Watch the after show on Patreon: patreon.com/dannyjones Support the show by checking out our sponsors: manscaped.com - Use code DANNYJONES for 20% off + free shipping! buy.ver.so/danny - Use code DANNY to save 15% on your first order. whiterabbitenergy.com/?ref=DJP - Use code DJP for 20% off
Danny, for the love of the gad fly, get the scholar Russel Gmirkin on the show! He basically argues the Septuagint was before the Hebrew Torah as well. It all a Hellenistic invention!
Ammon is a few levels higher than him but no offence because I’m so much lower lol Ammon sounds very much better knowledgeable and confident than the religious community I’ve had a change in my life spiritually ever since Chris Bledsoe but Ammon makes so much more sense to me now on my spiritual journey not religious. I pray to Mother Love and Holy Spirit that’s it no Jesus and my life changed for the better ❤😊 Thank you for everything @DannyJones
Yes. That’ was the gist of Ammon. Look at the source. Text ( I’m not agreeing or disagreeing. Because I can .001 percent read it ) but. I do like the old sources. Real books. Not web)
why do you think he's giving free classes on ancient greek. There aren't enough classics to go around, let alone ones who read the pharma side of the Greek. So he's making more Classics.
I’m pretty sure Dan McClellan does read Ancient Greek. He just doesn’t know the classical sources as well Ammon, especially the pharma stuff (which is Ammon’s speciality), because he is more focused on Jewish and Christian literature.
@@Mikey-hv6lw knowing medical texts that others don't is a smokescreen to deflect from the trick he's pulled with every time he uses them. What do I mean? He had an illegitimate methodology to create his novel translations by isolating a word from its context in the sentence (and passage), taking it to the LSJ to find a different definition that is more drug or cult related and claiming this is its real meaning. But what he never does is then read the passage in English with his new translation inserted - because it will be utter nonsense. It is not a legitimate translation. Another trick he pulls to reinforce his illegitimate translations is to take the listeners on a rabbit trail of related words all of them getting further away from a logical reading, but the practice is designed to mesmerise and reinforcee the nonsense he's forcing into the original text. I'm actually one of his ex students from the first cohort, but because I couldn't join his echo-chamber, he evicted me. He's running a cut behind the scenes and created a narcissistic codependency - he's an exceptionally good love-bomber to those inside and they just can't see through his mask, so defend him fiercely. That aside, I will illustrate how illegitimate is his definition of the word, lēstēs. It is crucial for Ammon's entire narrative: the only crime in Ammon's books that Jesus did, was to be profiteering from the Mystery rite through trafficking - apart from this "sin," Ammon actually fully endorses all the atrocities that he alleges Jesus was doing as an essential part of "the Christian Mystery" - which he has also clearly stated many times, is his ambition to replicate, himself, as part of his Satanic commission to initiate the Apocalypse. He claims that when Jesus sees the "swat team" coming to arrest him, he is "screaming, I'm not a trafficker!" By itself his paraphrase of Mk 14:48 is utterly wrong because it's merely an exclamation of surprise at the size of the force coming to arrest him *as if* he's a lēstēs. It is not a guilty confession! But in the context of Lk 23:2-3, 13-14 it shows that they went to arrest him believing him to be a dangerous "rebel" about to lead an insurrection with an armed gang. "Rebel" is not the definition you will find in the LSJ because it still means brigand, outlaw, but when Josephus published his works, he disparagingly calls the *rebels* "lēstai" 114 times. All the Gospels were written after his publications, so their use of the word in this way is entirely understandable. Whenever I post a comment on his videos i know beforehand that mods will protect Ammon who will not ever engage with any knowledgeable and scholarly pushback that clearly shows the errors in his narrative. I have added the bracketed translations to it just now for people here, but the latest comment I made even started with: "If all mods and Ammon honour Diké (Justice) and Alētheia (Truth), they will leave this comment and any further replies in public view." And they still hid it! There already exists a Greek word for "human trafficker" that stayed unchanged from Classical to Koine times. It's andrapodistēs: Aristoph. Pl. 521, reads in Classical Greek: κερδαίνειν βουλόμενός τις ἔμπορος ἥκων ἐκ Θετταλίας παρὰ πλείστων *ἀνδραποδιστῶν.* Translated, it means: "Perhaps a merchant wanting to profit through many *slave-dealers* coming from Thessaly." 1 Tim 1:10 reads in Koine Greek: πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοίταις, *ἀνδραποδισταῖς,* ψεύσταις, ἐπιόρκοις, καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερον τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀντίκειται, (The law is) For fornicators, for males who lie down with males, for *kidnappers of free men,* for liars, for oath breakers and for all things opposed to the sound teaching. Andrapodistēs has *ALWAYS* meant "kidnapper/slavedealer/menstealer/trafficker" - this meaning has *NEVER* been legitimately translated from lēstēs, in any *KOINE* text anywhere. (The NT was written in Koine, not Classical). To my knowledge it's not translated "trafficker" in any Classical text either. No-one in Lsdybabtlon666 has ever yet acknowledged this truth from the texts when I have raised it, before (and it's had a little exposure before being hidden). Are they always going to be too invested in being an unthinking echo-chamber? But I hope Danny's subscribers are more open minded - let's discuss it, please 🤔
Frankly, I didn’t really buy what Hillman was saying until I watched this guy fumbling around trying to discredit him only with the words “laughable”, “non sensical”, and so on. Man, explain why Hillman is wrong. You Have nothing to add except running away from the argument pretending to laugh.
It's been out for an hour or so and you replied 34 minutes ago. Tell me you didn't watch the podcast and just cherry-picked excerpts without telling me....
Lady Babylon brings the ancient source texts. That's a little more convincing, IMO, than a "scholarly" opinion. Argument with supporting evidence beats argument.
I don’t care either way who is right. There is no way to know for sure if either man is right. So you all sound really idiotic arguing either way. What I do know. I’m an intuitive. It’s very clear after watching/listening to Ammon that he is HEAVILY using hypnosis techniques on you guys. He has an agenda to “turn or kill souls”. He says he is a Satanists, and from listening to him he is a luciferian. It’s nobody’s job to change a souls one way or the other. It is each beings choice. Just like I think it is wrong for Christians or any religion to try to convert people. It is wrong for Ammon to do it the other way. He laughs at you all for how simple minded you are. You all believe every word he says because he is using technique. You all have SHEEP stamped on your forehead and energy signature. So Ammon the snake grins and yells “I’m your shepherd, follow me to greener pastures”. And you all go Baaa baaaa and follow off a cliff. Where he feasts and energy harvests off your energy. Good luck, y’all need it.
This guy made no convincing arguments, he just called things laughable and nonsensical without providing any evidence. Honestly not really worth watching
He made an appeal to authority right out of the gate. Like I just commented, scholars need to stop that nonsense. Make the argument. Consensus is a bit of a bruised edifice at the moment. We're here to learn, not join a cult.
@@mh4zdYou're not here to join a cult but you side with the guy who has no critical work in Hebrew or study of the Hebrew bible. Here's a free tip. Anyone who tells you one language is better because it can communicate with one word what it might take another three is conning you. That takes place in every translation throughout history. He relies on the people who know nothing about translating Hebrew or Greek. He's not impressing anyone else.
@@Robert_Browne Oh this is delicious. You took from my comment that I sided with Amon or whatever his name is. Holy S. You're demonstrating polemics to a T, and you can't recognize a call to objectivity because you think critiquing someone means the critic is automatically on the side of the criticized person's other opponents. I want Dan to do better. Get it? Get off the tribal reflex.
This guest admitted after the podcast was over that he was wrong about the word count of ancient Hebrew. It really does only have 8,000 words, as Ammon claimed.
@@wackyswacky1374 Yes! Danny showed that on the screen and Dan still insisted 80,000. Obviously doesn't have the knowledge he claims but her certainly has a lot more biase than what he claims.
Off the rip I find it hard to imagine that a Mormon is going to objectively evaluate Hillman's claims. On the basis of Faith alone, such a concession would be heretical. Basically, McClellan's opinion is firmly compromised by an external obligation
Dr McClellan has repeatedly stated that the evidence points to a 19th century origin for the BoM, against the authenticity of the Book of Abraham, etc. He's very willing to be honest when the data contradicts with the dogmas of his spiritual community.
Well put. I wonder how he explains his religions racist claims that black people skin became dark because they sinned and were cursed. Also wonder what he thinks about his religion withholding the "priesthood" in that religion from African Americans for 20 more years after the Civil rights movement. What he thinks about Joseph Smith translating texts to scripture in the book of Mormon, which was translated by those who speak Egyptian, and multiple sources asserted the translation wasn't the fancy story told my JS, but rather funeral texts. Wonder what he would say about his prophet sending away many of his devout leaders in the church on missions, just so he could steal and marry their wives while they were gone. I also wonder what he thinks about his prophet marrying 14 year Olds and many children, and having what was it, 34 wives? This gentleman lost all credibility in my mind that he could study ancient texts and still be apart of a religion founded by a con artist and terrorist, which is why Joseph Smith was killed in prison, after he ordered a news paper press building to be burned down because they were slandering the church. He turned himself in, not knowing he was facing grand arson and terrorist charges. He lost any credibility by admitting he was Mormon. Anybody who genuinely researches this faith would be an absolute ignorant lost soul to continue with that religion. Hard to believe any of this man's claims and research. "Coming from an ex-mormon who had their records removed from the church, and had the highest leaders of the church threaten me for leaving that insane cult."
Is this a bot attack or have all the crazies come out? Dan is a Mormon by tradition. He has criticized both Christian apologetics (who despise him as an atheist), and Mormonism; all from the perspective of the scholarly consensus (when he gives his own thoughts on an uncertain matter, he explicitly says that he is speculating beyond evidence).
@@beorntwit711 you can name call all you want. By tradition or by faith it doesn't matter. If Hillman were correct, and I'm not saying that he is, not am I in a position to make such a claim, a person compromised by their own cultural identity is going to be a poor sword-bearer to take up the fight against untruth. Dan McClellan could be the best biblical scholar on Earth, but this was in no way of convincing counter-argument to Ammon Hillman's outlandish claims. This would only be a satisfactory response if you're primed to hear a basic rebuttal and call it a day.
Everyone, EVERYONE, is the 2nd type. We only briefly lean into the 1st type unless rigorously trained. You can believe you don't do this, but that is your inner Self protecting you from your own bs. Stay vigilant.
this one is a thougie. I believe I was in the 1st type but on a closer inspection I'm the second category. How do you get closer to the Truth in a daily basis? Modern science methods are based of Karl Popper theories: scientific knowledge does not advance confirming new theories, it does by eliminating laws that contradict the experience.
I'll summarize this interview for you. Danny asks about Ammons claims, dude laughs and says no that's silly, they didn't mean it that way without providing any proof other than they wouldn't say that in bibilical greek.
