Dead Sea Scrolls: What Apologists Hope You'll Never Find Out (feat. Dr James Tabor)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 вер 2023
- Christian apologist Josh McDowell irresponsibly overstates what the Dead Sea Scrolls can tell us about Old Testament reliability. Dr John Bergsma insists that John the Baptist and several of Jesus' disciples were part of the Dead Sea Scroll group. Meanwhile, Dr Craig Evans insists that any notion of Jesus parallels are rejected by scholars and outside the mainstream. Dead Sea Scroll scholar, Dr James Tabor, joins us to address all of this.
== SIGN UP FOR ==
Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls course - www.tinyurl.com/TaborDSS
New Insights into the New Testament conference - www. tinyurl.com/BartCon2023
================
Support Paulogia at
/ paulogia
www.paypal.me/paulogia
Paulogia Channel Wish-List
www.amazon.ca/hz/wishlist/ls/...
Paulogia Merch
teespring.com/stores/paulogia
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @paulogia
Paulogia Audio-Only-Version Podcast
paulogia.buzzsprout.com
Follow Paulogia at
/ paulogia0
/ paulogia0
/ discord - Наука та технологія
![[柴犬ASMR]曼玉Manyu&小白Bai 毛发护理Spa asmr](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0TsXQ7z2Dh4/mqdefault.jpg)
== SIGN UP FOR Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls course - www.tinyurl.com/TaborDSS
[Lions 🦁 and leopards 🐆 and bears 🐻,oh my!]:
Revelation 13
Names of God Bible
The Beast from the Sea
13 I saw a beast coming out of the sea. It had ten horns, seven heads, and ten crowns on its horns. There were insulting names on its heads. 2 The beast that I saw was like a *leopard.* Its feet were like *bear’s* feet. Its mouth was like a *lion’s* mouth. The serpent gave its power, kingdom, and far-reaching authority to the beast. 3 One of the beast’s heads looked like it had a fatal wound, but its fatal wound was healed.
All the people of the world were amazed and followed the beast.
Hosea 13
Names of God Bible
4 “I am Yahweh your Elohim. I brought you out of Egypt.
You have known no god besides me.
There is no savior except me.
5 I took care of you in the desert, in a dry land.
6 When I fed you, you were full.
When you were full, you became arrogant.
That is why you forgot me.
7 So I will be like a *lion.*
Like a *leopard* I will wait by the road to ambush you.
8 Like a *bear* that has lost her cubs, I will attack you.
I will rip you open.
Like a lion I will devour you.
Like a wild animal I will tear you apart.
9 You are destroying yourself, Israel.
You are against me, your helper.
@@ready1fire1aim1what is the point of this copy paste?
@@GameTimeWhy
Just showing both atheists and theists who the villian of this book I'm reading is.
@@GameTimeWhy
Theology comes from combining two Greek words: Theos, meaning God, and Logos, meaning Word or rational thought.
[The Word of God is Elohim from Genesis 1]
(not to be confused with Yahweh Elohim, the false Elohim, from Genesis 2)
Compare John 1: 1-5 with Genesis 1: 1-5:
John 1: 1-5
Names of God Bible
The Word Becomes Human
1 In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was already with God in the beginning.
3 Everything came into existence through him. Not one thing that exists was made without him.
4 He was the source of life, and that life was the light for humanity.
5 The light shines in the dark, and the dark has never extinguished it.
Genesis 1: 1-5
Names of God Bible
The Creation
1 In the beginning Elohim created heaven and earth.
2 The earth was formless and empty, and darkness covered the deep water. The Ruach Elohim was hovering over the water.
3 Then Elohim said, “Let there be light!” So there was light. 4 Elohim saw the light was good. So Elohim separated the light from the darkness. 5 Elohim named the light day, and the darkness he named night. There was evening, then morning-the first day.
[Anyone with a name was given a name, a created being]:
Hebrews 11
Names of God Bible
3 Faith convinces us that God created the world through his word. This means what can be seen was made by something that could not be seen.
Genesis 2
Names of God Bible
2 Heaven and earth and everything in them were finished. 2 By the seventh day ELOHIM had finished the work he had been doing. On the seventh day he stopped the work he had been doing. 3 Then ELOHIM blessed the seventh day and set it apart as holy, because on that day he stopped all his work of creation.
The Creation of Man and Woman
4 This is the account of heaven and earth when they were created, at the time when YAHWEH ELOHIM made earth and heaven.
@@ready1fire1aim1 l still don't understand what you are doing. Why should anyone care about these passages? You need to actually explain what you are trying to prove.
I was raised fundamentalist Baptist. We were literally told that the King James Version of the bible was the same exact word for word bible that came directly from god himself. Over the years, several Baptist pastors told us that the KJV was directly translated from the original texts written by the people whose names were on the books of the bible. We were told that Moses wrote the entire Pentateuch. That caused me to question how he could have written Deuteronomy 34 when it describes his own death... they couldn't answer that right away. The next Sunday they told me that Joshua wrote that part and added it afterwards. This started me to question what they actually knew and how honest they were being. I was in my early teens at this time, and I went to our local public library and did research on how the bible was translated. I wrote a report on it that was over 300 pages. Listed my references. I even used books from our own church library. I ended my report with- WHY DID YOU LIE TO US?, and gave copies to the pastors at our church, one of whom was my dad. I was chastised for questioning the church elders, calling them liars, and was grounded for more than a month. I asked them again why they were not honest with us, they just deflected and told me that I was being a heretic and needed to 'get right with god'. Thus began my deconversion process.
My parents were also fundamentalist Baptist (they’ve lightened up on it more though). My mom would tell me consistently that there were no contradictions in the Bible growing up but had a difficult time answering questions when I asked anything outside of church.
When I realized that neither of my parents knew as much about the Bible as I thought they did I became much more skeptical of the “lack of contradictions” claim. Then I learned about different denominations, different versions of the Bible itself, the actual contradictions within regardless of the version, the history of Christianity and how it (along with other religions) spread, and also literally science.
Things actually started making sense to me then but not in the way either of my parents intended it to lol.
That is my question. Why did they lie and Apologists are still lying. I think they were probably lied to also and just regurgitating what they were taught. No excuse for current Apologists. With the internet and other sources, the truth is out there.
@@shirleymcclintock3056 personally I think it’s desperation. Especially among older Christian’s. They didn’t have access to the information that we do now. Many of them have probably spent their whole lives viciously wrapped in this bubble of reinforcement that the idea that it’s wrong scares them too much.
Referring to the death of Moses:
Deuteronomy 34:5-7:
"So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord. 6 And He buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, opposite Beth Peor; but no one knows his grave to this day. 7 Moses was one hundred and twenty years old when he died. His eyes were not dim nor his natural vigor diminished."
I'm not sure calling those elders liars is fair, as the truth of the authorship of the Pentateuch, especially that chapter is quite nuanced.
There could be at least a couple explanations for the cited passage...
1. Was Deut 34:5-7 a prophesy of Moses' own death? A prophesy like this isn't unique, as there have been previously recorded prophecies of the future of Israel ie. Deut 17, etc.
2. Could there possibly be another inspired writer, who wrote the last chapter of Deuteronomy (34), who was possibly Joshua? If Joshua or some other inspired writer wrote a few sentences, the last chapter of the book of Deuteronomy, would it be dishonest to say Moses authored the Pentateuch even though there was a small addition by a writer in later copies and editions of the book?
If this is true, what did you find in your research who added that last chapter to Deuteronomy? I see many claims of authorship, but I don't see a consensus among scripture scholars on this topic. A charitable explanation would be ignorance of archeological evidence on the authorship of that chapter.
