius, and the other gods who descended (Against Celsus 5.2). My point here is not to say Origen believed in all the old myths, but to show how Origen reached for these stories as analogies to explain the incarnation of the logos. When Celsus argued that he would rather believe in the deity of Asclepius, Dionysus, and Hercules than Christ, Origen responded with a moral rather than ontological argument (3.42). He asks how these gods have improved the characters of anyone. Origen admits Celsus' argument “which places the forenamed individuals upon an equality with Jesus” might have force, however in light of the disreputable behavior of these gods, “how could you any longer say, with any show of reason, that these men, on putting aside their mortal body, became gods rather than Jesus?”[72] (3.42). Origen's Christology is far too broad and complicated to cover here. Undoubtedly, his work on eternal generation laid the foundation on which fourth century Christians could build homoousion Christology. Nevertheless, he retained some of the earlier subordinationist impulses of his forebearers. In his book On Prayer, he rebukes praying to Jesus as a crude error, instead advocating prayer to God alone (10). In his Commentary on John he repeatedly asserts that the Father is greater than his logos (1.40; 2.6; 6.23). Thus, Origen is a theologian on the seam of the times. He's both a subordinationist and a believer in the Son's eternal and divine ontology. Now, I want to be careful here. I'm not saying that all early Christians believed Jesus was a deified man like Asclepius or a descended god like Apollo or a reincarnated soul like Pythagoras. More often than not, thinking Christians whose works survive until today tended to eschew the parallels, simultaneously elevating Christ as high as possible while demoting the gods to mere demons. Still, Litwa is inciteful when he writes: It seems likely that early Christians shared the widespread cultural assumption that a resurrected, immortalized being was worthy of worship and thus divine. …Nonetheless there is a difference…Jesus, it appears, was never honored as an independent deity. Rather, he was always worshiped as Yahweh's subordinate. Naturally Heracles and Asclepius were Zeus' subordinates, but they were also members of a larger divine family. Jesus does not enter a pantheon but assumes a distinctive status as God's chief agent and plenipotentiary. It is this status that, to Christian insiders, placed Jesus in a category far above the likes of Heracles, Romulus, and Asclepius who were in turn demoted to the rank of δαίμονες [daimons].[73] Conclusion I began by asking the question, "What did early Christians mean by saying Jesus is god?" We noted that the ancient idea of agency (Jesus is God/god because he represents Yahweh), though present in Hebrew and Christian scripture, didn't play much of a role in how Gentile Christians thought about Jesus. Or if it did, those texts did not survive. By the time we enter the postapostolic era, a majority of Christianity was Gentile and little communication occurred with the Jewish Christians that survived in the East. As such, we turned our attention to Greco-Roman theology to tune our ears to hear the story of Jesus the way they would have. We learned about their multifaceted array of divinities. We saw that gods can come down and take the form of humans and humans can go up and take the form of gods. We found evidence for this kind of thinking in both non-Christian and Christian sources in the second and third centuries. Now it is time to return to the question I began with: “When early Christian authors called Jesus “god” what did they mean?” We saw that the idea of a deified man was present in the non-Christian witnesses of Tiberius and Pliny but made scant appearance in our Christian literature except for the Theodotians. As for the idea that a god came down to become a man, we found evidence in The Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Justin, and Origen.[74] Of course, we find a spectrum within this view, from Justin's designation of Jesus as a second god to Origen's more philosophically nuanced understanding. Still, it's worth noting as R. P. C. Hanson observed that, “With the exception of Athanasius virtually every theologian, East and West, accepted some form of subordinationism at least up to the year 355.”