What is the evidence that Amon’s claims were true? He just asserted meaning without context. Anything that can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Ammon ruffled a lot of feathers. I love it so much. You can tell who goes into the research trying to learn, and who goes into it trying to prove a point. Ammon is a role model for all scholars and he's setting the bar way higher than any apologist can reach
Imagine absolutely knowing nothing about greek or ancient history, but then when a fringe scholar comes along with something edgy to say, you blindly assume he's right, and mainstream is wrong.
So you have no idea who this guy is do you? He goes against plenty of biblical scholars. He’s not really the guy I’d choose to fight on the side of the Bible lol
@@clockworkorange333please elaborate I've just come across him and I found rather interesting the topics he spoke of. Why would he proclaim to be a professor and not be one. have you any evidence to back up your claim. (I'm asking questions not defending him just curious on where you got that from)
@@smokinhoff9209look up ammon. Of course he isn't a "fake" expert. Why ask a random youtube commenter about him when he has plenty of information available about himself?
Honestly, I was hoping someone would ‘debunk’ the things Dr Hillman was saying, as they were quite frankly terrifying. But if anything, this video has made me pull my head out of the sand and realise that Hillman probably is right.
I thoroughly debunk something he brings in virtually every video he makes - and he's terrified of me ever being heard, so hides my comments (or his protectors do). I have lost count of the number of times he has hidden my debunking of his mistranslation of lēstēs!! But I can post it here and have done 😊 In case you don't find it (not too far above here), I said The definition of the word, lēstēs, is crucial for Ammon's entire narrative: the only crime in Ammon's books that Jesus did, was to be profiteering from the Mystery rite through trafficking - apart from this "sin," Ammon actually fully endorses all the atrocities that he alleges Jesus was doing as an essential part of "the Christian Mystery" - which he has also clearly stated many times, is his ambition to replicate, himself, as part of his Satanic commission to initiate the Apocalypse. He claims that when Jesus sees the "swat team" coming to arrest him, he is "screaming, I'm not a trafficker!" By itself his paraphrase of Mk 14:48 is utterly wrong because it's merely an exclamation of surprise at the size of the force coming to arrest him *as if* he's a lēstēs. It is not a guilty confession! But in the context of Lk 23:2-3, 13-14 it shows that they went to arrest him believing him to be a dangerous "rebel" about to lead an insurrection with an armed gang. "Rebel" is not the definition you will find in the LSJ because it still means brigand, outlaw, but when Josephus published his works, he disparagingly calls the *rebels* "lēstai" 114 times. All the Gospels were written after his publications, so their use of the word in this way is entirely understandable. Whenever I post a comment on his videos i know beforehand that mods will protect Ammon who will not ever engage with any knowledgeable and scholarly pushback that clearly shows the errors in his narrative. I have added the bracketed translations to it just now for people here, but the latest comment I made even started with: "If all mods and Ammon honour Diké (Justice) and Alētheia (Truth), they will leave this comment and any further replies in public view." And they still did delete it! There already exists a Greek word for "human trafficker" that stayed unchanged from Classical to Koine times. It's andrapodistēs: Aristoph. Pl. 521, reads in Classical Greek: κερδαίνειν βουλόμενός τις ἔμπορος ἥκων ἐκ Θετταλίας παρὰ πλείστων *ἀνδραποδιστῶν.* Translated, it means: "Perhaps a merchant wanting to profit through many *slave-dealers* coming from Thessaly." 1 Tim 1:10 reads in Koine Greek: πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοίταις, *ἀνδραποδισταῖς,* ψεύσταις, ἐπιόρκοις, καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερον τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀντίκειται, (The law is) For fornicators, for males who lie down with males, for *kidnappers of free men,* for liars, for oath breakers and for all things opposed to the sound teaching. Andrapodistēs has *ALWAYS* meant "kidnapper/slavedealer/menstealer/trafficker" - this meaning has *NEVER* been legitimately translated from lēstēs, in any *KOINE* text anywhere. (The NT was written in Koine, not Classical). To my knowledge it's not translated "trafficker" in any Classical text either. No-one in Lsdybabtlon666 has ever yet acknowledged this truth from the texts when I have raised it, before (and it's had a little exposure before being hidden). Are they always going to be too invested in being an unthinking echo-chamber? But I hope Danny's subscribers are more open minded - let's discuss it, please 🤔
60 seconds in and his rambling technique has already lulled me into a completely blank state of consciousness. Damn Danny is asking GOOD questions! I think the constant hand gesturing is part of keeping folks from thinking while they are being mesmerized.
Lol, after thinking he disproved dr. Hillman by saying the Hebrew language has upwards of 80 000 words, a quick search vindicates dr. Hillman!!! 20:24 Edit: in fact it's worse than Hillman said. The figure 8679 is for total words in the Hebrew Bible, while unique words are 1480, a far cry from the 80 000 McClellan claims, any way you look at it.
Yeah, the problem with mistranslations is that from then on, every ‘scholar’ studies it and truly believes what they are saying. Just because a large number of people believe something, doesn’t mean it is correct.
All I'm saying is. There so much archeological evidence that shows the Mediterranean was a hot pot for elusinian / occult like practices. It existed in many forms amongst the egyptains, Etruscans, minoans, phoenicians, Greeks and ...the list goes on. These practices used..yes drugs but in many forms, not all that we would perceive as psychedelic today. Some of these rituals included burning your child, crucifing men (romans got the idea from carthage) dancing for days, drugs, sex with same sex, adults children, animals, necromancy.. All types of poisens. It happened so often that we have one big ass book call the greek magical papyri.. It's all there and it isn't even the half of it. It was so impactful that it pretty much inspires the renascience (with hermes/ who was the protector of dionysus) Do I belive that the Romans killed the litteral son of God? Or do I believe they killed a man to make an example to those practicing these mysteries? (mysteries where the main intention was to become one/invoke God)
Marvel brained, astroturfed, pharma apologist sewing disinformation on behalf of the Cathedral. Knowingly or unknowingly disingenuous. Really sad to see how shallow his thinking is
To be fair, this guy isn't much of a scholar. I'd rather see an educational background including real universities and real degrees. Any of us following the Ammon saga could get the 15-30 hrs needed for a minor in Greek with Ammon's help. I didn't even know what classics was until Dr Hillman showed up in my feed.
Everything Ammon Hillman has stated about biblical scholars has just been confirmed by MR. DUCKTALES conservative, orthodox and bias views about the Hebrew translations
His religious views aside from identifying as Mormon are not public. He stated at one point that he views religious identification(even being an atheist) as less indicative of actual beliefs and more akin to being a fan of a given football team (this is backed by sociological research- there are even atheists who believe in God and Christians who think for sure God doesn’t exist). He explicitly holds a number of scholarly views that he says directly contradict with and undermine Mormonism. Imo, he’s the real deal. His disagreement with Ammon is in no way an attempt to defend Jesus, as he’s called out Jesus’ absurd views about hell and slavery.
LOL The shirt was the first notation of discrediting his words. It seems to me, if your going on a podcast representing your education/knowledge, the clothing choice would be a consideration. He may be smart but I question anything he says contradicting what I have learned in my life. I feel he is sincere yet misguided
Wow...this was hard to watch. He goes from such a confident "truth bringer" to just another talking head, squirming under scrutiny. You can take the scholar out of church, but you can't take the church out of the scholar. The strength of these indoctrinations is incredibly underrated, especially by those under its spell.
When someone dismisses another person's argument by labeling it as nonsensical without providing any evidence or logical reasons, it's often referred to as the **"straw man fallacy."** This tactic involves misrepresenting or oversimplifying the opposing position to make it easier to attack². Another related fallacy is **"ad hominem,"** where the focus shifts to attacking the person rather than addressing their argument directly¹. Both of these fallacies undermine constructive debate and critical thinking.
@twentythree7sevensix yes, when he shows a verses I go through and put the verse in its proper context. He doesn't understand Greek or language or he does, and he is a satanic pdfphile lying to layman. I've openly challenged the pdfphile to a debate anytime on any subject or any of his followers they just get triggered and block me. It's funny. I'm nice to them. I'm just actively debunking any claims he makes, and they clearly don't like that. Ammon doesn't understand Greek or he's a liar because that's what his god tells him to do.
@twentythree7sevensix Yes, he shows verses without a source, authentication, and age of the document he found that verse on, so I systematically go through each verse he provides and show it in its proper context to use the correct English words to illustrate what the verse actually says you know how's it been read since it was put on paper. People rely on this dude to speak Greek. For them it's pathetic. Muslims use this for tactic for which it is a illogical position to hold and out right lying when people put up fake language barriers like it's the 1700's😂
I was hoping to hear a stronger argument against Ammon's claims, but Dan only dismissed the claims without providing evidence to why the biblical scholar narrative is correct. In summary the only thing I heard in this podcast is "Ammon is taking things way out of context and is not part of the group that decides what the bible is saying. Yes, his translations are fair but we as the bible defenders don't like that narrative so we will just laugh at him and tell people he is crazy." Overall, this guy seems out of his depth when it comes to this topic. He is good at regurgitating the commonly agreed upon biblical narratives, but he misses the whole point that people like Ammon are making. That is the bible is a poorly translated version of myth and that humanity should open their minds to new interpretations that will expand our understanding of the myths.
Look for McClellans rebuttal on his own channel. That is where it is. He is not "out of his depth" as you say. He's just not trying hard to argue in this interview cuz his beef isn't with this guy. McClellan is just answering the questions he's given, like "What makes a dead language?"
Yeah I want to see a team of people who actually know the Greek chime in on Dr Hillman’s presentation of the sources, not some Mormon in a cartoon tshirt rehashing the Wikipedia page on Torah authorship.