There are some authors whose work was largely completed but who didn't live to see the final publication or subsequent revisions... which were done by the heirs of their estate, but are credited to have written their book
ie. JRR Tolkien didn't live to see the publication of the Silmarillion, only to have his son Christopher Tolkien edit, partly written and published it. Though JRR Tolkien is claimed to be the author of the book. It wouldn't be dishonest to say that it is JRR's work.
Comment for the dead sea UA-cam algorithm
Reply to comment for the dead sea UA-cam algorithm.
Another reply to the comment for the dead sea UA-cam algorithm for the dead sea UA-cam algorithm.
Heck yeah
Obligatory reply for Al Gore's rhythm.
All hail the mighty Algo!
The sheer irony of them talking about the 'legend' of how these scrolls were found and which one to stick with. Mcdowell likes the rock throwing Beduin so he's "sticking with that one". Now what other accepted narratives could this apply to?
@@trevorseath3997 I think Sean misses the hilarity of his giving himself a pass on his own wishful, picking and choosing. This exposes that Sean, in my humble opinion, isn't humble at all but is still plagued by doubts that he needs to shout down whatever is still bothering him. Could be the blatant hypocrisy. But hey, building oneself up like a new messiah, bravely leading those who still want to follow something or someone is a great source of income.
Former Christians are a fast growing population, so whatever Sean may really think/believe, one thing is certain. Exploiting the doubt, pain, and confused experiences of those who happen upon conflicting message is fantastic revenue stream. We have a monetized UA-cam channel and now conferences.
The new religion? Believe me because I'm doubting everything. The utter hypocrisy of that may be deemed unbelievable, but folks will believe anything if they have such a generous shepherd to lead the way.
Bingo! It translates to: Don't sidle up to the Judeo Christian buffet to feed yourself, feed on my anti-whatever doctrine so I'll drive the other buffet out of business. (But Sean provides comfort for the masses and we all know that's the only basis for religion, right??? Sarcasm on high.)
@@annmalleybooksNew messiah?
There's no evidence of a first one.
Nothing was written about Jesus until 60 years after his supposed death.
If there was a guy wandering around, raising the dead, healing the lepers, giving sight to the blind, etc. It's reasonable to think that word would spread and literate people would write about it.
Then there's the problem of the different accounts of the various gospels.
How many people and or angels were at the tomb?
Where is the evidence that any of the supernatural events of the Bible ever happened?
There's no evidence of the Exodus.
No evidence of Noah's flood.
If God wanted us to follow a set of rules, why, being omniscient, would he trust such a job to men and not just do it himself?
The Bible has some nice stories, nice poetry, and very few reliable facts.
The Christian god is completely and obviously fictional.
@@ciggystardust You can chose to believe that the persons behind this video are pure as the driven snow as well.
They're not. They have agendas. Blind spots. Beefs. Perhaps the need to garner support for their views. And, I'd guess, these guys lean toward confirmation bias. when it comes to choosing what to release and what to tuck away.
I say this because they're human beings, and well suffer from the lovelies written above.
But presenting facts out of context skews any picture. (What makes these two any better than those they're choosing to disown, discredit, or whatever?)
They want followers, supporters, and a customer base. Targeting the disaffected by presenting half-truths about one's competition is an age-old technique to get business.
I'm not buying. But you can choose what you'd like, obviously.
@@trevorseath3997*legends, not myths
I’m a big fan of Michael Heiser and I use an ESV, and I’ve learned from Heiser how to understand the “sons of God” language in the Bible. To me this is an issue of translation, and it doesn’t make it any less remarkable to me how consistent Isaiah is
'Filhos de Deus' Israel.
YSRa'El é 'YaShaR'El'.
Yashar'El signfica Justo/Reto/Direto a Deus; e disso se podem ter várias interpretações.
Sim Israel é Yasharel pois em hebraico isso é possível.
Assim como o nome MShH(Moshê)[Moses] é: 'Mayam Shua ou Maym Shua' que signfica:
' As Águas Salvam' ou 'Salvo pela Águas'
Pois Moses é salvo pelas Águas em momentos cruciais como no seu nascimento e na ora da abertura do Mar, onde o mar se abre e quando o mar se fecha engole os Egípcios.
O Mar é a Energia, o Prana, o Chi, os Egípcios são as tensões que estão quase que nos amarrando, estrangulando, estão nos fatigado, nos fazendo trabalhar sem parar.
É aquilo que para o fluxo do Chi/Ki/Prana/ Energia Vital.
Egípcios( Mitzri) e Egito(Mitzraim) signfica: Limitação, Aperto, Estrangulamento.
A Terra do Egito é essa prisão no nosso próprio corpo.
Os Egípcios são essas tensões que geram doenças e todo tipo de males, eles são as más características;
Enquanto que os Israelitas são as boas características.
É uma linguagem similar ao Bhagavad Gita, Padavas vs Kauravas.
Tem muitos símbolos e etc... mas não vou destrinchar tudo.
Exactly
Don’t for to add Ken Johnson's channel as an excellent source of up to date translations from the most recently released dead sea scrolls.
The more I learn about early Christianity, the more it sounds just like an apocalyptic cult. And Paul is just being an opportunistic, charismatic cult leader, hijacking the cult after Jesus' crucifixion.
Agreed, but I would say “Paul [was] just being…” because it took my brain a moment to realize you are talking about Paul of Tarsus and NOT Paulogia. 😂😂 (it was the “is” that threw me) But yeah, whomever Jesus was, or if he even existed, and his teachings was co-opted by Paul the Apostle who made it into his on image; if you don’t mind me stealing religious babble. And it’s a trend that hasn’t stopped happening for 2,000 years!
The Apostle Paul was a pen name for Josephus Flavius. The rabbit hole is way deeper than a mere hijacking. However, you are on the right path.
@@whippet71That's absurd. There's no evidence that Paul was Flavius Josephus. On the other hand, there's evidence Simon Atomos (Simon "the small" an alias for Simon Magus) was Paulos (the little one).
Like Stalin after Lenin.
Paul hijacked Christianity bc he noticed that followers were quite naive and gullible so Paul saw great use in the control aspect of it
Like the old joke about the monk finding the original translation. 'No... no... it says celeBRATE.'
I heard it was a pope in heaven, learns the ancient languages so he can read the original... and has a breakdown.
The reliance on 'rules' instead of inner gnosis😅... reminds me of the american irish joke about ireland...mary is cleaning the church while the priest is discussing the 'fairy belief' problem in the village, and the priest turns to mary and says and mary you dont believe in fairies do u Mary?... god, no father, of course not, but they are there 😏.....sure all we have to do is ask our 200million year old self in a dream ❤indigeneous wisdom counts...ie mean look at the sherpas...who really does the climbing🙄🤔
Lol I liked this
Hahahaha - good one...
"the bedouin throwing a rock is the coolest one, so I'm going with that one" but, remember everyone, people don't just make-up stories.
People don't just make up stories? Is that your final answer.
@@werriboy55It’s the story they are sticking to 😉
@@werriboy55 Fiction is just fiction!
People do make up stories.
Spongebob SquarePants... not made up...
15:41 "And that's from the Q source we have of John's teaching."
But that's the thing about the Q source - we _don't_ have the Q source. It's an entirely hypothetical text, postulated to be the second common source for Luke and John (with Mark being the first). But it doesn't actually exist, so it can't be used as a source. What we have is a modern reconstruction.
I really appreciate your videos. Great guests, interesting topics, well done.
Listened to the end and still waiting to hear what the Christian apologists don't want me find out.
I think that refers to the differences between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible that were pointed at.
High profile apologists who talk about the dead sea scrolls almost inevitably claimthat they are identical to the biblical old testament and complete. Neither of which are true.