[75] Whether any Christians before Alexander and Athanasius of Alexandria held to the sophisticated idea of consubstantiality depends on showing evidence of the belief that the Son was coequal, coeternal, and coessential with the Father prior to Nicea. (Readers interested in the case for this view should consult Michael Bird's Jesus among the Gods in which he attempted the extraordinary feat of finding proto-Nicene Christology in the first two centuries, a task typically associated with maverick apologists not peer-reviewed historians.) In conclusion, the answer to our driving question about the meaning of “Jesus as god” is that the answer depends on whom we ask. If we ask the Theodotians, Jesus is a god because that's just what one calls an immortalized man who lives in heaven.[76] If we ask those holding a docetic Christology, the answer is that a god came down in appearance as a man. If we ask a logos subordinationist, they'll tell us that Jesus existed as the god through whom the supreme God created the universe before he became a human being. If we ask Tertullian, Jesus is god because he derives his substance from the Father, though he has a lesser portion of divinity.[77] If we ask Athanasius, he'll wax eloquent about how Jesus is of the same substance as the Father equal in status and eternality. The bottom line is that there was not one answer to this question prior to the fourth century. Answers depend on whom we ask and when they lived. Still, we can't help but wonder about the more tantalizing question of development. Which Christology was first and which ones evolved under social, intellectual, and political pressures? In the quest to specify the various stages of development in the Christologies of the ante-Nicene period, this Greco-Roman perspective may just provide the missing link between the reserved and limited way that the NT applies theos to Jesus in the first century and the homoousian view that eventually garnered imperial support in the fourth century. How easy would it have been for fresh converts from the Greco-Roman world to unintentionally mishear the story of Jesus? How easy would it have been for them to fit Jesus into their own categories of descended gods and ascended humans? With the unmooring of Gentile Christianity from its Jewish heritage, is it any wonder that Christologies began to drift out to sea? Now I'm not suggesting that all Christians went through a steady development from a human Jesus to a pre-existent Christ, to an eternal God the Son, to the Chalcedonian hypostatic union. As I mentioned above, plenty of other options were around and every church had its conservatives in addition to its innovators. The story is messy and uneven with competing views spread across huge geographic distances. Furthermore, many Christians probably were content to leave such theological nuances fuzzy, rather than seeking doctrinal precision on Christ's relation to his God and Father. Whatever the case may be, we dare not ignore the influence of Greco-Roman theology in our accounts of Christological development in the Mediterranean world of the first three centuries.    Bibliography The Homeric Hymns. Translated by Michael Crudden. New York, NY: Oxford, 2008. Antioch, Theophilus of. To Autolycus. Translated by Marcus Dods. Vol. 2. Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001. Aphrahat. The Demonstrations. Translated by Ellen Muehlberger. Vol. 3. The Cambridge Edition of Early Christian Writings. Edited by Mark DelCogliano. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge, 2022. Apollodorus. The Library of Greek Mythology. Translated by Robin Hard. Oxford, UK: Oxford, 1998. Appian. The Civil Wars. Translated by John Carter. London, UK: Penguin, 1996. Arnobius. Against the Heathen. Translated by Hamilton Bryce and Hugh Campbell. Vol. 6. Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995. Arrian. The Campaigns of Alexander. Translated by Aubrey De Sélincourt. London, UK: Penguin, 1971. Bird, Michael F. Jesus among the Gods. Waco, TX: Baylor, 2022. Blackburn, Barry. Theios Aner and the Markan Miracle Traditions. Tübingen, Germany: J. C. B. Mohr, 1991. Callimachus. Hymn to Artemis. Translated by Susan A. Stephens. Callimachus: The Hymns. New York, NY: Oxford, 2015. Cicero. The Nature of the Gods. Translated by Patrick Gerard Walsh. Oxford, UK: Oxford, 2008. Cornutus, Lucius Annaeus. Greek Theology. Translated by George Boys-Stones. Greek Theology, Fragments, and Testimonia. Atlanta, GA: SBL, 2018. Cotter, Wendy. "Greco-Roman Apotheosis Traditions and the Resurrection Appearances in Matthew." In The Gospel of Matthew in Current Study. Edited by David E. Aune. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001. Cyprian. Treatise 6: On the Vanity of Idols. Translated by Ernest Wallis. Vol. 5. Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995. Dittenberger, W. Orientis Graecae Inscriptiones Selectae. Vol. 2. Hildesheim: Olms, 1960. Eusebius. The Church History. Translated by Paul L. Maier. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2007. Fredriksen, Paula. "How High Can Early High Christology Be?" In Monotheism and Christology in Greco-Roman Antiquity. Edited by Matthew V. Novenson. Vol. 180.vol. Supplements to Novum Testamentum. Leiden: Brill, 2020. Hanson, R. P. C. Search for a Christian Doctrine of God. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007. Hart, George. The Routledge Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses. 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Routledge, 2005. Homer. The Odyssey. Translated by Robert Fagles. New York, NY: Penguin, 1997. Iamblichus. Life of Pythagoras. Translated by Thomas Taylor. Iamblichus' Life of Pythagoras. Delhi, IN: Zinc Read, 2023. Justin Martyr. Dialogue with Trypho. Translated by Thomas B. Falls. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2003. Laertius, Diogenes. Life of Pythagoras. Translated by Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie. The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library. Edited by David R. Fideler. Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes Press, 1988. Laertius, Diogenes. Lives of the Eminent Philosophers. Translated by Pamela Mensch. Edited by James Miller. New York, NY: Oxford, 2020. Lane, William L. The Gospel of Mark. Nicnt, edited by F. F. Bruce Ned B. Stonehouse, and Gordon D. Fee. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974. Litwa, M. David. Iesus Deus. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2014. Livy. The Early History of Rome. Translated by Aubrey De Sélincourt. London, UK: Penguin, 2002. Origen. Against Celsus. Translated by Frederick Crombie. Vol. 4. The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003. Pausanias. Guide to Greece. Translated by Peter Levi. London, UK: Penguin, 1979. Perriman, Andrew. In the Form of a God. Studies in Early Christology, edited by David Capes Michael Bird, and Scott Harrower. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2022. Philostratus. Letters of Apollonius. Vol. 458. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard, 2006. Plutarch. Life of Alexander. Translated by Ian Scott-Kilvert and Timothy E. Duff. The Age of Alexander. London, UK: Penguin, 2011. Porphyry. Life of Pythagoras. Translated by Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie. The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library. Edited by David Fideler. Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes Press, 1988. Pseudo-Clement. Recognitions. Translated by Thomas Smith. Vol. 8. Ante Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003. Pseudo-Hippolytus. Refutation of All Heresies. Translated by David Litwa. Atlanta, GA: SBL, 2016. Pseudo-Thomas. Infancy Gospel of Thomas. Translated by James Orr. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1903. Psuedo-Clement. Homilies. Translated by Peter Peterson. Vol. 8. Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1897. Siculus, Diodorus. The Historical Library. Translated by Charles Henry Oldfather. Vol. 1. Edited by Giles Laurén: Sophron Editor, 2017. Strabo. The Geography. Translated by Duane W. Roller. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge, 2020. Tertullian. Against Praxeas. Translated by Holmes. Vol. 3. Ante Nice Fathers. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003. Tertullian. Apology. Translated by S. Thelwall. Vol. 3. Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003. Younger, Pliny the. The Letters of the Younger Pliny. Translated by Betty Radice. London: Penguin, 1969. End Notes [1] For the remainder of this paper, I will use the lower case “god” for all references to deity outside of Yahweh, the Father of Christ. I do this because all our ancient texts lack capitalization and our modern capitalization rules imply a theology that is anachronistic and unhelpful for the present inquiry. [2] Christopher Kaiser wrote, “Explicit references to Jesus as ‘God' in the New Testament are very few, and even those few are generally plagued with uncertainties of either text or interpretation.” Christopher B. Kaiser, The Doctrine of God: A Historical Survey (London: Marshall Morgan & Scott, 1982), 29. Other scholars such as Raymond Brown (Jesus: God and Man), Jason David BeDuhn (Truth in Translation), and Brian Wright (“Jesus as θεός: A Textual Examination” in Revisiting the Corruption of the New Testament) have expressed similar sentiments. [3] John 20.28; Hebrews 1.8; Titus 2.13; 2 Peter 1.1; Romans 9.5; and 1 John 5.20. [4] See Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians 12.2 where a manuscript difference determines whether or not Polycarp called Jesus god or lord. Textual corruption is most acute in Igantius' corpus. Although it's been common to dismiss the long recension as an “Arian” corruption, claiming the middle recension to be as pure and uncontaminated as freshly fallen snow upon which a foot has never trodden, such an uncritical view is beginning to give way to more honest analysis. See Paul Gilliam III's Ignatius of Antioch and the Arian Controversy (Leiden: Brill, 2017) for a recent treatment of Christological corruption in the middle recension. [5] See the entries for  אֱלֹהִיםand θεός in the Hebrew Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (HALOT), the Brown Driver Briggs Lexicon (BDB), Eerdmans Dictionary, Kohlenberger/Mounce Concise Hebrew-Aramaic Dictionary of the Old Testament, the Bauer Danker Arndt Gingrich Lexicon (BDAG), Friberg Greek Lexicon, and Thayer's Greek Lexicon. [6] See notes on Is 9.6 and Ps 45.6. [7] ZIBBC: “In what sense can the king be called “god”? By virtue of his divine appointment, the king in the ancient Near East stood before his subjects as a representative of the divine realm. …In fact, the term “gods“ (ʾelōhı̂m) is used of priests who functioned as judges in the Israelite temple judicial system (Ex. 21:6; 22:8-9; see comments on 58:1; 82:6-7).” John W. Hilber, “Psalms,” in The Minor Prophets, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, vol. 5 of Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary: Old Testament. ed. John H. Walton (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009), 358. [8] Around a.d. 340, Aphrahat of Persia advised his fellow Christians to reply to Jewish critics who questioned why “You call a human being ‘God'” (Demonstrations 17.1). He said, “For the honored name of the divinity is granted event ot rightoues human beings, when they are worthy of being called by it…[W]hen he chose Moses, his friend and his beloved…he called him “god.” …We call him God, just as he named Moses with his own name…The name of the divinity was granted for great honor in the world. To whom he wishes, God appoints it” (17.3, 4, 5). Aphrahat, The Demonstrations, trans., Ellen Muehlberger, vol. 3, The Cambridge Edition of Early Christian Writings (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge, 2022), 213-15. In the Clementine Recognitions we find a brief mention of the concept:  “Therefore the name God is applied in three ways: either because he to whom it is given is truly God, or because he is the servant of him who is truly; and for the honour of the sender, that his authority may be full, he that is sent is called by the name of him who sends, as is often done in respect of angels: for when they appear to a man, if he is a wise and intelligent man, he asks the name of him who appears to him, that he may acknowledge at once the honour of the sent, and the authority of the sender” (2.42). Pseudo-Clement, Recognitions, trans., Thomas Smith, vol. 8, Ante Nicene Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003). [9] Michael F. Bird, Jesus among the Gods (Waco, TX: Baylor, 2022), 13. [10] Andrew Perriman, In the Form of a God, Studies in Early Christology, ed. David Capes Michael Bird, and Scott Harrower (Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2022), 130. [11] Paula Fredriksen, "How High Can Early High Christology Be?," in Monotheism and Christology in Greco-Roman Antiquity, ed. Matthew V. Novenson, vol. 180 (Leiden: Brill, 2020), 296, 99. [12] ibid. [13] See Gen 18.1; Ex 3.2; 24.11; Is 6.1; Ezk 1.28. [14] Compare the Masoretic Text of Psalm 8.6 to the