@@Tychaios0I "chime in" regularly in the comment thread of the Lady Babylon shows but Ammon is terrified people will read what I say so hides my comments (or his protectors do). I've lost count of the number of times he's hidden my rebuttal of lēstēs - but I can post it here 😄 The definition of the word, lēstēs, is crucial for Ammon's entire narrative: the only crime in Ammon's books that Jesus did, was to be profiteering from the Mystery rite through trafficking - apart from this "sin," Ammon actually fully endorses all the atrocities that he alleges Jesus was doing as an essential part of "the Christian Mystery" - which he has also clearly stated many times, is his ambition to replicate, himself, as part of his Satanic commission to initiate the Apocalypse. He claims that when Jesus sees the "swat team" coming to arrest him, he is "screaming, I'm not a trafficker!" By itself his paraphrase of Mk 14:48 is utterly wrong because it's merely an exclamation of surprise at the size of the force coming to arrest him *as if* he's a lēstēs. It is not a guilty confession! But in the context of Lk 23:2-3, 13-14 it shows that they went to arrest him believing him to be a dangerous "rebel" about to lead an insurrection with an armed gang. "Rebel" is not the definition you will find in the LSJ because it still means brigand, outlaw, but when Josephus published his works, he disparagingly calls the *rebels* "lēstai" 114 times. All the Gospels were written after his publications, so their use of the word in this way is entirely understandable. Whenever I post a comment on his videos i know beforehand that mods will protect Ammon who will not ever engage with any knowledgeable and scholarly pushback that clearly shows the errors in his narrative. I have added the bracketed translations to it just now for people here, but the latest comment I made even started with: "If all mods and Ammon honour Diké (Justice) and Alētheia (Truth), they will leave this comment and any further replies in public view." And they still did! There already exists a Greek word for "human trafficker" that stayed unchanged from Classical to Koine times. It's andrapodistēs: Aristoph. Pl. 521, reads in Classical Greek: κερδαίνειν βουλόμενός τις ἔμπορος ἥκων ἐκ Θετταλίας παρὰ πλείστων *ἀνδραποδιστῶν.* Translated, it means: "Perhaps a merchant wanting to profit through many *slave-dealers* coming from Thessaly." 1 Tim 1:10 reads in Koine Greek: πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοίταις, *ἀνδραποδισταῖς,* ψεύσταις, ἐπιόρκοις, καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερον τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀντίκειται, (The law is) For fornicators, for males who lie down with males, for *kidnappers of free men,* for liars, for oath breakers and for all things opposed to the sound teaching. Andrapodistēs has *ALWAYS* meant "kidnapper/slavedealer/menstealer/trafficker" - this meaning has *NEVER* been legitimately translated from lēstēs, in any *KOINE* text anywhere. (The NT was written in Koine, not Classical). To my knowledge it's not translated "trafficker" in any Classical text either. No-one in Lsdybabtlon666 has ever yet acknowledged this truth from the texts when I have raised it, before (and it's had a little exposure before being hidden). Are they always going to be too invested in being an unthinking echo-chamber? But I hope Danny's subscribers are more open minded - let's discuss it, please 🤔 Incidentally he called for Greek scholars to critique his own "translation" in his New Satanic Version of Mk 14:51-52. I have and it's VERY revealing of deliberate manipulation to force his false narrative into the text! docs.google.com/document/d/1_iTWlYWio7TKDqmLWWuqhwFiWr7K6tyt5TlBAi5CsUM/edit?usp=drivesdk
So did quick google search on who is crucified in roman times. Pirates was one of the crimes punished by crucifixion. Googled what a pirate was during roman times and it say slave trader. So i believe Dr. Ammon is more correct
Says he has no bias but is a Mormon who believes their founder found a book under a tree and that Book of Mormon and the Bible are their source of faith. How in the entire existence can this guy not have a bias? Who actually wrote the Book of Mormon? Book of Mormon - Wikipedia Author - Joseph Smith The Book of Mormon is a religious text of the Latter Day Saint movement, first published in 1830 by Joseph Smith as The Book of Mormon: An Account Written by the Hand of Mormon upon Plates Taken from the Plates of Nephi. So this guy believes a book created in 1830 is more of a source than the original Greek Bible what a clown.
Dan Mclellan doesn't actually believe that. He has a liberal view on scriptures. Just about everything he says is academic consensus, not just his personal views.
@@zachr0so Dan acknowledges that his church was founded by a charlatan who wrote fiction based upon older fiction? But still believes that there is somehow truth to the fiction? Yeah let’s follow this guy… into logical suicide.
It probably doesn't because Ammon is literally translating ancient Greek texts. Modern academia never wants to accept new discoveries not even as possibilities to play with.
It also doesn't support anything he's learned from his Mormon programming from birth. I'm an ex, (thankfully) mormon and I hear his mormon bias throught this entire discussion.
This is the 2nd Bible Scholar who has made their field look like a joke. I thought he was going to have a legit rebuttle to Amons claim of the child trafficker, but nope.. "That word just means something different in New Testament Greek, it's called street greek" lol, it's meaning in all other Greek books doesn't matter.
The Bible scholars don't have the language, or the depth of reading to understand the entire gestalt of the Hellenistic world like a good Classicist has. I would love to hear another person on Ammon's level politely and succinctly critique Ammon's theories - but this guy ain't it!
Shocking how you think a weird can't carry two different meaning depending on what level or dialect it's used with. We literally see this all the time between the multiple different versions of English
There's not really anything to rebut because Amon didn't really make much of an argument--he made a claim and offered a near contemporaneous source as to why he thought it would fly, but layered it into his more general theory about Jesus being a drug addict child trafficker. If Ammon could explain why he thinks that's what the author of Mark meant in context, then he'd be making an argument for reading it that way.
Here's the deal - The word λῃστῶν - or lestes didn't always mean child trafficker. Was it used that way at times, yes, but more often it was used as a general term describing - robber, highwayman, bandit or revolutionary, insurrectionist, guerrilla. The word is used in Mark 11:17 - Then he began to teach them and said, “Is it not written: ‘My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations’? But you have turned it into a den of lestes!” - Jesus is not telling the people that they have turned the temple into a den of 'child traffickers'. The priests were stealing from the people by requiring ridiculous exchange rates for necessary sacrifices. Context matters - especially in the ancient language. Jesus also didn't say I'm not a lestes - That's not even the structure of the sentence in the greek nor context. He's saying - 'You know me...I've been in the temple in the broad daylight and you could have arrested me and yet you choose to come in the night like I'm a thief or robber.' He was challenging their motives because they were coming at a time out of the public eye... Unfortunately this was not the best person to refute Ammon's crazy assertations. As far as the boy - That's another whole literary picture that concludes at the end of the book with another boy that announces the risen savior...the only other time the word νεανίσκος - neaniskos is used. I won't get into that. Ammon is creating his own narrative through his own faulty context and lens and this guy doesn't combat it well.
When does he say this?? some of the things he says i find interesting but also i can hear some fallacy, not to say everything Amon says is true. because some things Amon says dont make sense and instead of staying on topic he chooses to jump from topic to topic.
@@Aporeticit’s like reading the word elimination in a nursing textbook which means poop. Elimination= Christ. It won’t mean poop if you read it in any other context but in the medical book it strictly means poop. It doesn’t matter where it is used in other places in the context of a medical book it strictly means to poop.
@@JohnDee633 The problem with his statement is he didn't provide any data to support his claim and certainly not just beyond one example. We only have the documents to refer to what something means and you can't just say "well they were separated so you can't say it means the same thing". Yes language changes but not all words change the same way over time. He is using general theory to try to discredit specific examples.
Dude this is basic common sense about how any language works. "Charge" in the courtroom isn't the same as "charge" on the basketball court, isn't the same as a "charge" on your credit card, isn't the same as a "charge" on your cell phone, and all of these senses exist in the same time and in the same place. You can't just zero in on one specific usage and then insist that the same usage is intended in a completely different context. Or if you're Ammon, that's exactly what you do.
The sapphire under their feet that McClellan mentions (15:30), which is at the bottom of Mt Sinai. McClellan has no clue about this. In reality, this is the black basically pavement, at the bottom of the Great Pyramid. McClellan sees the twigs, but not the forest. Yes, Mt Sinai is the Great Pyramid. Ralph
we were created.. something cant come from nothing...there is a light that animates our forms. it leaves and goes some place else when we leave this form. we all will have to answer for the thoughts,words, and deeds for better or worse. its your choice as to whether you see this or not. free will is a God given right/honor/responsibilty
@@michaelvenezia9673 LOL and then you end that with "God" given. hahahaha. that's a seriously P poor argument. Clearly, there is no such thing as "free will". Guess you haven't thought that through.
@@michaelvenezia9673 In the OT it says God breathed life into us. That wasn't a soul then. It was nemesh, breath. And really this is what I read, how can I know for sure? How can you know the light that animates us goes somewhere. What does that mean anyway? Does it merge with all light? I am not trying to argue friend. We don't control our thoughts. Try to predict your next thought. And answer to who? And why? And for what? Even among the Abrahamic God, Jews Christians and Muslims differ. And among those groups there are differences. Hinduism was earlier. Same with free will. Why is it a right? I don't even want it. Honor? How? So I can walk on a razors edge and be condemned for the slightest screw up? Responsibility? Who asked for it? How much have you studied free will? Or sociology. You can predict so much behavior based on IQ, education and wealth, learning disability, parental abuse or alcoholism, neighborhood, nutrition, genetics, and a thousand other things a person had no control over. There is actually a common mental illness, OCD, where intrusive thoughts are part of the illness. The person literally does not want the thoughts. How much have you studied psychology and sociology? Brain disorders are real, and even normal brains are not like you thing, as if you are riding a horse. Your brain is not a horse you ride and pull the reigns to make it go right or left.
Look at his face of confusion when you brought up the main arguement for the greek word for child trafficker… its like he either forgot to watch over the main point of the OG hillman video or he blatantly pretended hes never heard of it cause he knew all he could say was basically “ its up to interpretation” …. Again notice his expressions when asked
but it isn't. you like many others are not understanding what is being said. the context matters so you can't just use the words generically across the board much less apply the generic medical context across the board. you have to follow the context in the bible and that in which it is laying out. so if you are not doing that you are getting various inaccurate translations throughout the text that paint random pictures that don't line up or make much sense at all. ask yourself why he focuses on and promotes primarily the versus that could paint Jesus in a bizarre light and destroy the Christian view but does not bring up any other examples from the bible to prove this is the correct way to apply the text? because it is deliberate and he knows it is specious made up nonsense that makes the text as a whole not make a lot of sense and he hopes you are too stupid to realize this yourself and believe him off face value. Ammon is an agent of disinformation and of the devil, and or one of the great teachers who set out to deceive for the great deceiver and lead believers away from the faith or anti-christ.
I just don’t understand why anyone hearing Hillman for any period of time doesn’t see the contextual problems of every word of Greek that comes out of his mouth. It’s particularly astounding that an ‘expert’ ignores the biggest clues to translating ancient languages…
@seekingtruthgaming8887 I watched the whole thing. That's the point. His whole argument was, "No one I know believes this. That'd be silly to read it like that. Yeah that word means that in Greek but the bible uses a different unique definition, etc etc."
@@wackyswacky1374 well you've strawmanned twice now. It's not that it's just silly so no lol Any scholar denies ammon on the basics of how words are used in context of pther words put together. A word by itself means one thing but changes when you add other words to it. For example imagine you fins a saying of a person in California in the 60s and they say I'm so gay Then find another guy in Alabama mahatma says I'm so gay! You'd know from the surrounding context that the Cali guy is talking about homo stuff and the bama guy is talking about being happy.
@seekingtruthgaming8887 yeah but the surrounding context still supports Ammon's reading. At the very least, Ammon's reading is plausible. So for the scholars to outwrite dismiss it on face value is IMO their own biases showing.
I don't understand how Dan McClellan says he is an expert in translation, but he doesn't know Greek. χριστός is an adjective, "to anoint, rub on" and he should know that; ὁ Χριστός is a title and used as a proper name in the New Testament--*and specified as such in the NT* : Jesus, who is called The Christ (ὁ Ἰησοῦς ὁ λεγόμενος Χριστός). Ammon knows Greek, but he has 0 knowledge of linguistics. Words have core meanings--lexical semantics--and they have pragmatic uses where their pragmatic sense is very often clear. He is taking the pragmatic use of a word (prevalent in medical texts) and applying it to any and all instances in non-medical texts like the New Testament (and rattling off dictionary definitions and applying them all to the biblical texts). This is a textbook word-study fallacy (The textbook? James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language). at 1:07:05, Ammon has shuffled the translation of the proper name ὁ Χριστός into the nominal adjective χριστός , translating it as "Christ." I.e., he has substituted one word for another, making his own case, but without evidence. This is called begging the question.