@@peppermintgal4302Which is weird when you consider that the Dead Sea Scrolls are a total W for Christians. Yeah they’re not identical, no two manuscripts are. But they’re pretty darn close all things considered and show how impressive the Jewish Masoretes were in their preservation of the Hebrew text. The Dead Sea Scrolls dealt a pretty big blow to the German High Criticism school.
@@bman5257no there’s no two christian manuscripts that are identical
@@yourewrongfr I literally said that.
I hadn't watched Paulogia this entire year because i didn't have time to, and just hearing Paul's intro made me have such a big smile, like i was seeing a long-time friend again after many years
I didn't know how much i missed watching your videos Paul, thank you so much for your work
Welcome back!
@@Paulogia Weren't the dead sea scrolls Is proven to be fake
@@oldcountryboyNo.
@@ericdanielski4802 So did you look it up on Google Google says they are completely fake can you show Me where it says They are not fake
@@ericdanielski4802 It was the Christian museum where they are kept Did the testing and they tested all fake
Every time you upload I know it’ll be a good day! I’ve watched everything so I’m always starving for more of your content!
Superb content as usual. Thanks Paul.
Yeah, too bad all those Gnostic Gospels they found in Egypt never got the press. I feel that the Dead Sea Scrolls got.
I used to get confused and think they were the same thing. >.>
Christian propaganda most likely.
Charlie Heston wasn't in that movie. 😅❤
They found those in the trash. Your home
Dr Tabor is such chilled vibes. Also love the fact that his surname is also a mountain in Israel (thanks, Erikson. Tavore was awesome... and for always teaching me something new)
Israel are a people not a geographical location.
@@nimblehorse ... Explain that to Yahoo-hoo. 😮
And yet, we can see many maps, both contemporary and historical, that show Israel. Weird, huh?@@nimblehorse
& hes 100 wrong. That’s the hilarious part l. & you are not smart enough to understand
So glad for the book recommendation! Great interview and video. 👍
I love these episodes. Keep it up man.
2:38 - "One of the boys threw a rock inside the cave and heard pottery shatter"
"Someday there's going to be a hugely popular game, run by electronic computers and displayed on televisions, where the hero smashes pottery and finds hidden treasure inside!"
Then spends the rest of the game organising their briefcase.
"Hey! Listen!"
Goats be great craft buffs. 🎉
Diablo....
5:55 why did you say "there are 17 changes" when the fact is that 14 of them are stylistic or spelling changes which make no difference and really aren't significant? And the 3 significant letters are the ones that McDowell mentioned in the clip?
Why did you say that?
thanks for posting. thanks for suggesting folks go read the OG sources too. actually, super thank you for that. there's so much that gets left out/changed it's hard to describe the treasure field out there waiting to be read again.
YaY can't wait to watch another Paulogia video ❤
Weird that Dr Tabor didn't give the full story of his own paper about Essene toilet practices. They had a very close-by (400m) area near their community where they could go on Shabbat. Josephus wasn't describing their camp, he was describing how they'd live if they were in Jerusalem instead of out near the Dead Sea.
And yes, we Jews can be halakhically observant *and* spiritually engaged, as the Chasidut is very much mystical and enthusiastic within Orthodoxy.
In a study published today in the journal Social Neuroscience, researchers at the University of Utah School of Medicine report that religious and spiritual experiences activate reward circuits in the brain-the same that are associated with feelings of love and drug-induced euphoric states.
- Psychology Today
Thanks for the video :)
Thank you for making and sharing this. I am also commenting to help your channel with the algorithm.
I found an old Spideman comic. Spiderman confirmed! lol.
Spiderman fallacy
Well, he's all over the web!
@@oxcart4172 lol
Thank you for your excellent work Dr. Tabor.
So what don’t apologists want us to find out?
GREAT OPENING!!!! ❤
I have two of Dr Tabor's books. He's great!
Has anyone else noticed that John the Baptist seems remarkably like a guy on the street corner with a Bible in one hand and giant American flag in the other, using a belt support of course, telling us to Read The Bible you are going to Hell. Or the End is coming next week but NOT on any particular day?
I believe that is exactly what he or the person he was based on was in their day.
Yes. The crazy woman at Meijer who screams "YOU ALL BETTER REPENT, BECAUSE THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IS AT HAND!!!" Is exactly how the historical Jesus of Christianity, if he existed, would've behaved.
End-times nuts have always had this similarity across the centuries. It comes with the territory.
There is even an end of the world society and the end of the world is said to be coming each decade. Meanwhile this resonates with people because well life is short.
@@josephmartin5483
> be coming each decade.
I think that 2010 was missed. It was REALLY big for 2000 with one small group of Christians going to Israel to INCITE the Apocalypse, Big A. Falwell was really big on it yet never admitted he was wrong.
Great video!
Awesome as always.
And that’s why I’ve always preferred the NET translation. They actually have “sons of God” in Deuteronomy and explain this exact rationale. However, I disagree with the take that the alternate translation was chosen because of some intrigue to keep polytheism out. It is quite evident that Israelites always referred to themselves as children of God. Someone mistakenly thought the original text was talking about the Israelites. There’s a whole discussion between Jesus and the Pharisees about this in the NT.
Exactly though this may have been a more second temple thing deriving from the henoistic nature of first temple judaism and first temple Samaritanism being basically just cults of El and the tetragrammaton and thus deriving a tribal name off their cult
At 6.25, Prof Tabor points out that McDowell snr was incorrect to claim the text was unchanged but he actually missed something. The claim was not just that the text was reliable but that it was "the word of God". An assertion that has not and cannot be demonstrated to be fact.
Agreed! The same sort of unchanged after centuries claim could be made about veda, I think.
@@bubbles581 Indeed. All religions are based upon claims that have not and cannot be verified. That is why such emphasis is placed upon belief, faith and feelings.
Why did you feel the need to point this out? First of all, that was completely unrelated to what they were talking about, secondly, the assertion that it is was the word of god is basically the same as if a naturalist said the universe was created by the big bang. Just "An assertion that has not and cannot be demonstrated to be fact".
@@onionsans Why did I point it out? For the same reason you have replied. Because I wanted to. Why do I need further justification?
In fact, my point was not unrelated to the topic.
McDowell stated, "thus sayeth the Lord" as another way of proclaiming biblical reliability and to do so he told a blatent lie about the Dead Sea Scrolls. That is what Prof Tabor is countering with facts.
How can that possibly be unrelated?
It should be noted that whether the bible is the word of God, underlies the whole discipline of biblical scholarship and every debate on Judaism and Christianity and much of Islam.
If the divine origin and reliability of the bible were not in question, there would be no need for any investigation or debate.
It is worth mentioning that your reference to the Big Bang is incorrect.
Science has genuine evidence for the early moments of the universe, but there is zero evidence to support any theistic claims, so they are not "basically the same" in any way.
@@Outspoken.Humanist When they say "Thus sayeth the Lord" it is exactly the same as finishing off a proof for a mathematical paper. The thing you're attacking isn't the last statement, you're attacking the supporting bits of the statement, therefore you calling it out is ridiculous. Secondly, The big bang theory is historical science. Since historical science is historical, it is impossible to prove, as we can't go back in time to when it happened. Therefore, any theory related to the past cannot be proven, only supported. Thirdly, there actually are tons of bits of evidence for theistic claims. Saying there is none is ridiculous. Finally, yes, you do need further justification. Your comment links to a section of the video which does not talk about how much the people believe the bible to be the word of God, instead, it points to them talking about the people believing the dead sea scrolls to be proof that the bible is the word of god. The focus of this section of the video is different from the focus of your comment, therefore your comment is irrelevant.