Septuagint and Hebrews 2.7. [15] Homer, The Odyssey, trans., Robert Fagles (New York, NY: Penguin, 1997), 370. [16] Diodorus Siculus, The Historical Library, trans., Charles Henry Oldfather, vol. 1 (Sophron Editor, 2017), 340. [17] Uranus met death at the brutal hands of his own son, Kronos who emasculated him and let bleed out, resulting in his deification (Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel 1.10). Later on, after suffering a fatal disease, Kronos himself experienced deification, becoming the planet Saturn (ibid.). Zeus married Hera and they produced Osiris (Dionysus), Isis (Demeter), Typhon, Apollo, and Aphrodite (ibid. 2.1). [18] Lucius Annaeus Cornutus, Greek Theology, trans., George Boys-Stones, Greek Theology, Fragments, and Testimonia (Atlanta, GA: SBL, 2018), 123. [19] Apollodorus, The Library of Greek Mythology, trans., Robin Hard (Oxford, UK: Oxford, 1998), 111. [20] Pausanias, Guide to Greece, trans., Peter Levi (London, UK: Penguin, 1979), 98. [21] Strabo, The Geography, trans., Duane W. Roller (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge, 2020), 281. [22] Psuedo-Clement, Homilies, trans., Peter Peterson, vol. 8, Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1897). Greek: “αὐτὸν δὲ ὡς θεὸν ἐθρήσκευσαν” from Jacques Paul Migne, Patrologia Graeca, taken from Accordance (PSCLEMH-T), OakTree Software, Inc., 2018, Version 1.1. [23] See Barry Blackburn, Theios Aner and the Markan Miracle Traditions (Tübingen, Germany: J. C. B. Mohr, 1991), 32. [24] Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, trans., Pamela Mensch (New York, NY: Oxford, 2020), 39. [25] Iamblichus, Life of Pythagoras, trans., Thomas Taylor, Iamblichus' Life of Pythagoras (Delhi, IN: Zinc Read, 2023), 2. [26] Diogenes Laertius, Life of Pythagoras, trans., Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie, The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library (Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes Press, 1988), 142. [27] See the list in Blackburn, 39. He corroborates miracle stories from Diogenus Laertius, Iamblichus, Apollonius, Nicomachus, and Philostratus. [28] Porphyry, Life of Pythagoras, trans., Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie, The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library (Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes Press, 1988), 128-9. [29] Iamblichus,  68. [30] What I call “resurrection” refers to the phrase, “Thou shalt bring back from Hades a dead man's strength.” Diogenes Laertius 8.2.59, trans. R. D. Hicks. [31] Laertius, "Lives of the Eminent Philosophers," 306. Two stories of his deification survive: in one Empedocles disappears in the middle of the night after hearing an extremely loud voice calling his name. After this the people concluded that they should sacrifice to him since he had become a god (8.68). In the other account, Empedocles climbs Etna and leaps into the fiery volcanic crater “to strengthen the rumor that he had become a god” (8.69). [32] Pausanias,  192. Sextus Empiricus says Asclepius raised up people who had died at Thebes as well as raising up the dead body of Tyndaros (Against the Professors 1.261). [33] Cicero adds that the Arcadians worship Asclepius (Nature 3.57). [34] In another instance, he confronted and cast out a demon from a licentious young man (Life 4.20). [35] The phrase is “περὶ ἐμοῦ καὶ θεοῖς εἴρηται ὡς περὶ θείου ἀνδρὸς.” Philostratus, Letters of Apollonius, vol. 458, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard, 2006). [36] See George Hart, The Routledge Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses, 2nd ed. (Oxford, UK: Routledge, 2005), 3. [37] Plutarch, Life of Alexander, trans., Ian Scott-Kilvert and Timothy E. Duff, The Age of Alexander (London, UK: Penguin, 2011), 311. Arrian includes a story about Anaxarchus advocating paying divine honors to Alexander through prostration. The Macedonians refused but the Persian members of his entourage “rose from their seats and one by one grovelled on the floor before the King.” Arrian, The Campaigns of Alexander, trans., Aubrey De Sélincourt (London, UK: Penguin, 1971), 222. [38] Translation my own from “Ἀντίοχος ὁ Θεὸς Δίκαιος Ἐπιφανὴς Φιλορωμαῖος Φιλέλλην.” Inscription at Nemrut Dağ, accessible at https://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras/display.php?page=cimrm32. See also