I.to be rubbed on, φάρμακα χριστά salves, Aesch., Eur. II.of persons, anointed: χριστός, οῦ, ὁ, the Anointed One, the Christ, as a transl. of the Hebr. Messiah, NTest
I'm really sick of experts opening statements sounding like "any expert would laugh at that statement" thanks for literally saying nothing lol names of experts or you're just saying nothing
Because academia also relies heavily upon consensus. Look, if you want to exalt or dismiss any scholar simply from a second rate podcast, go for it. I enjoy Hillman, but he's got a lot more wood to chop for his take to be labeled credible on any academic level
@@percyblok6014The point your making is exactly what I'm complaining about. I've seen so many of these biblical scholars laugh at different assertions, claim it's laughable, then never explain why. If Hillman has ideas that are refutable then I'd like to see a scholar actually explain why that is instead of ignoring and disregarding them. If someone can't or won't explain their reasoning then it seems they also have plenty of wood to chop. So far I've yet to see a scholar claim Hillman's assertions are impossible. They all frame it in the sense of well sorta, kinda, some people, not most, possible, plausible but unlikely. To me if you're saying something is unlikely but possible it's the same as saying he has a valid argument or else they would say it's impossible and give actual evidence instead of conjecture based on their opinion and studies.
One thing thats makes me skeptical about Ammon is that the Bible and the many many manuscripts are the some most read and highly scrutinized texts within the last 2000 years and Ammon comes out and says I'm the only one who can read this properly. I find this unlikely.
** having a double masters and being off on from 80k Hebrew to Danny clearly showing 8k only in Hebrew ** makes anything else this guy says invalid and shows how smart Ammon actually is
As a bilingual person native Spanish speaker who grew up in the United States I agree a thousand percent with Dan. One Spanish word can mean so many different things among all the different Spanish speaking cultures. A word that is simple and that has an innocent meaning for me and my culture to an other Spanish culture, that same exact word and pronunciation of it is offensive and demeaning to another Spanish speaking country even though it is the same word spelling and all. We see this in Spanish all around the world. In today’s American context a switch has taken on a whole different meaning. Outside of the hood it means one thing and inside the hood it means something totally different. Same word, same country, same language. I don’t know why this makes peoples minds run in circles. It’s not rocket science, unless one wants to bend things to make it mean what they want it to mean and fit their agenda. Education is so important all though people want to sell you the idea that it isn’t. Much respect to the scholar Dan for having the patience.
Different meanings for the same word in different languages, cultures, and countries are known. There's nothing new here. Dan's response to Dr Hillman loses through insults 'nonsensical' and 'laughable'.
Exactly, he can't even admit to himself that Ammon could be right because Christians can't accept a negative interpretation without losing their faith. It's like bringing someone out of a cult who's been brainwashed their entire life that the outside world is wrong. There's no way to be unbiased about it when your views of life, death and everything important to you is at risk of going away.
@@interstateneek McClellan's work at times also undermines Mormon authority on the Bible (which he discusses in one of his videos). I don't think you understand his arguments.
Amon is cool I find him interesting but he's fighting the truth so hard it's obvious he's scared of it... stop trying to put square pegs in round holes ammon, Jesus is Savior Annointed
Jesus spoke Aramaic. Jesus wouldve only used Common Greek speaking to Gentiles. The Jews all spoke Aramaic although they used Greek in business for contracts, loans, buying, selling, etc.
Wtf does that have anything to do with anything? He has a degree and supporting/serving people in his community through low end labor is something to be respected. Mormons belief are pretty luny from my POV and he didn't back up much if any of his claims by evidence in this interview, but don't shit on him for not believing cleaning after his community is below him.
What "truth"? You realise Ammon's taking you all for a ride! I agree that Dan did a poor job, but I post thorough rebuttals regularly in the comment thread of the Lady Babylon shows. But Ammon is terrified people will read what I say so hides my comments (or his protectors do). I've lost count of the number of times he's hidden my rebuttal of lēstēs - but I can post it here 😄 The definition of the word, lēstēs, is crucial for Ammon's entire narrative: the only crime in Ammon's books that Jesus did, was to be profiteering from the Mystery rite through trafficking - apart from this "sin," Ammon actually fully endorses all the atrocities that he alleges Jesus was doing as an essential part of "the Christian Mystery" - which he has also clearly stated many times, is his ambition to replicate, himself, as part of his Satanic commission to initiate the Apocalypse. He claims that when Jesus sees the "swat team" coming to arrest him, he is "screaming, I'm not a trafficker!" By itself his paraphrase of Mk 14:48 is utterly wrong because it's merely an exclamation of surprise at the size of the force coming to arrest him *as if* he's a lēstēs. It is not a guilty confession! But in the context of Lk 23:2-3, 13-14 it shows that they went to arrest him believing him to be a dangerous "rebel" about to lead an insurrection with an armed gang. "Rebel" is not the definition you will find in the LSJ because it still means brigand, outlaw, but when Josephus published his works, he disparagingly calls the *rebels* "lēstai" 114 times. All the Gospels were written after his publications, so their use of the word in this way is entirely understandable. Whenever I post a comment on his videos i know beforehand that mods will protect Ammon who will not ever engage with any knowledgeable and scholarly pushback that clearly shows the errors in his narrative. I have added the bracketed translations to it just now for people here, but the latest comment I made even started with: "If all mods and Ammon honour Diké (Justice) and Alētheia (Truth), they will leave this comment and any further replies in public view." And they still did! There already exists a Greek word for "human trafficker" that stayed unchanged from Classical to Koine times. It's andrapodistēs: Aristoph. Pl. 521, reads in Classical Greek: κερδαίνειν βουλόμενός τις ἔμπορος ἥκων ἐκ Θετταλίας παρὰ πλείστων *ἀνδραποδιστῶν.* Translated, it means: "Perhaps a merchant wanting to profit through many *slave-dealers* coming from Thessaly." 1 Tim 1:10 reads in Koine Greek: πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοίταις, *ἀνδραποδισταῖς,* ψεύσταις, ἐπιόρκοις, καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερον τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀντίκειται, (The law is) For fornicators, for males who lie down with males, for *kidnappers of free men,* for liars, for oath breakers and for all things opposed to the sound teaching. Andrapodistēs has *ALWAYS* meant "kidnapper/slavedealer/menstealer/trafficker" - this meaning has *NEVER* been legitimately translated from lēstēs, in any *KOINE* text anywhere. (The NT was written in Koine, not Classical). To my knowledge it's not translated "trafficker" in any Classical text either. No-one in Lsdybabtlon666 has ever yet acknowledged this truth from the texts when I have raised it, before (and it's had a little exposure before being hidden). Are they always going to be too invested in being an unthinking echo-chamber? But I hope Danny's subscribers are more open minded - let's discuss it, please 🤔 Incidentally he called for Greek scholars to critique his own "translation" in his New Satanic Version of Mk 14:51-52. I have and it's VERY revealing of deliberate manipulation to force his false narrative into the text! docs.google.com/document/d/1_iTWlYWio7TKDqmLWWuqhwFiWr7K6tyt5TlBAi5CsUM/edit?usp=drivesdk You won't find the truth from Mr Hillman
@alirowan1999 you don't need to believe Hillman to reject Christianity for the farce that it is. Actually objectively looking at the actions that the god of scripture will plainly do that for you. A god that's fond of killing mankind and allegedly sacrificing his own son. For what? So he can justify himself for forgiving mankind of their sins? An omnipotent god does not need a sacrifice to forgive sins. To top it off, Jesus will allegedly come back to kill us all for unbelief and set up his theocratic dictatorship. And those who don't believe get cast into the lake of fire to burn. Sounds all very lovely coming from a fod who is supposed to be "love". I was a Christian for around thirty years, so please don't think I haven't been through all the issues with the doctrine. I left Christianity behind long before Hillman started gaining popularity. Christianity will *definitely* take you for a ride way more than Hillman ever can.
@@alirowan1999 I thought I posted a reply to your comment last night but apparently I didn't or youtube is doing something shifty. Anyway, nobody really needs Hillman to understand how intellectually bankrupt Christianity is. I was a Christian for around 25 years before I finally left, having seen too much inconsistency and contradiction that I couldn't deny anymore. There is literally no reason for an allegedly omnipotent god to need a sacrificial atonement to justify himself in forgiving mankind of their sins. It just begs the question of why create a reality in which something god abhors (sin) can exist in the first place. He abhors sin yet commits numerous atrocities himself to "purge" sin from the earth. Like, you know... supposedly drowning everyone with the flood. Who knows how many people he killed with that one. if anyone wants to say the god of the OT is evil, then they would have to say Jesus is evil also because he is said to be coming back to literally kill everyone that doesn't bow the knee to him in the apocalypse. Hypocritical at best. But no, god is more immoral than anyone else... at least, as is presented at face value in scripture.
Danny-“I think what Ammon was saying is the Bible is misrepresenting what the term were or changes what the terms mean.” Dan-“ and that’s where I’d like to see evidence IN THE BIBLE.” 1:09:10 Like dude do you even hear yourself? Like seriously..
there are a lot of holes in his arguments - sorry Dan but you didn't say anything to convince me because you provide no substance - he states he tries to call out the bullshit in religion - and at the same time he is mormon???? wth??
Having followed Dan for a while I think he follows his religion not because he believes its dogma, but for social reasons that appeals to him and his personal needs. In fact, I think many religious people do that.
For the people in the comments: Dan, the guest, admitted after the podcast that he was wrong and that Ancient Hebrew really does only have approximately 8,000 words in it. So, this so called "expert" in Hebrew doesn't even know how many words are in the language......
For me the cringe moments were when he said (1) christianity was not a standard-issue mystery cult with dyin'n'risin' god, and again when he pretended (2) early apocalyptics, among them nascent christianity, were not all fundamentally about an expectation of their savior figure being executed so he could rise again. Without the full suite of mystery-cult trappings (including also baptism and a meal ritual) it would have been unable to compete with the dozens of others current throughout the Roman empire, so would have vanished along with the Judean state. And, without an executed savior, it would have been totally invisible in the Judean apocalyptic milieu. Its only unique feature was pacifism, which it needed for compatibility with Roman occupation.
@@brenttrandall9247 That's modern Hebrew after inventing words for airplane, machine gun and telephone call. Classical biblical Hebrew has under 9000 words, no one disputes this. Get it right.
1:17:07 First, he says we have to look at usage contemporary to the time when the text was created. Then, when a contemporary reference to the usage as 'trafficker' is made he says we have to look at context, which he conveniently claims is missing. Yet, it isn't. The context is that Jesus was captured, alone in a park, with a small child whom is specifically mentioned to not be fully clothed, but instead "naked, EXCEPT FOR a linen cloth." He earlier ignores that context and attempts to portray the boy as fully clothed in a robe. It doesn't say that at all. It makes no mention of a robe.. It specifically says NAKED, EXCEPT FOR. That context would indicate that the cloth did not predominately cover the child to begin with. He isn't making a strong case by continually shifting the goal posts.