Interesting stuff, thanks Paul.
Wonderful interview
Think of all the priceless manuscripts that have gotten thrown out or are waiting underground buried or whatnot, just always has fascinated me……
Speaking about hidden manuscripts.... There never was multiple Gospels by multiple authors. The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.
Hello hello
@@termination9353halo halo
Hey Paul new to the channel, I really like your content actually I was researching a bit about the history of the Bible that's when I got to know about your channel, and again it was a pleasure to listen to Dr Tabor on your channel talking about the Dead Sea Scrolls
Welcome!
Some Gospel history.. There never was multiple Gospels by multiple authors. The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.
@@termination9353 I'd like to see your argument for Lazarus and the Apostles writing one or any gospel. I'd love to see you debate with Joseph Atwill, who shows that Josephus Flavius was the likely author of Mark which is dated to AFTER the Jewish War in 60 CE. His history of that war and the events of the war dovetail in detail. The quote in John was a much later insert made by apologists, as Bart Ehrman shows in "Misquoting Jesus."
@@deaddocreallydeaddoc5244 So we don't have a legitimate Gospel at all according to ehrman. Any scripture I point out isn't really there.... and anything you say has absolute historical accuracy. You are a cheat.
@@deaddocreallydeaddoc5244 Tell me something, why would the Church add a scripture that contradicts their own claims. Why name a book John and then add a sentence that says Lazarus wrote it?
That commercial is hilarious. Diane Franklin walks down the street eating from a jar of peanut butter. LOL!
Great work. Thank you.
Outstanding! I was so excited with what I was finding in the DSS in the early 1990s I was writing dissertations to my friends in emails trying to engage discussion on how it fit into their religion...I actually had my best friend write back, "PLEASE take me off the DSS Newsletter."😆 Thank you Dr Tabor for making your scholarship available and Paul for it being entertaining.
In the early 1990s....emails
😂
Sure you were...🙄
@@eugeneoisten9409 I just checked the dates and my emails on the subject actually started in 1995. Sorry for the slight error. :/
@@eugeneoisten9409 I wrote my first emails in the mid 80s, so it’s possible. However it was a laborious process.
@rickedwards7276
And you sent that email out. How?
And your list of email addresses could be counted on 2 or 3 fingers at that time right?
@@eugeneoisten9409You do realize that the Net actually started in 1961, and the earliest version of our email standards (RFC # 561 Standardizing Network Mail Headers, by Abhay Bhushan, Ken Pogran, Ray Tomlinson, and Jim White) is from 5 September 73, right? *Right?*
21:25 -- I know this is going to seem like such a small thing, but THANK YOU for calling the five books of Moses the Torah (instead of the pentateuch or whatever it is Christians and ex-Christians seem to love calling it these days - like, dude, the actual name for it is much easier to say and is much less obscure).
You should stick with Jesus rather than Yeshua also. Yeshua is wrongThe Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th..
I would concur with a few exceptions here; it wasn't that the gospels themselves were hijacked by Rome, and this is where most atheist like the people that made this video pivot their views for the Bible in general. It's often exaggerated that the Bible was used as a tool of control by the church. It was the reverse; this is why most sermons, even up until the middle ages in Western Europe mostly were conveyed in Latin. It wasn't until Pope Innocent on his return trip from Paris after it was told to him that the people were holding studies of the Bible. This Revelation was viewed by the church as something that warranted death. The Inquisition of Pope Innocent I believe took place in 1254 a.d. which led to the first live burning of Jews in Paris for willfully hiding Christians from the Catholic Church for having their own Bibles.
useing mathematics (it's one of the 4 branches of science) there is a good argument with evidence I can use to prove God exist. There are Physicist that have done math to show the likely hood of our universe happening "by chance" and they counted every variable for it. One stated that for life to come from nothing (which violates the biological law that life can only come from other life), nothing being molecules accidently arranged them selves to make the first DNA to mindless form into the first living cell is comparable to a tornado going into a scrap metal yard and building a passenger airplane by chance.
The math showed there is a 10^40,000 in 1 Chance of that happening though natural process.
To put that into perspective, if you could speak 32 Zeros in 6 seconds it would take you 4 hours to say that whole number. And it would take about 38 pieces of paper to write out the full number as well.
I can't believe something that has that small of a number behind it.
It would be illogical for me to believe that the universe "accidentally" was created from a huge unorganized explosion (Big bang theory, nothing created everything) made laws of physics that line up for life to exist in the first place. (Protons neutrons and electrons having the ability to even combine together to make Anything in the universe including life forms, and there's no logic or thought behind something so complect and complicated happended by a mere 10^40'000 in one chance.
So by the creation of the universe it's self, and seeing how wonderful and good it was created, It would be more illogical to Believe nothing caused it. In a way, believing something like that is it own fairy tail.
For Christians, "Torah" has the advantage that Jesus called it that. ("the law", aside from "the prophets")
So much rubbish talked on this site! Some will go to *_any_* lengths to try to discredit God's Word, and those with little knowledge of all the facts, mathematical, cultural and literary that prove the veracity of the Bible continue to fall for it, hook, line and sinker! One very simple question shines the light on it, and that's the q1uestion, "Why"? Think about it: If you discredit God's Word, what does it leave you? The ability to ignore the "Gospel once delivered", for whatever religion you want to make up. And you can bet that it won't be one of free salvation through trusting in Christ who already suffered the penalty for your sin. No, it will be one where you try in futility, to earn your own salvation!
Now, to answer your question: "Torah" is the jewish name, and you must gather from context whether it refers only to the 5 books of the Pentateuch or includes other jewish writings. "Pentateuch" has only ever referred to the first 5 books of the Bible. The word simply means "5 books". There is nothing obscure about it, but, like many unbelievers you are clearly prejudiced away from anything Christian.
Amazing stuff 🎉
Always like the Tabor viewpoints!
Great interview Paul! Dr. James Tabors course on Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls is outstanding! ❤
Your criteria for a great interview is that it strokes your bias.
❤ Jesus power. 😮 FREE. Warning it is intense. Last 30 minutes. Best to relax and shut yr eyes😢
@@jamiehudson3661 Yeah, I am sure you're being a Christian does nothing to stroke your own selfish bias, right??
@@britaom3299 Everyone has biases, but you need to admit that. Doesn't mean you can't be objective, but you have to go where the facts lead.
@@jamiehudson3661 Yes. I am biased towards accurate perceptions rather than comfortable prejudices that only feed narcissism and selfishness.
If Jesus’ teachings are more like the Essenes than the Orthodox Jews of the time, then isn’t it more likely that Jesus was an essene and also a reformer of the tradition he was raised in? Also, gospel of Thomas seems to corroborate the idea that Jesus was an essene and also a reformer, IMO. Also, what’s up with the teacher of righteousness? Was Jesus fulfilling prophecies about the teacher of righteousness, or was he one of multiple teachers, or was the New Testament narrative about Jesus just plagiarized from a historical teacher of righteousness from a century before Christ?
Totally. For Paul’s efforts he was shipwrecked, scourged, beaten and ultimately beheaded. Who wouldn’t think he was insincere?
That opening was trippy.
The creepy old dude made it so cringe
A lot of this reminds me of the work of Dr Barbara Theiring. She believed that Jesus & his followers were originally members of the Essene community at Qumran, but seceded from it. She believed John the Baptist was still in the Essene community.
She thought that the Wicked Priest character mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls was Jesus.
She also believed that the Essenes practiced an insane level of timekeeping and recorded all the events in a complicated code she called the Pesher Technique, and that the New Testament was written using the same technique. This is where her views got a bit crazy - well, a lot crazy, actually.