https://zeugma.packhum.org/pdfs/v1ch09.pdf. [39] Greek taken from W. Dittenberger, Orientis Graecae Inscriptiones Selectae, vol. 2 (Hildesheim: Olms, 1960), 48-60. Of particular note is the definite article before θεός. They didn't celebrate the birthday of a god, but the birthday of the god. [40] Appian, The Civil Wars, trans., John Carter (London, UK: Penguin, 1996), 149. [41] M. David Litwa, Iesus Deus (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2014), 20. [42] ibid. [43] Blackburn, 92-3. [44] The Homeric Hymns, trans., Michael Crudden (New York, NY: Oxford, 2008), 38. [45] "The Homeric Hymns," 14. [46] Homer,  344. [47] Theophilus of Antioch, To Autolycus, trans., Marcus Dods, vol. 2, Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001). [48] Callimachus, Hymn to Artemis, trans., Susan A. Stephens, Callimachus: The Hymns (New York, NY: Oxford, 2015), 119. [49] Siculus,  234. [50] Cyprian, Treatise 6: On the Vanity of Idols, trans., Ernest Wallis, vol. 5, Ante-Nicene Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995). [51] Arnobius, Against the Heathen, trans., Hamilton Bryce and Hugh Campbell, vol. 6, Ante-Nicene Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995). [52] Livy, The Early History of Rome, trans., Aubrey De Sélincourt (London, UK: Penguin, 2002), 49. [53] Cicero, The Nature of the Gods, trans., Patrick Gerard Walsh (Oxford, UK: Oxford, 2008), 69. [54] Wendy Cotter, "Greco-Roman Apotheosis Traditions and the Resurrection Appearances in Matthew," in The Gospel of Matthew in Current Study, ed. David E. Aune (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001), 149. [55] Litwa, 170. [56] William L. Lane, The Gospel of Mark, Nicnt, ed. F. F. Bruce Ned B. Stonehouse, and Gordon D. Fee (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974). [57] “Recent commentators have stressed that the best background for understanding the Markan transfiguration is the story of Moses' ascent up Mount Sinai (Exod. 24 and 34).” Litwa, 123. [58] Tertullian, Apology, trans. S. Thelwall, vol. 3, Ante-Nicene Fathers, ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003). [59] Eusebius, The Church History, trans. Paul L. Maier (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2007), 54. [60] Pliny the Younger, The Letters of the Younger Pliny, trans., Betty Radice (London: Penguin, 1969), 294. [61] Pseudo-Thomas, Infancy Gospel of Thomas, trans., James Orr (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1903), 25. [62] Litwa, 83. [63] For sources on Theodotus, see Pseduo-Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.35.1-2; 10.23.1-2; Pseudo-Tertullian, Against All Heresies 8.2; Eusebius, Church History 5.28. [64] Pseudo-Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, trans., David Litwa (Atlanta, GA: SBL, 2016), 571. [65] I took the liberty to decapitalize these appellatives. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, trans. Thomas B. Falls (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2003), 244. [66] Justin Martyr, 241. (Altered, see previous footnote.) [67] Justin Martyr, 102. [68] Justin Martyr, 56-7. [69] Arnobius makes a similar argument in Against the Heathen 1.38-39 “Is he not worthy to be called a god by us and felt to be a god on account of the favor or such great benefits? For if you have enrolled Liber among the gods because he discovered the use of wine, and Ceres the use of bread, Aesculapius the use of medicines, Minerva the use of oil, Triptolemus plowing, and Hercules because he conquered and restrained beasts, thieves, and the many-headed hydra…So then, ought we not to consider Christ a god, and to bestow upon him all the worship due to his divinity?” Translation from Litwa, 105. [70] Justin Martyr, 46. [71] Justin Martyr, 39. [72] Origen, Against Celsus, trans. Frederick Crombie, vol. 4, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003). [73] Litwa, 173. [74] I could easily multiply examples of this by looking at Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, and many others. [75] The obvious exception to Hanson's statement were thinkers like Sabellius and Praxeas who believed that the Father himself came down as a human being. R. P. C. Hanson, Search for a Christian Doctrine of God (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007), xix. [76] Interestingly, even some of the biblical unitarians of the period were comfortable with calling Jesus god, though they limited his divinity to his post-resurrection life. [77] Tertullian writes, “[T]he Father is not the same as the Son, since they differ one from the other in the mode of their being. For the Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as He Himself acknowledges: “My Father is greater than I.” In the Psalm His inferiority is described as being “a little lower than the angels.” Thus the Father is distinct from the Son, being greater than the Son” (Against Praxeas 9). Tertullian, Against Praxeas, trans., Holmes, vol. 3, Ante Nice Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003).