I was getting into this, then I realised a subtle difference between this guy and Aemon. During Aemons podcast with Danny, Aemon constantly brought up sources for what he was saying, this guy just sits here like "that's just not true".... "Believe me because I know.".... Aemon had sources bro, this guy just flexes his credentials and hopes you buy into the glamour 90% of the time.
Did you guys catch that instant debunk about hebrew? He claimed 80k words in hebrew then but its a very commonly known fact that there were around 8k hebrew words was the truth. Danny misspoke about the 1.5 million Greek terms, thats today. Ammon had given a more conservative answer of 250k word in Greek to this guys 275k.
Finally someone smart who’s brain is not scorched with meth , and who is not speaking like he’s sitting on toilet and trying to push out crappies that mostly came out of his mouth . Thank you Mr. Dan McClellan .
It certainly wasn't the best choice of attire for this podcast & discussion. A female host probably would have suggested he change, its driving me nuts!!
1:08:12 the gospels are not avoiding medical context. He said prior that later texts are not relevant for saying how the earlier texts meant. Now he's backtracking
I look forward to hearing Dr. Ammon. His presentation was so detailed and full of sources. I did not appreciate the disrespect. This was dismissive of him and it did not seem an unbiased and “data” focused.
80,000 is approximately the total words in the hebrew version not unique words. Ironically he claims Ammon mixed his numbers up when actually he is the one mistaken
i know he says he tries not to include his dogma of being religious but i think it’s virtually impossible to separate from your religion because if you stumble upon anything that disagrees you scoff or look away from something that might make your religion “wrong” or not what yoh think it is
The reason we do not hear of Moses, is because he had other names. In Egyptian he was called Osar-Seph and Tuth-Moses. Read Manetho, the historian. Osarseph means ‘Son of Osiris’, a standard Egyptian title. Tuthmoses means ‘Son of Thoth’. In other words, Aaron and Moses were Pharaoh Akhenaton and Tuthmoses (his brother). And yes, Tuthmoses was an army commander, the same as Moses. Ralph
@@JohnDee633so we are gonna forget Arabs? 🤣🤣African Americans aren’t Israelites I’m sorry my brother. Not defending Arabs because I’m not one, but do a little geography study of the Bible and the places it took place at.
He looks so uncomfortable being asked these questions. Its like he knows what he is saying is bullshit which he is being made to say by his masters behind the scene. Would of been interesting to see ammon's interview after this one because this bloke dont make sense after hearing ammon's interview
It’s always extra fun when Danny has a sane guest. Watching him bounce the crazy theories of his… less sane guests… off actual experts leads to really interesting moments.
Context is king in linguistic semantics. Interpret, "I'm dying down the street". On it's own there's multiple valid interpretations, once cast against the light of our current era, one would most likely deduct a vehicle or "ride" of some sort would be involved. A person with a hoverboard would be dismissed, although some day in the future it may be very valid.
Why did the Jews stop using the Septuagint? To distance themselves from the Greek speaking Christian's! It's synonymous with the religion, of course the Septuagint is the oldest, unless I completely missed something....
That guys a joke though 😂😂 Clearly the apostles were not children at the time of Christ. Look at all the books. They are definitely not children. Peter definitely wasn’t a fisherman at 10 years old.😂😂
I'm learning the word Christ accommodates multiple subjects. Christ as the Sun of God on the Zodiac Wheel. Christ as our spinal fluid, the Cristo's. Christ as being the ointment for drug use. It's even a medical term. Christ as the Son of God who made an ultimate sacrifice. This is 4 examples off the top of my head how the word Christ is used to represent something.
On one hand you have an almost literally excommunicated professor of classics who studied ancient texts and discovered seemingly coherent narrative from these. Who had an a-ha moment somewhere and found in many texts his rhetoric and enhance on previously found clues. Connecting dots very well. Capable and well educated. Some ofcourse pointing out personality traits where I mostly recognize traits of someone who's mind works faster than his mouth can put into words and has not been trained to take a breather. But personality aside... on the other side you have again another scholar, highly capable and educated (whether you agree with religion or not). He also found, or learned from others' , a-ha moments and how they reflect on findings thereafter. connecting various dots in a maze of 2000 year old combined scripts when they had no access to reference checksum databases. Both equally willing to be put on display for all of us to see. So I won't shorthand either one. These are 1- to 3000 year old pieces of writing, with no certainty that texts were written by the person or in approval of the person that made any of these findings. There could very well be a badly written copy of a copy, made by a 9 year old somewhat retarded malnourished nephew of a gossiping descendant of the original writer, who was drunk when writing down some dear diary moments in the first place.....and this abomination of a copy was the only one to survive and to be discovered and be put in bible or what ever manuscript decades or more later. yes you have great proven artifacts from great minds but these were well supplied with students and aids for writing and work. ( example: davinci didn't do all his signed work himself. students plethora ) holy vs unholy. dark vs light. sinner vs saint. left vs right. fiction vs fact....History is written by the victors...That does not mean that it is forever obscured and is completely lost to history ofcourse. Not at all. From Homer's epochs to a President's son laptop....The truth is like most of the time, somewhere in the middle. Everyone is a little bit right in some aspects. but where's the middle? That's a part where us beings who like to question everything once in a while, will never agree on. And that's beautiful.
As an alternative, I'll Ask the metallic silver luminescant orbs that are floating outside my house next time if they can possibly clear things up. But now we are still busy with getting an understanding of a Nintendo DS in exchange for some quantum field material solutions, you know, the usual.
So - Dr Hillman and Google say 8000 unique Hebrew words, and 1.5m Ancient Greek words, but Ducktales says 80,000 Hebrew, and 250,000 ancient Greek. I was already hooked on Hillman, but this might actually get me to persevere with his crazy podcasts 😂😂❤❤
Ammon can be hard to watch. But he never fails to provide evidence for his claims. Other than Greek/Hebrew which one came first. I've heard compelling arguments on both sides. What I have concluded on that topic is "who cares."
His podcasts are definitely out there….but I would challenge anyone to offer an actual genius from history that wasn’t also…..definitely out there 🤷🏻♂️
@CrawfordDalee where the hell did you find that . .. my Google says 14000 words and that includes names and that there's 7000 plus words in the Hebrew bible..... nice try DAN LOL
I got into gambling and was down low. I ended up homeless and on drugs, and then I got to know Jesus. He told me he could help me cross the border and next thing know I’m being sold into human trafficking…
Ammon deciphering never before translated ancient greek medical text and giving you source Dan seems to have had no experience with medical text so how can he even comment on the meaning. (especially ancient Greek drug's and there applications) He is so conditioned by the current manifestation of the Bible. And haveing all this supposed biblical knowledge but choosing to be morman doesn't make sense as the older the source the closer to the truth you get.Yet Mormon is one of the newest versions and it's founder/foundation is sketchy at best.
Not only that, there's ACTUAL evidence that the Mormon church was built on a foundationof lies. Mormonism and Scientology just baffle the heck out of me. 😂😂😂
He's saying the medical text use of Christ doesn't translate to the normal use of Christ these days which have Biblical origins. That's what I got from that.
@@energybasics totally and I get that along with the regin and time frame that should give it more context.But also medical text is more like a account/documentation of what happened and what works or not to help with the issues (needed for future help to others so needed to be accurate) it woukd read more like a dictionary than a tale handed down and translated through time and culture.Im thinking the medical text are even closer to the origin of the word/meaning.
Yeah, his statement that he is a religious and a Mormon had me scratching my head. It highlights the fact that he’s not skeptical enough when approaching “religious” texts. Mormonism requires its adherents to believe some pretty unfounded stuff.
@@robdoubleyou4918 all religions require you to believe in the supernatural. brain dead argument. you can believe you can become a god yourself and not let that undermine your ability to study the Septuagint and classism without bias. take your head out of your ass before you suffocate.
@@Rityam369nah, pretty spot-on really.if you're listening to a Christian (which is what a Mormon is) defend Christianity you're a special kind of gullible. This shouldn't have to be said but I realized recently that it does so; my statement includes all other religions as well implicitly. It would seem that 85% of the world is composed of so-called "adults" that believe in children's-fables AKA religion. There's nothing wrong with being agnostic, but to follow a religion by your own choice in modern day is literally insane. Literal, normalized insanity.
Trying not to be disrespectful, but yep being lectured by a Mormon is laughable. All religious raised people can't be of independent thought. I'm from UK, and I wince when Thanksgiving comes around. The pilgrims were extremist puritans. Too extreme for UK and Europe which was a zoo at the time. Our Empire was built on blood and suffering, but God approved apparently......
@@genestone4951most people comprehend the world at a 3rd grade level. It’s obvious, to me, he’s an LDS plant. One of those “reach the youth” type guys. The equivalent of the marines setting up a booth outside of detention.
He said a whole lot of “Scholars think this or that” without showing evidence of why they think that unlike Ammon who pulls the text up and shows us why he claims what he claims
Anyone whose affiliated to a religious organisation can't be truly independent. Anyone who believes any of the religious texts are easily led and gullible. Such texts are rules of the road, bylaws written by those in power to keep power. The best place to look are books of accident reference literature, broad subjects. That way you'll get a better idea of what was happening. However you must be careful, remember history is always written by the victors.
To all the people who say this guy is not making a good argument, I will give an example of what he is trying to say. Imagine you have a word in the Greek that is translated as thief, or stealer (someone who steals). However, there are many different types of "stealers": shoplifter, burglar, armed robber, strong-arm, pick pocket, etc. Just because one story uses the word to describe a shoplifter, doesn't mean every other use of the word should be translated as a shoplifter. You have to look at the context of the story. If Paul is casing a bank, then puts on a mask and goes in and "steals" the money, you know from the context of that story that he is not shoplifting, but probably armed robbery or strong arm. This guy is right when he talks about the context of how the word is used.
Or if a kid says that a guy wearing a leather jacket is cool. If you look at the root or apply the word to a period before it came to mean impressive than it would mean he is cold to the touch.
Everybody knows this! Of course, context is important, but It's not explanation enough to discount Dr Hillman's translations. Listening to Dan was like listening to a religious education teacher during high school. Incredibly disappointing on many levels.
Loved this show. Danny basically forced McClellan to debate Ammon's arguments as if he was Ammon himself. Something tells me Dan McClellan would not have agreed to debate with Ammon in person.
1:16:53 So if we discard the "medical bandage" as well as the nakedness, what we're left with is that Jesus was alone with a child, at 4am in a park, while he directed others to perform 'look out' duties, as the authorities were searching for him and that's something to be laughed at and dismissed? I hope this guy isn't a parent...