That the gospel of Matthew is a pesher seems downright blatant to me.
It is a jewish tradition in reading scripture to always be able to get something new out of an old text, and we have a lot of evidence for this in the talmud. So merely referencing old scripture taken WAY out of context is not necessarily pesher. I would say that Paul's misquoting of the old testament, Mark's direct drawing of elements from Daniel, and Luke's fascination with the suffering servant aren't necessarily signs of a pesher style. But for Matthew, we can reconstruct most of the pesher he used to create his gospel, especially in his birth and death narratives.
I know less about the Essenes. JtB seems reasonably compatible with them, though I couldn't say I know enough to agree or disagree with Jesus having been a part of them.
Most of what she says is undoubtedly true. There's evidence for most of it.
Her whackiest belief is to assume the Wicked Priest is Jesus and not Paul. Eisenmann thinks it's Paul, so does Robert Price.
@@grumpylibrarianVery astute observations. I'm of the opinion that "Christ Jesus" was merely an appellation denoted to the Gnostic myth of the Christ Aeon, and reading Paul prima facie, and not reading the Gospels into Paul, which is the most fashionable method of interpreting Paul, I think leads to this conclusion without any doubt. Paul himself definitely thought Christ was related to a cosmic "Christ figure" even Bart Ehrman admits that.
He even admits the strong early parallels between Paul and the founder of Gnosticism and the chief disciple of John the Baptist per the Church Fathers, Simon Magus. Popularized by Robert Price.
@@TheMahayanist Quoting Robert Price isn't helping much. The man never met a conspiracy theory he didn't like. I have a lot more respect for Richard Carrier or David Fitzgerald on these things, even where I disagree. As for Eisenmann, I had to look him up, but he's known for being quite out of the mainstream in his tying together of the Essenes and Palestinian messianism. He might be precisely the expert who would know, or he might be the guy who's holding a hammer and looking around for a nail.
Without knowing anything about the wicked priest, I would definitely have trouble being convinced that Paul was an Essene, let alone a notable one. Even where Paul takes a hard left turn away from pharisaic traditions, it's still couched in pharisaic viewpoints.
There's no reason that the wicked priest had to be anybody that we'd ever heard of, so it seems purely speculative to start assuming specific people fit the bill.
@@grumpylibrarianI only quote Price because I think his conclusions are defensible. He's insane in his politics, that's true.
If you take the "Paul = Simon Magus theory" we know from the Church Fathers that Simon Magus was a chief Essene and disciple of John the Baptist. So if you think there's evidence for the Simon as Paul theses, which there is, most easily the claim that he thought the angels created the Torah (Paul does, Galatians 1 I think says the law came by angels as an intermediary)
Saying Paul was Pharasaic is wildly absurd. He was filling his Epistles with Gnostic and mystery religion soteriology, and quotes Greek poets and literature as evidence.
As far as the Wicked Priest is concerned, yes there's speculation. Since the Essenes wrote everything in code.
But there's evidence for the rest of what I've said so far, despite that speculation.
I watched a PBS documentary about the Dead Sea Scrolls and they said that some of the letters that were used in the scroll were not from that time period...so it is very fishy.
I think the Dead sea scrolls may not be of that time period either. They seem to possibly plant seeds of future politically dualistic motivations using word manipulation that coincides with politics/power involving babylonian judean polytheistic gnosticism, Palestine an Zionist Judaism, palestinians, yiddishjews, middle east, slavic, european, russo, greek christians etc. It is convenient that people have been pushing the ideas of Pre-millennialism into manistream over the last 100-200 years, especially later 1800’s political zionist supremacy movements well into the early 1900’s thru to 1960’s an beyond.
These end-times pre-millennial beliefs were partially brought forth by the inserted references to it in the Scofield “Study Bible” man made notes, John Nelson Darby advancing it mainstream at his time, and later the “Left Behind” series of books an movies that normalized an popularized this lesser theory of the book of Revelations and end-times prophecies.
Fringe theologians like Left Behind’s author Lehaye, and Jerry Jenkins (dallas theological seminary), even promoting this non-traditional hypothesis against the much more credible historical theories of major denominations worldwide which point away from a “ Left Behind “ like pre-millennialism pre-trib rapture that these 2 guys try to advance (book/movie sales motives 😮) . The man made occultic babylonian talmud has dark ties to agnostic zionist supremacy movements, political power, persecution of other minorities to get to their goals etc. Cultic Jehovah’s Witnesses also push similiar fringe ideas related to the end-times.
Who is orchestrating or funding these things, and for what agenda an ideological control or financial gain ?? 😮
PBS will also tell you a man can be a woman and a woman can be a man.
Thank you so much for doing what you do.
This is excellent educationing, thanks guys.
I'm a life-long Catholic and will remain one, but... I'm also a scientist. I enjoy these discussions and appreciate the work you put into them.
I'm adult enough to understand that 2000 years, or more depending on which books your talking about, of humans translating and interpreting in various languages will induce all kinds of error. Based on that alone, you just can't take things literally.
I really don't understand the stance of people like you. You say you're a Catholic, but you don't believe the Bible, think it's a word of Man, and select the interpretation based entirely on your feelings despite claiming to be a scientist as well.
I think that your job ends the moment you step out of the lab, and you start falling for all the holes in the broken road again you would have avoided or patched otherwise.
And I definitely think that many if not most Catholics wouldn't say that you are one of them either. But I might misunderstand Catholics, though - a quick google shows me that they allow doubt as long as it's "correct kind".
On smaller note, why is the word of God so fragile, even though it supposedly speaks about the most important part of our lives? Seems to me that God didn't intend for people like us to read it in the first place. It wouldn't be a stretch to claim the Bible to be a work of the Devil instead.
I never said I don't "believe in the Bible." Is it the inspired word of God?? I don't know. I'm not a fundie and really don't have an opinion on that. I don't make selections based on feelings. My IQ is plenty high enough to think and reason.
I also think you read too much into what other people write based on your own perspective.
Do I believe everything that happened 2023 years ago as it is written in various versions of the Bible? Is the catholic Bible more correct than previous versions? No.
Do I think there is a God and does he care what you call him? Yes and no. I do think there's an afterlife. I think you and I are a fragment of our totality. Even the Bible makes that clear. "I knew you before I formed you in your mother's womb." We existed before we were born. I believe we are here to experience life and learn.
Most of the arguments about religion happen due to semantics. Someone hears a word that they interpret based on their experiences. Take the word 'soul'. Fundie Christians seem to believe it's this magical thing inside your body that was created specifically by Jesus so it can be tested its entire life to see if it's worthy of heaven... others believe a soul is just a fragment of a larger consciousness that exists in another place, outside of time.
The cool thing is that you can believe whatever you want and it has no effect on my life and me just being a good person. And a catholic.
@@thomasnewcomb2079 "I never said I don't "believe in the Bible." Is it the inspired word of God?? I don't know. Do I think there is a God and does he care what you call him? Yes and no. I do think there's an afterlife. "
That's exactly what not believing the Bible means.
"My IQ is plenty high enough to think and reason."
I didn't say it wasn't, I said you stop using it when leaving your work.
"I think you and I are a fragment of our totality. Even the Bible makes that clear. "I knew you before I formed you in your mother's womb." We existed before we were born. I believe we are here to experience life and learn."
No, it says *knew,* just like I *know* how my breakfast is going to look like before I prepare it. It doesn't mean that it exists beforehand. Your point doesn't follow.
If anything, I can pick a Bible verse that says otherwise: "For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward, for the memory of them is forgotten."
"Most of the arguments about religion happen due to semantics. Someone hears a word that they interpret based on their experiences."