Just how many Herods threatened the life of Jesus? Dr. Jason Combs explores the many Herods, their effect on Jesus and especially on the life, and death of John the Baptist and the call to sacrifice for the Savior.00:00 Part 1–Dr. Jason Combs00:56 Introduction of Dr. Jason Combs04:19 How the Gospels relate to one another as testimonies07:18 Mark 6 and Jesus is the carpenter's son09:46 John the Baptist was killed15:34 Josephus's account of John the Baptist's death17:44 Mark and intercalation–Markan sandwich21:47 President Faust story about Rafael Monroy and Vincente Morales24:12 Jesus departed by ship after hearing of John's death26:47 Feeding of the 5000, Moses and Jesus's name in Hebrew32:43 Additional details remind us of Exodus and Jesus as a New Moses36:58 Messianic Banquet and the Essenes42:00 Gentile vs. servant leadership43:16 Jesus walks on the water47:41 Commandment to be of “good cheer”49:57 Matthew emphasizes they know who Jesus is52:50 Mark shows Jesus's divinity in subtle epiphanies55:17 Beliefs about ghosts in the First Century58:20 Matthew teaches us how Jesus is tutoring Peter1:00:26 Jesus and Peter walk on the water1:08:15 End of Part 1–Dr. Jason CombsShow Notes (English, French, Spanish, Portuguese): https://followhim.coFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/followhimpodcastInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/followhimpodcastYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/FollowHimOfficialChannelThanks to the followHIM team:Shannon Sorensen: Executive Producer, SponsorDavid & Verla Sorensen: SponsorsDr. Hank Smith: Co-hostJohn Bytheway: Co-hostDavid Perry: ProducerKyle Nelson: Marketing, SponsorLisa Spice: Client Relations, Editor, Show NotesJamie Neilson: Social Media, Graphic DesignWill Stoughton: Video EditorKrystal Roberts: Translation Team, English & French Transcripts, WebsiteAriel Cuadra: Spanish Transcripts"Let Zion in Her Beauty Rise" by Marshall McDonaldhttps://www.marshallmcdonaldmusic.com/products/let-zion-in-her-beauty-rise-piano

How can sharing personal testimony of healings, blessings, and testimony bless others? Dr. Ryan Sharp explores the many miracles of Jesus and the value of personal testimony amidst tribulation and persecution.00:00 Part 1–Dr. Ryan Sharp00:56 Introduction of Dr. Ryan Sharp02:34 Unique approaches of each gospel author04:11 Matthew's POV06:40 Inclusio14:35 Why miracles are shown18:01 Jesus heals man with leprosy19:29 Miracles in Matthew 921:01 Elder Wirthlin story of friendship 24:44 John story “Where Will Your Friends Take You?”27:27 Brother Arnold story “Strengthen Your Brethren”31:05 Matthew's call35:19 Jesus eats with sinners36:50 Fasting and joy39:10 Characteristics of Mark41:34 Messianic Secret46:59 Dr. Sharp shares a personal story about teaching and studying the New Testament49:25 Markan sandwich of Jarius and woman with issue of blood54:37 Hem of Jesus's garment1:01:11 End of Part 1–Dr. Ryan SharpShow Notes (English, French, Spanish, Portuguese): https://followhim.coFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/followhimpodcastInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/followhimpodcastYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/FollowHimOfficialChannelThanks to the followHIM team:Shannon Sorensen: Executive Producer, SponsorDavid & Verla Sorensen: SponsorsDr. Hank Smith: Co-hostJohn Bytheway: Co-hostDavid Perry: ProducerKyle Nelson: Marketing, SponsorLisa Spice: Client Relations, Editor, Show NotesJamie Neilson: Social Media, Graphic DesignWill Stoughton: Video EditorKrystal Roberts: Translation Team, English & French Transcripts, WebsiteAriel Cuadra: Spanish Transcripts"Let Zion in Her Beauty Rise" by Marshall McDonaldhttps://www.marshallmcdonaldmusic.com/products/let-zion-in-her-beauty-rise-piano