Watch the after show on Patreon: patreon.com/dannyjones
Support the show by checking out our sponsors:
manscaped.com - Use code DANNYJONES for 20% off + free shipping!
buy.ver.so/danny - Use code DANNY to save 15% on your first order.
whiterabbitenergy.com/?ref=DJP - Use code DJP for 20% off
I was hoping you'd have on someone to make things fair. Excellent guest. Thanks Danny.
Let’s go Danny and Ammon ❤😊
Danny, for the love of the gad fly, get the scholar Russel Gmirkin on the show! He basically argues the Septuagint was before the Hebrew Torah as well. It all a Hellenistic invention!
Ammon is a few levels higher than him but no offence because I’m so much lower lol Ammon sounds very much better knowledgeable and confident than the religious community I’ve had a change in my life spiritually ever since Chris Bledsoe but Ammon makes so much more sense to me now on my spiritual journey not religious. I pray to Mother Love and Holy Spirit that’s it no Jesus and my life changed for the better ❤😊 Thank you for everything @DannyJones
F*ck Manscaped and all creators that simp for their sponsorship!!
If Ammon speaks and reads the Greek then you gotta find someone else who can also read and speak it then let them go at it.
Yes. That’ was the gist of Ammon. Look at the source. Text ( I’m not agreeing or disagreeing. Because I can .001 percent read it ) but. I do like the old sources. Real books. Not web)
why do you think he's giving free classes on ancient greek. There aren't enough classics to go around, let alone ones who read the pharma side of the Greek. So he's making more Classics.
check out Carl Ruck
I’m pretty sure Dan McClellan does read Ancient Greek. He just doesn’t know the classical sources as well Ammon, especially the pharma stuff (which is Ammon’s speciality), because he is more focused on Jewish and Christian literature.
@@Mikey-hv6lw knowing medical texts that others don't is a smokescreen to deflect from the trick he's pulled with every time he uses them. What do I mean? He had an illegitimate methodology to create his novel translations by isolating a word from its context in the sentence (and passage), taking it to the LSJ to find a different definition that is more drug or cult related and claiming this is its real meaning. But what he never does is then read the passage in English with his new translation inserted - because it will be utter nonsense. It is not a legitimate translation.
Another trick he pulls to reinforce his illegitimate translations is to take the listeners on a rabbit trail of related words all of them getting further away from a logical reading, but the practice is designed to mesmerise and reinforcee the nonsense he's forcing into the original text.
I'm actually one of his ex students from the first cohort, but because I couldn't join his echo-chamber, he evicted me. He's running a cut behind the scenes and created a narcissistic codependency - he's an exceptionally good love-bomber to those inside and they just can't see through his mask, so defend him fiercely.
That aside, I will illustrate how illegitimate is his definition of the word, lēstēs. It is crucial for Ammon's entire narrative: the only crime in Ammon's books that Jesus did, was to be profiteering from the Mystery rite through trafficking - apart from this "sin," Ammon actually fully endorses all the atrocities that he alleges Jesus was doing as an essential part of "the Christian Mystery" - which he has also clearly stated many times, is his ambition to replicate, himself, as part of his Satanic commission to initiate the Apocalypse.
He claims that when Jesus sees the "swat team" coming to arrest him, he is "screaming, I'm not a trafficker!" By itself his paraphrase of Mk 14:48 is utterly wrong because it's merely an exclamation of surprise at the size of the force coming to arrest him *as if* he's a lēstēs. It is not a guilty confession! But in the context of Lk 23:2-3, 13-14 it shows that they went to arrest him believing him to be a dangerous "rebel" about to lead an insurrection with an armed gang. "Rebel" is not the definition you will find in the LSJ because it still means brigand, outlaw, but when Josephus published his works, he disparagingly calls the *rebels* "lēstai" 114 times. All the Gospels were written after his publications, so their use of the word in this way is entirely understandable.
Whenever I post a comment on his videos i know beforehand that mods will protect Ammon who will not ever engage with any knowledgeable and scholarly pushback that clearly shows the errors in his narrative. I have added the bracketed translations to it just now for people here, but the latest comment I made even started with:
"If all mods and Ammon honour Diké (Justice) and Alētheia (Truth), they will leave this comment and any further replies in public view." And they still hid it!
There already exists a Greek word for "human trafficker" that stayed unchanged from Classical to Koine times. It's andrapodistēs:
Aristoph. Pl. 521, reads in Classical Greek:
κερδαίνειν βουλόμενός τις ἔμπορος ἥκων ἐκ Θετταλίας παρὰ πλείστων *ἀνδραποδιστῶν.*
Translated, it means:
"Perhaps a merchant wanting to profit through many *slave-dealers* coming from Thessaly."
1 Tim 1:10 reads in Koine Greek:
πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοίταις, *ἀνδραποδισταῖς,* ψεύσταις, ἐπιόρκοις, καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερον τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀντίκειται,
(The law is) For fornicators, for males who lie down with males, for *kidnappers of free men,* for liars, for oath breakers and for all things opposed to the sound teaching.
Andrapodistēs has *ALWAYS* meant "kidnapper/slavedealer/menstealer/trafficker" - this meaning has *NEVER* been legitimately translated from lēstēs, in any *KOINE* text anywhere. (The NT was written in Koine, not Classical). To my knowledge it's not translated "trafficker" in any Classical text either.
No-one in Lsdybabtlon666 has ever yet acknowledged this truth from the texts when I have raised it, before (and it's had a little exposure before being hidden). Are they always going to be too invested in being an unthinking echo-chamber?
But I hope Danny's subscribers are more open minded - let's discuss it, please 🤔
Frankly, I didn’t really buy what Hillman was saying until I watched this guy fumbling around trying to discredit him only with the words “laughable”, “non sensical”, and so on.
Man, explain why Hillman is wrong. You Have nothing to add except running away from the argument pretending to laugh.
thank you
It's been out for an hour or so and you replied 34 minutes ago. Tell me you didn't watch the podcast and just cherry-picked excerpts without telling me....
Lady Babylon brings the ancient source texts. That's a little more convincing, IMO, than a "scholarly" opinion. Argument with supporting evidence beats argument.
@@JudeFKennedy could have watched it on patreon first
I don’t care either way who is right. There is no way to know for sure if either man is right. So you all sound really idiotic arguing either way. What I do know. I’m an intuitive. It’s very clear after watching/listening to Ammon that he is HEAVILY using hypnosis techniques on you guys. He has an agenda to “turn or kill souls”. He says he is a Satanists, and from listening to him he is a luciferian. It’s nobody’s job to change a souls one way or the other. It is each beings choice. Just like I think it is wrong for Christians or any religion to try to convert people. It is wrong for Ammon to do it the other way. He laughs at you all for how simple minded you are. You all believe every word he says because he is using technique. You all have SHEEP stamped on your forehead and energy signature. So Ammon the snake grins and yells “I’m your shepherd, follow me to greener pastures”. And you all go Baaa baaaa and follow off a cliff. Where he feasts and energy harvests off your energy. Good luck, y’all need it.
So… who wants to hear Ammon and Dan do a nice old fashioned debate? 🍿
I got $5 and a hail Joseph Smith on it 🗽
☝🏽 I do brother
Ammon would destroy Dan
Ammon would destroy Dan
dan will get destroyed and he knows it lol
This guy made no convincing arguments, he just called things laughable and nonsensical without providing any evidence. Honestly not really worth watching
He made an appeal to authority right out of the gate. Like I just commented, scholars need to stop that nonsense. Make the argument. Consensus is a bit of a bruised edifice at the moment. We're here to learn, not join a cult.
What about the argument of the LXX copying to Hebrew too strictly? Why else would the Greek there just be so awkward?
@@mh4zdYou're not here to join a cult but you side with the guy who has no critical work in Hebrew or study of the Hebrew bible. Here's a free tip. Anyone who tells you one language is better because it can communicate with one word what it might take another three is conning you. That takes place in every translation throughout history. He relies on the people who know nothing about translating Hebrew or Greek. He's not impressing anyone else.
@@Robert_Browne Oh this is delicious. You took from my comment that I sided with Amon or whatever his name is. Holy S. You're demonstrating polemics to a T, and you can't recognize a call to objectivity because you think critiquing someone means the critic is automatically on the side of the criticized person's other opponents. I want Dan to do better. Get it? Get off the tribal reflex.
@@Robert_Browne Care to offer a mea culpa Mr. Rigor?
Danny was on Lady Babylon a few days ago where they talk about this interview. Be sure to watch that after this.
Dr Hillman seems to have had a field day with this 😂.
Hail Satan
This guest admitted after the podcast was over that he was wrong about the word count of ancient Hebrew. It really does only have 8,000 words, as Ammon claimed.
@@wackyswacky1374 yep 😂
@@wackyswacky1374 Yes! Danny showed that on the screen and Dan still insisted 80,000. Obviously doesn't have the knowledge he claims but her certainly has a lot more biase than what he claims.
Morman? Kinda hard to believe someone that believes that shit
Lmao it immediately discredits all he says🤣
Hate to be that guy but I think it’s spelled Morthem.
It’s spelled ”Cult.”
talk about 'nonsensical' right lol
THE GOLDEN WOLVERINE TABLETS
Off the rip I find it hard to imagine that a Mormon is going to objectively evaluate Hillman's claims. On the basis of Faith alone, such a concession would be heretical. Basically, McClellan's opinion is firmly compromised by an external obligation
100%
Dr McClellan has repeatedly stated that the evidence points to a 19th century origin for the BoM, against the authenticity of the Book of Abraham, etc. He's very willing to be honest when the data contradicts with the dogmas of his spiritual community.
Well put. I wonder how he explains his religions racist claims that black people skin became dark because they sinned and were cursed. Also wonder what he thinks about his religion withholding the "priesthood" in that religion from African Americans for 20 more years after the Civil rights movement. What he thinks about Joseph Smith translating texts to scripture in the book of Mormon, which was translated by those who speak Egyptian, and multiple sources asserted the translation wasn't the fancy story told my JS, but rather funeral texts. Wonder what he would say about his prophet sending away many of his devout leaders in the church on missions, just so he could steal and marry their wives while they were gone. I also wonder what he thinks about his prophet marrying 14 year Olds and many children, and having what was it, 34 wives? This gentleman lost all credibility in my mind that he could study ancient texts and still be apart of a religion founded by a con artist and terrorist, which is why Joseph Smith was killed in prison, after he ordered a news paper press building to be burned down because they were slandering the church. He turned himself in, not knowing he was facing grand arson and terrorist charges. He lost any credibility by admitting he was Mormon. Anybody who genuinely researches this faith would be an absolute ignorant lost soul to continue with that religion. Hard to believe any of this man's claims and research. "Coming from an ex-mormon who had their records removed from the church, and had the highest leaders of the church threaten me for leaving that insane cult."
Is this a bot attack or have all the crazies come out?
Dan is a Mormon by tradition. He has criticized both Christian apologetics (who despise him as an atheist), and Mormonism; all from the perspective of the scholarly consensus (when he gives his own thoughts on an uncertain matter, he explicitly says that he is speculating beyond evidence).