That's true, just like the above paragraph. And this is precisely why I don't believe any of them, and are confused when I see people picking one or inventing one.
If two bakers accuse each other of poisoning the bread, I would rather stay hungry.
@@nati0598 OK, nati, which Bible are you referring to that you think I don't believe. You may have not fully understood the part in the video where he talked about the difference between 'truth' and 'fact'. Ponder that for a bit because that's core bit here. While I don't necessarily believe the story of Noah happened as written, there are core elements that are interesting to consider.
As a different example, the Golden Rule, which the Bible says Jesus said is just a really good rule to live by, regardless of its alleged source.
As for the 'knew/know' way you phrased it... past tense is past tense. There's a nuance there about actually knowing someone that is different than knowing you're eating a bowl of granola.
@@thomasnewcomb2079 "OK, nati, which Bible are you referring to that you think I don't believe."
Any of them. Just because you agree with certain parts doesn't mean you believe a book. Just like you don't "believe" in a science textbook, you just agree on certain parts, preferably all of them.
Just like here you mention Golden Rule, which you seem to agree with. No, that's not believing in the book. It's a simple agreement. You agree because you have external reasons to think that a Golden Rule is a good rule to live by. (It's not)
In the same way, I suppose, you believe that God exists-ish, and simply "agree" with the Bible of your choosing despite the God you pretend to agree with the Bible on is a completely different entity upon any examination.
Now, I would say it's a _fact_ that the Bible has some _truth_ in it... I don't really know what you expect me to gleam from this that I can connect to your comment.
"As for the 'knew/know' way you phrased it... past tense is past tense."
There is no nuance, I didn't even realize I changed tenses, knew applies the same way here.
And I would say that no, knowing someone and knowing something are the exact same thing. A study of behavior under stimuli.
Even if you were correct, does knowing someone manifest their being into the world? Or are you saying it's impossible to know a person if they didn't exist prior, it being impossible to create any model of a soul?
The LATE Michael Heiser?! Aww man. He was great in Ancient Aliens Debunked. One of the only Christians I could listen to for more than a few minutes
Yes, sadly. I think it was earlier this year, after a battle with, i think, cancer.
I know the feeling. There are very few atheists I can listen to for more than a few minutes.
I'm old enough to remember those original Recess commercials as they were broadcast 😲😲😞
Cookie 🍪🥠😅😆
It's a genuine advert 😮,
Good discussion.
I think the story about the kids throwing rocks into the cave is believable. Since they are herders, they are only focused on the sheep or goats. It's probably goats. If the goats go a climbing up on the rock walls and find some caves, do you want to go up and chase them out. No. You're a lazy teen. Also, you don't want to lose sight of the rest of the flock on the ground when you go a caving. However, if you are clever, you throw rocks up into the cave to scare out the goats. They are stupid goats. They love the caves because it gets you out of that blazing sun. But if you are in the dark and rocks start bouncing of the cave walls and echoing all around you, you get the blankity blank out of there in a hurry. The story of the rock throwing sound legitimate. Or, at least plausible.
Man, I've been a teenager, its plausible from boredom alone. I've been walking all day with these stupid goats, still have another half day of walking to go. I'm seeing if I can land rocks in certain holes and shit just to do something.
Even simpler, kid was slacking off, found a cave, found a jar in the cave, and decided to smash it, for no reason other than smashy smashy. Then, holy crap, something is in these! I should tell someone but maybe not quite how I found them.
@@WukongTheMonkeyKing How is that simpler? And "kids" back in the day didn't slack off. Children were chattel just like the goats. If these kids lost a goat, they would be beaten within an inch of their lives. Climbing into a cave means taking your eyes off the goats. Also, it's not simpler. The kid has to climb up a loose cliff to get to the cave.
@@RobinMarks1313 summarizing things universally is risky. Humans aren't robots, and humans have always done things they weren't supposed to do.
Your example of the trouble they got into would be a great reason for a kid to lie about what they were really doing.
@@WukongTheMonkeyKing These weren't kids. And I'm not summarizing things broadly. I'm walking in these specific kid's boots, or rather, sandals. These were not kids. They were little men given the responsibility of the herd at a young age. They grew up fast. Also, these kids weren't stupid. In the desert, you are hundreds and hundreds of kilometers away from a hospital or medical help. They didn't have cellphone or even phones. To go and climb and explore a cave is a dangerous thing to do and they wouldn't do it frivolously. These were you're average North American teens. These kids weren't our culture's kids on spring break in Florida. Their father would whip them if they lost a goat. To go exploring meant real danger and you wouldn't do it unless you threw a rock, broke a jar, and thought maybe there was something valuable in the hole way up in that dangerous place. I'm not generalizing. I'm living through the kids and seeing their lives. And I understand it since I was a farm kid. Farm kids and city kids ain't the same thing. Life and death is all around you and you take things seriously. Kids on the farm drive tractors and know it's dangerous. Farm kids die. Also, they see things slaughtered. These kid shepherds were no fools. I believe the story is plausible.
Thanks for this. I think there is so much more to be gained spiritually by a honest look at all the sources provided to us.
Replace "spiritually" with "being ethical". In other words, "be here now". ❤
Maybe just dont be a liar and a hypocrite because your actions have consequences and these texts are full of bad ideas.
The present time is the best way to practice Christian teachings. There is too much emphasis on the ancient times and the prophecies of the future. It is a better result to view the Word of Jesus as always current (IS,WAS, WILL BE).
I've had that book for 20 years, and read it, twice!
It always amazes me that we can easily conclude that a 75-year-old story about ancient scrolls has become altered or exaggerated over 7 decades, yet we somehow accept that the origin of our Bible was divine, indisputable, and without corruption - for over 1000 years.
40,000 Christian relgious texts and archeological discovery and many non Chirstian texts that serve to concrete it are what the Bible is compared to. The dead sea scrolls are a very small piece of it all. There's astounding evidence out there archeological and so on. It's not like there's very little evidence, and it's built upon nothing. There's a reason why it's not thrown out the window in science like you're thinking it should be. Christianity has the most historical accuracy of any religion that's known to date. It's the most tested religion on all fronts, historical, scientific, and archeological. Its not like there's nothing to go off of lol
And written some 200 years after Jesus' death after anybody who would've personally known or interacted with the dude was long since dead.
We keep making changes to language to fit whatever narrative at the time that’s why language can’t properly translate back and forth. We find stuff like this and make it say whatever we like it to say without checking cross-referencing the other language’s. All we really need to do is work together but each group is too narcissistic. Meanwhile the changes to the comprehension from our language make other languages not make sense. Writing is always the phonetic spelling of language that’s how it was intended otherwise it literally makes no sense and can’t be used. Again the chosen solution was school the people on the new meanings that are not exactly phonetic
@@Tanjutsu4420 Yes, language is certainly a substantial issue, but some things - such as bias & ignorance - can transcend language barriers.
If the Dead Sea Scrolls are too much, you can always read the label of Dr Bronner's Soap.
I have a question: what Septuagint manuscripts do we have of 3-2 BC to claim that Septuagint agrees to the Dead Sea Scrolls? What manuscripts are compared? Thank you.
Truly amazing stuff.
Ah yes .. josh mcdowell ! The 'evidence that demands a verdict' bookwriter ! I read at least one of those when i was a good little fundamentalist .. they seem rather quaint now.
I have read much of the gnostic scriptures , but never the dead sea scrolls. It's good to know Paul that you are keeping current with this as i didn't know all the scrolls have been translated and released.
Keep up the great work Paul !
What’s quaint about it?
@@ianmartinesq Have you read it ? just the arguments against evolution are silly by what we know now.