@@beorntwit711 you can name call all you want. By tradition or by faith it doesn't matter. If Hillman were correct, and I'm not saying that he is, not am I in a position to make such a claim, a person compromised by their own cultural identity is going to be a poor sword-bearer to take up the fight against untruth. Dan McClellan could be the best biblical scholar on Earth, but this was in no way of convincing counter-argument to Ammon Hillman's outlandish claims. This would only be a satisfactory response if you're primed to hear a basic rebuttal and call it a day.
There are 2 types of people, those who seek truth, and those who seek evidence to support what they already believe.
Everyone, EVERYONE, is the 2nd type. We only briefly lean into the 1st type unless rigorously trained. You can believe you don't do this, but that is your inner Self protecting you from your own bs. Stay vigilant.
Oh ya? you forgot people who just have FAITH
The Catholic Church does this very well. Nothing but sheep.
this one is a thougie. I believe I was in the 1st type but on a closer inspection I'm the second category. How do you get closer to the Truth in a daily basis?
Modern science methods are based of Karl Popper theories: scientific knowledge does not advance confirming new theories, it does by eliminating laws that contradict the experience.
I'll summarize this interview for you. Danny asks about Ammons claims, dude laughs and says no that's silly, they didn't mean it that way without providing any proof other than they wouldn't say that in bibilical greek.
Thats about what I expected. Cherry on top is the ducktails shirt. FFS
Yup and the shirt just YELLS fake it till ya make it...not an ounce of professionalism IMO.
What is the evidence that Amon’s claims were true? He just asserted meaning without context. Anything that can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Also it’s amazing how you can summarize a 2 hour debate that’s only been live for 30 minutes prior to your post!
Thank you. You saved 2 hours of my life.
Ammon ruffled a lot of feathers. I love it so much. You can tell who goes into the research trying to learn, and who goes into it trying to prove a point. Ammon is a role model for all scholars and he's setting the bar way higher than any apologist can reach
🎉💯
Absolutely!!!! 💯💯
Imagine absolutely knowing nothing about greek or ancient history, but then when a fringe scholar comes along with something edgy to say, you blindly assume he's right, and mainstream is wrong.
It would seem that that's been happening the whole @@zachr0
So you have no idea who this guy is do you? He goes against plenty of biblical scholars. He’s not really the guy I’d choose to fight on the side of the Bible lol
A minor in greek, can't speak greek. Doesn't present any solid arguments, shilling what wikipedia says, What a waste.
ammon is a fake person. fake name. fake expert.
@@clockworkorange333he's also a complete used bag of douche!
@@clockworkorange333please elaborate I've just come across him and I found rather interesting the topics he spoke of.
Why would he proclaim to be a professor and not be one.
have you any evidence to back up your claim.
(I'm asking questions not defending him just curious on where you got that from)
@@smokinhoff9209look up ammon. Of course he isn't a "fake" expert. Why ask a random youtube commenter about him when he has plenty of information available about himself?
@@jeranismisashillasisjtolan well that's one way to put a stop to civil discourse.
Honestly, I was hoping someone would ‘debunk’ the things Dr Hillman was saying, as they were quite frankly terrifying. But if anything, this video has made me pull my head out of the sand and realise that Hillman probably is right.
You ROCK
He wouldn't be getting the backlash he's received if he were wrong. They only do that to those who tell the truth.
I don’t believe Hillman I know he’s correct and others have also for some time now. Interesting to see where this goes from here.. veritas lux mea
Hail Satan 🪐😂
I thoroughly debunk something he brings in virtually every video he makes - and he's terrified of me ever being heard, so hides my comments (or his protectors do).
I have lost count of the number of times he has hidden my debunking of his mistranslation of lēstēs!! But I can post it here and have done 😊
In case you don't find it (not too far above here), I said
The definition of the word, lēstēs, is crucial for Ammon's entire narrative: the only crime in Ammon's books that Jesus did, was to be profiteering from the Mystery rite through trafficking - apart from this "sin," Ammon actually fully endorses all the atrocities that he alleges Jesus was doing as an essential part of "the Christian Mystery" - which he has also clearly stated many times, is his ambition to replicate, himself, as part of his Satanic commission to initiate the Apocalypse.
He claims that when Jesus sees the "swat team" coming to arrest him, he is "screaming, I'm not a trafficker!" By itself his paraphrase of Mk 14:48 is utterly wrong because it's merely an exclamation of surprise at the size of the force coming to arrest him *as if* he's a lēstēs. It is not a guilty confession! But in the context of Lk 23:2-3, 13-14 it shows that they went to arrest him believing him to be a dangerous "rebel" about to lead an insurrection with an armed gang. "Rebel" is not the definition you will find in the LSJ because it still means brigand, outlaw, but when Josephus published his works, he disparagingly calls the *rebels* "lēstai" 114 times. All the Gospels were written after his publications, so their use of the word in this way is entirely understandable.
Whenever I post a comment on his videos i know beforehand that mods will protect Ammon who will not ever engage with any knowledgeable and scholarly pushback that clearly shows the errors in his narrative. I have added the bracketed translations to it just now for people here, but the latest comment I made even started with:
"If all mods and Ammon honour Diké (Justice) and Alētheia (Truth), they will leave this comment and any further replies in public view." And they still did delete it!
There already exists a Greek word for "human trafficker" that stayed unchanged from Classical to Koine times. It's andrapodistēs:
Aristoph. Pl. 521, reads in Classical Greek:
κερδαίνειν βουλόμενός τις ἔμπορος ἥκων ἐκ Θετταλίας παρὰ πλείστων *ἀνδραποδιστῶν.*
Translated, it means:
"Perhaps a merchant wanting to profit through many *slave-dealers* coming from Thessaly."
1 Tim 1:10 reads in Koine Greek:
πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοίταις, *ἀνδραποδισταῖς,* ψεύσταις, ἐπιόρκοις, καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερον τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀντίκειται,
(The law is) For fornicators, for males who lie down with males, for *kidnappers of free men,* for liars, for oath breakers and for all things opposed to the sound teaching.
Andrapodistēs has *ALWAYS* meant "kidnapper/slavedealer/menstealer/trafficker" - this meaning has *NEVER* been legitimately translated from lēstēs, in any *KOINE* text anywhere. (The NT was written in Koine, not Classical). To my knowledge it's not translated "trafficker" in any Classical text either.
No-one in Lsdybabtlon666 has ever yet acknowledged this truth from the texts when I have raised it, before (and it's had a little exposure before being hidden). Are they always going to be too invested in being an unthinking echo-chamber?
But I hope Danny's subscribers are more open minded - let's discuss it, please 🤔
60 seconds in and his rambling technique has already lulled me into a completely blank state of consciousness. Damn Danny is asking GOOD questions! I think the constant hand gesturing is part of keeping folks from thinking while they are being mesmerized.
Lol, after thinking he disproved dr. Hillman by saying the Hebrew language has upwards of 80 000 words, a quick search vindicates dr. Hillman!!! 20:24
Edit: in fact it's worse than Hillman said. The figure 8679 is for total words in the Hebrew Bible, while unique words are 1480, a far cry from the 80 000 McClellan claims, any way you look at it.
No no, the 8679 is for unique words, the ~1400 are unique words that only appear in the Hebrew Bible.
Neither of you seem to understand what hapax legomenon means. Go look it up
@@justmagicmostly awesome circumvention. Care to address the facts as presented?
@@abelbabel8484 do we have much in way of examples of Hebrew outside the bible?
@@boxerfencer precious little, some rabbinic literature. That's about all.
“I’m very good at separating my own spirituality from academics….but yeah I’m a Mormon”
My next question. So when you do your interpretation, are you wearing your magic underwear?
ad hominem
@@MLM68the joke went right over your head. What do you think the quotations are there for
I haven’t listened to this debate yet but at this point I am actually willing to believe in MORMONISM… because the bar hs sunk so low..
Moron got ya
"it could be read like that, sure".
Saved you 2 hours
"It could be read that way, sure. But you can also read it the Hebrew way, the one I CHOOSE to take as only valid source" 🤡
Yeah, the problem with mistranslations is that from then on, every ‘scholar’ studies it and truly believes what they are saying. Just because a large number of people believe something, doesn’t mean it is correct.
@@JoeBrandAG holy smokes
All I'm saying is. There so much archeological evidence that shows the Mediterranean was a hot pot for elusinian / occult like practices. It existed in many forms amongst the egyptains, Etruscans, minoans, phoenicians, Greeks and ...the list goes on. These practices used..yes drugs but in many forms, not all that we would perceive as psychedelic today. Some of these rituals included burning your child, crucifing men (romans got the idea from carthage) dancing for days, drugs, sex with same sex, adults children, animals, necromancy.. All types of poisens. It happened so often that we have one big ass book call the greek magical papyri.. It's all there and it isn't even the half of it.
It was so impactful that it pretty much inspires the renascience (with hermes/ who was the protector of dionysus)
Do I belive that the Romans killed the litteral son of God? Or do I believe they killed a man to make an example to those practicing these mysteries?
(mysteries where the main intention was to become one/invoke God)
@@JoeBrandAGdan is a clown and has too fragile an ego to admit that ammon is right LOOL such narrow mindedness
41:00 he admits Ammon is right and that he has no idea what he’s arguing for
Marvel brained, astroturfed, pharma apologist sewing disinformation on behalf of the Cathedral. Knowingly or unknowingly disingenuous. Really sad to see how shallow his thinking is
To be fair, this guy isn't much of a scholar. I'd rather see an educational background including real universities and real degrees. Any of us following the Ammon saga could get the 15-30 hrs needed for a minor in Greek with Ammon's help. I didn't even know what classics was until Dr Hillman showed up in my feed.
What are you talking about???? Explain because that's not what I heard...
Isn't it amazing that it happens SEVERAL TIMES...
Like dude really buries his own interest
@queenbeedat8726
He side steps several times.
All the way thru
Everything Ammon Hillman has stated about biblical scholars has just been confirmed by MR. DUCKTALES conservative, orthodox and bias views about the Hebrew translations
Dantales
Most LDS r not conservative.
His religious views aside from identifying as Mormon are not public. He stated at one point that he views religious identification(even being an atheist) as less indicative of actual beliefs and more akin to being a fan of a given football team (this is backed by sociological research- there are even atheists who believe in God and Christians who think for sure God doesn’t exist). He explicitly holds a number of scholarly views that he says directly contradict with and undermine Mormonism. Imo, he’s the real deal. His disagreement with Ammon is in no way an attempt to defend Jesus, as he’s called out Jesus’ absurd views about hell and slavery.
LOL The shirt was the first notation of discrediting his words. It seems to me, if your going on a podcast representing your education/knowledge, the clothing choice would be a consideration. He may be smart but I question anything he says contradicting what I have learned in my life. I feel he is sincere yet misguided
Don't knock the Ducktales!
Wow...this was hard to watch. He goes from such a confident "truth bringer" to just another talking head, squirming under scrutiny. You can take the scholar out of church, but you can't take the church out of the scholar. The strength of these indoctrinations is incredibly underrated, especially by those under its spell.