@@scottmcfadyen293 I’ve read segment that I was researching. I’ll acknowledge I haven’t read anything in it about evolution. I’ll have to go read the section on evolution. I was reading it for the historical sections.
@@ianmartinesq Fair enough. i remember reading it to challenge a teacher in school. it was a part about how old the earh is and the bokd argument that dating methods are questionable by being wrong when dating various things. carbon-14 for things of a fairly young age and potassium-argon dating for older rock strata.
@@scottmcfadyen293 Interesting. I haven’t read that part either so I don’t know how good it is.
However, I was talking to a nuclear engineer one time and he was telling me something that sounds pretty similar. Essentially that carbon dating and potassium-argon dating are actually very unreliable. His explanation came with a page chock full of equations I didn’t understand.
I kept the page to try to get a handle on it. I still don’t understand it well enough to make the claim myself. Nevertheless, I haven’t forgotten his tea-time presentation and I always try to remember to take all carbon and potassium-argon dating claims with a grain of salt.
Hey, that was very interesting. I would be interested in hearing a much longer discussion about how the Dead Sea scrolls relate to everything and what they mean and so forth. How did they affect modern scholarship? What was the reaction of the crazy conservative people that our Paul here is always using as foils? I simply don't know enough about the Dead Sea scrolls and I really enjoy Tabor's take on it. I wish this video was an hour long, I guess it's what I'm saying.
Thanks a lot, Paul
I would recommend Kipp Davis channel if you haven’t seen his work on the DSS. Long form extremely informative content. But it’s more detailed specifics and less overarching ideas.
@@Looshington Thanks: I'm actually listening to an episode of the Mythvision podcast with him as the guest right now. Appreciate it
James is about to start a ten part series on it on his channel
There never was multiple Gospels by multiple authors. The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.
He notes Isaiah 43:25.
KJV, hundreds of years before the Dead Sea Scrolls reads as
“I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.”
How is this different than the Dead Sea Scroll translation he is citing:
“I, I am the one who blots out your transgression for my own sake, and I will remember your sins no longer”
doesnt sound…. “entirely different”
That opening scene was amazing
One of my favorite subjects.
My favorite "Bedouin throwing a rock" is still Christopher Moore's deeply empathetic, oddly learned and hilariously irreverent Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal. Okay, it's not a particular favorite among biblical scholars, but stiff shirts do need some of the starch taken out of them in order sit comfortably on human skin. I really can't recommend this book highly enough...for everyone, on both sides of this cultish cultural divide.
I recommended Lamb as a 'funny, irreverent book' to a coworker I didnt realize was deeply catholic (he was one of those unicorn religious people that personally believed but didnt feel the need to convert everyone). He was .. disturbed, lol. But I cant agree enough with you, the book is hilariously weird, deeply tongue-in-cheek, and in no way tries to have any sort of factual hidden basis (like a certain Da Vinci Code does)
Very interesting commentary. I think it defies credulity to think that the Jesus movement had no awareness of the Essenes, or that there would have been no influences on religious thought spread between them. It seem to me to be very possible that Jesus's teachings grew from an existing schismatic movement that was attractive because of its relative permissiveness.
Stretches credulity for sure. Jesus himself was an Essene monk. There never was multiple Gospels by multiple authors. The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.
The New Testament tells you about a preexisting group, the one lead by John the Baptist.
@@termination9353clearly John 21:24 is John talking about himself.
If you are in some group telling you different, as in the nonsense about Lazarus you posted above, get out, you are in a cult.
@@broz1488 scripture says Lazarus is the disciple whom Jesus loved. John 11:5 Now Jesus LOVED Martha, and her sister, and LAZARUS, John 11:3
Therefore his sisters sent unto him{Jesus], saying, Lord, behold, HE[Lazarus] WHOM THOU LOVEST is sick.., John11:36 Then said the Jews, Behold how he[Jesus] LOVED him[Lazarus]!
@@termination9353 you are trying to make 2+2=5, on nothing more than a thumbsuck.
You seem to forget that Christianity developed and was born in a community of many hundreds of followers, and thousands of followers after Pentecost Sunday.
Followers who have left us written accounts of what they witnessed and experienced. Their personal testimonials.
Not one early account mentions the nonsense you are peddling. In fact the early eyewitness accounts completely contradict everything you are claiming.
Thank you, Dr. Robert Eisenman. 🙏
Yay! Love Dr. Tabor!
Locusts and honey almost certainly means locust beans and honey. They’re an important legume used for food and medicine in North Africa around the Mediterranean
Depends on the original language used. I’m assuming it was Greek. In modern Greek, locust bean and carob are the same word: χαρούπι (charoúpi). So it’s likely the translation into English was corrupted.
I’ve seen the ‘locust bean’ explanation before, but I’m not an expert.
Locusts aren’t impossible though, even if they are not that common in semi desert scrub. Locusts were allowed as food for Jews in the Torah, as ‘hopping creatures’ as opposed to crawling ones (insects or other bugs).
@@brianfileman I’d really like to know if I’m wrong in the understanding of locust meaning black locust beans, as the implications are rather important. Many Christians are unaware of the devotion to vegetarian diets that were ubiquitous in early Christianity, born out of an opposition to ritual animal slaughter. It’s my understanding that the ebionites; Nazarenes, and Essenes all had this in common, at least at the monastic or priestly level. Apparently abstaining from meat was so common in Christianity’s early days that it was a red flag for romans who were persecuting those adherents to the “superstitious cult of Christianity”
@@PathologicallyPositive
Not sure I can help further. If the reference in the Greek Gospels uses the word for carob or locust bean, the answer is unambiguous.
If it uses ακρίδα (akrída), then perhaps locust was intended. But of course, the time difference between events and recording them could explain the confusion.
@@brianfileman Thank you for the help! I’ll see what I can figure out based on that info
The whole point of Jesus is to work together under humanity and not wait for some God to save them. Why would Jesus help people if he thought God was going to save them.The whole point of Jesus help is have faith in yourself and only humanity working together will let people know that they are on heaven.
You are completely lost, unfortunately
Jesus said ‘apart from me you can do nothing’. Have you ever read Scripture??
Where can I find a print of the artwork used. Specifically when you were speaking about the “Bene Elohim”?
I got formally bonked on the head in this video. Thank you very much
The title surprises me a bit because it suggests that apologists may deliberately want to hide certain facts, which would mean that they themselves have doubts and do not deeply believe in what they say.I wonder if it's even possible to be a doubting apologist? :)
I've seen enough apologists lie to know that some of them are just in it for the money. I suspect most of them are, but i have other things to do than carefully investigate each of them.
The whole purpose of apologetics is to push a narrative. Considering all the good counter arguments to apologetic arguments that have emerged in the last two millennia, and the fact that virtually all apologists stick to the same script they’ve always used, it’s safe to say that many apologists are disingenuous at best and downright dishonest at worst
I'd love to see an analysis like this as it relates to Mormonism. Mormons (I used to be one) love to reference the Dead Sea Scrolls as somehow proving Mormonism, but naturally can't expand on that vague idea. I actually didn't even realize wider Christianity did the same thing.
People can leave the church of Jesus Christ, but they just can't leave it alone. Never have I ever been so infatuated with something that I don't believe in. Strange. As a member myself, I've never once gone looking for "proof" of the book of Mormon. It speaks for itself through the power of the holy ghost.
Z- There never was multiple Gospels by multiple authors. The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.
@@natandjoecif the BofM speaks for itself by the power of the Holy Ghost, why doesn't it speak to everyone who studies it and sincerely prays about it? I was born and raised LDS and was a devoted member for fifty years, but the Holy Ghost never gave me any such witness.
@termination9353 very cool story..uh...where did you learn this, exactly?
@@bluelantern144 mostly from the gospel scripture itself. Acts 10 confirms that Cornelius already had in his possession a Gospel narrative scroll.
Love this channel. It's like food.
The Truth doesn’t change, only our understanding.
New Testament conference I remember when they did the Jesus Seminar. That bad people of various opinions talking.
It always kinda bothered me that someone would be walking around eating peanut butter out of a jar on a public street like that, but the 80's were a wild and lawless time dude!! ; )
Do you know who the girl is?
She played the lead role in the, The last American virgin.
...Diane Franklin
@@michealfriedman7084 Huh. Interesting factoid. Thanks.
Not as wild as the 60s. Then, we'd walk the streets eating chips out of a newspaper. We were well hard.
@@Gynra 😂🤣Definitely broke the mold, didn't they?
Thank you 🙏
Loved the Life of Brian clip hahaha amazing
9:00 nice! This is the first time I've heard Dr Tabor translating "elohim" as "gods", and of course it makes a lot of sense. The jewish religion obviously came out of an eclectic polytheistic landscape prior to the reforms under king Josiah.
Gotta love Tabor making Shit up with zero evidence eh? Hey, why not do a dissertation on; white is black?
The "in" , "im" endings of Semitic languages implies plural.
Father, Son, Spirit... 3 in 1 bud. If you wish to argue it is not Monotheistic.. We have a problem as Bible says all 3 know exactly everything the other is and does. @@osvaldobenavides5086
@@osvaldobenavides5086 it does, however usually Dr Tabor says that "elohim" refers to something more like "lord of lords" and he and others also usually point out that while elohim is a plural word, it is usually accompanied by singular verbs, which should be plural if it were an actual plural.
@integrationalpolytheism if a hundred people in a bus drive off a cliff. The people are plural, but the bus is singular.
Everybody knows that The Life of Brian is the True gospel of the New Testament! We just have to follow the gourd...
Yep. Also, Christians love to ignore the fact that the Gospels were anonymously written by Greek speaking Christians decades later, and there are zero contemporary secular sources for Jesus. 🤷🏻♂️
😁Great opening! - Stay healthy ! Keep your marvelous brains in top shape!
The bottom line; human beings are not "born in sin." Once you realize that this is a biological and psychological fact, and our emotions are based on instincts that all living things share to some degree or another, you realize that there is no need to be "saved" from your "sin" of being born. This undermines the entire premise of Christianity.
Your assertions are flawed. If one denies the existence of sin, then one will never accept the term born in sin. However, if one accepts that certain behavior is unacceptable, one cannote doubt that children need not be taght that unacceptable behavior. And that is the meaning of born in sin. Nobody accuses a chicken of lying or murder.
You need serious help.
I so love the "Bloody Boring Prophets" scene
And the whore of Babylon shall ride forth on a three-headed serpent, and throughout the lands, there'll be a great rubbing of parts. Yeeah...
What DSS English translation do you recommend?
This is so interesting. I remember my sister (when in a college that was funded in part by a religious denomination). Her professor of Theology told her "if not for the Catholic Church taking the Dead Sea Scrolls there would be no Church today". Is that true, but I remember NOT being surprised that any religion would take such scrolls--if they even exist.
Don't overestimate facts. Age-old institutions cannot be 'refuted'.
The REAL Christians are the Copts. Catholicism owes its existence to Constantine.
I'm a christian and will always be one. But the more you explore and learn about the early writings and culture you realize how obvious it is that this was all done by imperfect people many whom were and are very set on proving themselves right
I have evidence God does exist:
useing mathematics (it's one of the 4 branches of science) there is a good argument with evidence I can use to prove God exist. There are Physicist that have done math to show the likely hood of our universe happening "by chance" and they counted every variable for it. One stated that for life to come from nothing (which violates the biological law that life can only come from other life), nothing being molecules accidently arranged them selves to make the first DNA to mindless form into the first living cell is comparable to a tornado going into a scrap metal yard and building a passenger airplane by chance.
The math showed there is a 10^40,000 in 1 Chance of that happening though natural process.
To put that into perspective, if you could speak 32 Zeros in 6 seconds it would take you 4 hours to say that whole number. And it would take about 38 pieces of paper to write out the full number as well.
I can't believe something that has that small of a number behind it.
It would be illogical for me to believe that the universe "accidentally" was created from a huge unorganized explosion (Big bang theory, nothing created everything) made laws of physics that line up for life to exist in the first place. (Protons neutrons and electrons having the ability to even combine together to make Anything in the universe including life forms, and there's no logic or thought behind something so complect and complicated happended by a mere 10^40'000 in one chance.
So by the creation of the universe it's self, and seeing how wonderful and good it was created, It would be more illogical to Believe nothing caused it. In a way, believing something like that is it own fairy tail. It's just more intellectual.
If the Dead Sea Scrolls weren't copied by Levite scribes, I'd be very caution of holding them in higher regard than those that we suppose _were._ They were very meticulous to copy the scroll to the Yud (smallest Hebrew character) and stroke. Also known as _jot and tittle._
The Essenes-those believed to have been in possession of the scrolls-did not have all the same beliefs as the wider Jewish community. It isn't far off to say their copies of the Torah and Tanakh may have been inaccurate. Older does not equal more reliable. The source matters a great deal.
Considering the spelling differences between some words in the Masoretic text and dead sea scrolls too in the hebrew - conveying the same message phonetically at least (depending on your Hebrew accent)
Can’t believe I just heard about these now for the first time at age 25
Are the Nag Hamadi scrolls considered as part of the dead sea scrolls? If not, would you also include that as a fourth text to consider?
Septuagint
Masoretic
Dead Sea
Nag Hamadi?
My crew calls ourselves "recovering Catholics"
I think there's a decent case that John the Baptist, if his reality in any way matches his portrayal in the gospels and Josephus, was at least highly influenced by the Essenes.
As for Jesus, whom I truly doubt in any way matched his depictions in the gospels (and might not have ever met John the Baptist), how pro-Essene or anti-Essene he was varies quite a bit from gospel to gospel. Luke is the most anti-Essene, while Mark and Matthew lean more pro-Essene, though neither make that strong a case for it. And as usual, John does his own thing.
The Church Fathers say that John the Baptist was an Essene. And the Essenes match the Theraputae, who are likely the Buddhist missionaries from India sent by King Ashoka, in 21 of 23 key beliefs and practices. (According to research by Rene Salm) Making it likely that the Essenes were a highly syncretic sect of Judaism (possible precursor to some of the pagan mystery cult practices later popularized by Paul's Epistles and John's Gospel)
I won't debate the historical Jesus because there's simply no point. The Jesus in our earliest sources is simply one in Paul's imagination. That's true whether or not a historical Jesus actually existed in history. Moreover, scholars have dozens of "historical Jesus" models and have yet to converge on any one that lends credibility.
@@TheMahayanist Whether or not Jesus existed, the gospel authors depicting him in any way leaning Essene does tell us a bit about them.
@@grumpylibrarianYeah, but that assumes the Gospels are history, as Catholics or those who grow up in a Catholicized culture are prone to do. When they aren't. They're simply allegorical stories. Helms, MacDonald, Crossan all have books on that.
@@TheMahayanist I don't think you understood my point at all.
I have no reason to believe a single word of the gospels is true. I said it says something about the AUTHORS. And while they weren't Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, they were people who existed who had opinions and infused those opinions into their writings, and what they wrote down tells us about THEM.
@@TheMahayanist :zx There never was multiple Gospels by multiple authors. The Gospel was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them Friday 13th.
Pleasantly surprised to hear about Dr. Heiser again. He was my favorite.