When someone dismisses another person's argument by labeling it as nonsensical without providing any evidence or logical reasons, it's often referred to as the **"straw man fallacy."** This tactic involves misrepresenting or oversimplifying the opposing position to make it easier to attack². Another related fallacy is **"ad hominem,"** where the focus shifts to attacking the person rather than addressing their argument directly¹. Both of these fallacies undermine constructive debate and critical thinking.
I'm pretty much on ammon's lives with 3 accounts actively debunking each verse in Greek it's fun to do
@@Itskinda_funny Sorry I am confused, do you mean you are debunking what Dr Hillman is saying during his lives?
@twentythree7sevensix yes, when he shows a verses I go through and put the verse in its proper context. He doesn't understand Greek or language or he does, and he is a satanic pdfphile lying to layman. I've openly challenged the pdfphile to a debate anytime on any subject or any of his followers they just get triggered and block me. It's funny. I'm nice to them. I'm just actively debunking any claims he makes, and they clearly don't like that. Ammon doesn't understand Greek or he's a liar because that's what his god tells him to do.
@@Itskinda_funnyI also don't know what you are talking about and it's kinda funny! lol.
@twentythree7sevensix Yes, he shows verses without a source, authentication, and age of the document he found that verse on, so I systematically go through each verse he provides and show it in its proper context to use the correct English words to illustrate what the verse actually says you know how's it been read since it was put on paper. People rely on this dude to speak Greek. For them it's pathetic. Muslims use this for tactic for which it is a illogical position to hold and out right lying when people put up fake language barriers like it's the 1700's😂
I was hoping to hear a stronger argument against Ammon's claims, but Dan only dismissed the claims without providing evidence to why the biblical scholar narrative is correct. In summary the only thing I heard in this podcast is "Ammon is taking things way out of context and is not part of the group that decides what the bible is saying. Yes, his translations are fair but we as the bible defenders don't like that narrative so we will just laugh at him and tell people he is crazy."
Overall, this guy seems out of his depth when it comes to this topic. He is good at regurgitating the commonly agreed upon biblical narratives, but he misses the whole point that people like Ammon are making. That is the bible is a poorly translated version of myth and that humanity should open their minds to new interpretations that will expand our understanding of the myths.
Well put, he leaves us at square one, just academically lol
Look for McClellans rebuttal on his own channel. That is where it is. He is not "out of his depth" as you say. He's just not trying hard to argue in this interview cuz his beef isn't with this guy. McClellan is just answering the questions he's given, like "What makes a dead language?"
Yeah I want to see a team of people who actually know the Greek chime in on Dr Hillman’s presentation of the sources, not some Mormon in a cartoon tshirt rehashing the Wikipedia page on Torah authorship.
@@Tychaios0I "chime in" regularly in the comment thread of the Lady Babylon shows but Ammon is terrified people will read what I say so hides my comments (or his protectors do). I've lost count of the number of times he's hidden my rebuttal of lēstēs - but I can post it here 😄
The definition of the word, lēstēs, is crucial for Ammon's entire narrative: the only crime in Ammon's books that Jesus did, was to be profiteering from the Mystery rite through trafficking - apart from this "sin," Ammon actually fully endorses all the atrocities that he alleges Jesus was doing as an essential part of "the Christian Mystery" - which he has also clearly stated many times, is his ambition to replicate, himself, as part of his Satanic commission to initiate the Apocalypse.
He claims that when Jesus sees the "swat team" coming to arrest him, he is "screaming, I'm not a trafficker!" By itself his paraphrase of Mk 14:48 is utterly wrong because it's merely an exclamation of surprise at the size of the force coming to arrest him *as if* he's a lēstēs. It is not a guilty confession! But in the context of Lk 23:2-3, 13-14 it shows that they went to arrest him believing him to be a dangerous "rebel" about to lead an insurrection with an armed gang. "Rebel" is not the definition you will find in the LSJ because it still means brigand, outlaw, but when Josephus published his works, he disparagingly calls the *rebels* "lēstai" 114 times. All the Gospels were written after his publications, so their use of the word in this way is entirely understandable.
Whenever I post a comment on his videos i know beforehand that mods will protect Ammon who will not ever engage with any knowledgeable and scholarly pushback that clearly shows the errors in his narrative. I have added the bracketed translations to it just now for people here, but the latest comment I made even started with:
"If all mods and Ammon honour Diké (Justice) and Alētheia (Truth), they will leave this comment and any further replies in public view." And they still did!
There already exists a Greek word for "human trafficker" that stayed unchanged from Classical to Koine times. It's andrapodistēs:
Aristoph. Pl. 521, reads in Classical Greek:
κερδαίνειν βουλόμενός τις ἔμπορος ἥκων ἐκ Θετταλίας παρὰ πλείστων *ἀνδραποδιστῶν.*
Translated, it means:
"Perhaps a merchant wanting to profit through many *slave-dealers* coming from Thessaly."
1 Tim 1:10 reads in Koine Greek:
πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοίταις, *ἀνδραποδισταῖς,* ψεύσταις, ἐπιόρκοις, καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερον τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀντίκειται,
(The law is) For fornicators, for males who lie down with males, for *kidnappers of free men,* for liars, for oath breakers and for all things opposed to the sound teaching.
Andrapodistēs has *ALWAYS* meant "kidnapper/slavedealer/menstealer/trafficker" - this meaning has *NEVER* been legitimately translated from lēstēs, in any *KOINE* text anywhere. (The NT was written in Koine, not Classical). To my knowledge it's not translated "trafficker" in any Classical text either.
No-one in Lsdybabtlon666 has ever yet acknowledged this truth from the texts when I have raised it, before (and it's had a little exposure before being hidden). Are they always going to be too invested in being an unthinking echo-chamber?
But I hope Danny's subscribers are more open minded - let's discuss it, please 🤔
Incidentally he called for Greek scholars to critique his own "translation" in his New Satanic Version of Mk 14:51-52. I have and it's VERY revealing of deliberate manipulation to force his false narrative into the text!
docs.google.com/document/d/1_iTWlYWio7TKDqmLWWuqhwFiWr7K6tyt5TlBAi5CsUM/edit?usp=drivesdk
@@alirowan1999 thanks for sharing all this
So did quick google search on who is crucified in roman times. Pirates was one of the crimes punished by crucifixion. Googled what a pirate was during roman times and it say slave trader. So i believe Dr. Ammon is more correct
How do you square that with the fact that the Roman Empire enslaved and trafficked hundreds of thousands of people…?
Google is the arbiter of truth, right? Oh, wait.
@@afrodemon8629 Google isn't dogmatic and is atleast 95% accurate.
Says he has no bias but is a Mormon who believes their founder found a book under a tree and that Book of Mormon and the Bible are their source of faith. How in the entire existence can this guy not have a bias?
Who actually wrote the Book of Mormon?
Book of Mormon - Wikipedia
Author - Joseph Smith
The Book of Mormon is a religious text of the Latter Day Saint movement, first published in 1830 by Joseph Smith as The Book of Mormon: An Account Written by the Hand of Mormon upon Plates Taken from the Plates of Nephi.
So this guy believes a book created in 1830 is more of a source than the original Greek Bible what a clown.
Dan Mclellan doesn't actually believe that. He has a liberal view on scriptures. Just about everything he says is academic consensus, not just his personal views.
@@zachr01:47:00 you mean lying through his teeth with no sources?
@@zachr0so Dan acknowledges that his church was founded by a charlatan who wrote fiction based upon older fiction?
But still believes that there is somehow truth to the fiction? Yeah let’s follow this guy… into logical suicide.
Didn't you listen to him say Moses was not historical which is at odds with the beliefs of his church?
What compelled him to justify that which he doesn't personally believe in, is my question ... 😉
I listened with an open mind but came away with even more respect for Dr. Hillman's work.
All I hear from Dan is.. "Everything I've learned from modern academia does not support anything Ammon says."
It probably doesn't because Ammon is literally translating ancient Greek texts. Modern academia never wants to accept new discoveries not even as possibilities to play with.
Dont you dare tell me the shadows on the wall of the cave aren't real, that's a conspiracy theory!
It also doesn't support anything he's learned from his Mormon programming from birth. I'm an ex, (thankfully) mormon and I hear his mormon bias throught this entire discussion.
😂
that's not all he said idiot
This is the 2nd Bible Scholar who has made their field look like a joke. I thought he was going to have a legit rebuttle to Amons claim of the child trafficker, but nope.. "That word just means something different in New Testament Greek, it's called street greek" lol, it's meaning in all other Greek books doesn't matter.
The Bible scholars don't have the language, or the depth of reading to understand the entire gestalt of the Hellenistic world like a good Classicist has. I would love to hear another person on Ammon's level politely and succinctly critique Ammon's theories - but this guy ain't it!
Shocking how you think a weird can't carry two different meaning depending on what level or dialect it's used with. We literally see this all the time between the multiple different versions of English
There's not really anything to rebut because Amon didn't really make much of an argument--he made a claim and offered a near contemporaneous source as to why he thought it would fly, but layered it into his more general theory about Jesus being a drug addict child trafficker. If Ammon could explain why he thinks that's what the author of Mark meant in context, then he'd be making an argument for reading it that way.
@@Easternromanfan oh so we get to just pick and choose our favorite bias tickler then? IM IN!
Here's the deal - The word λῃστῶν - or lestes didn't always mean child trafficker. Was it used that way at times, yes, but more often it was used as a general term describing - robber, highwayman, bandit or revolutionary, insurrectionist, guerrilla. The word is used in Mark 11:17 - Then he began to teach them and said, “Is it not written: ‘My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations’? But you have turned it into a den of lestes!” - Jesus is not telling the people that they have turned the temple into a den of 'child traffickers'. The priests were stealing from the people by requiring ridiculous exchange rates for necessary sacrifices. Context matters - especially in the ancient language. Jesus also didn't say I'm not a lestes - That's not even the structure of the sentence in the greek nor context. He's saying - 'You know me...I've been in the temple in the broad daylight and you could have arrested me and yet you choose to come in the night like I'm a thief or robber.' He was challenging their motives because they were coming at a time out of the public eye... Unfortunately this was not the best person to refute Ammon's crazy assertations. As far as the boy - That's another whole literary picture that concludes at the end of the book with another boy that announces the risen savior...the only other time the word νεανίσκος - neaniskos is used. I won't get into that. Ammon is creating his own narrative through his own faulty context and lens and this guy doesn't combat it well.
"That word didn't mean that then."
"Isn't this a text from the same period using that word that way?"
"Hmm... Yes, but still no."
That’s not what he said. He basically said it was used for that back then, but context matters.
When does he say this?? some of the things he says i find interesting but also i can hear some fallacy, not to say everything Amon says is true. because some things Amon says dont make sense and instead of staying on topic he chooses to jump from topic to topic.
@@Aporeticit’s like reading the word elimination in a nursing textbook which means poop. Elimination= Christ. It won’t mean poop if you read it in any other context but in the medical book it strictly means poop. It doesn’t matter where it is used in other places in the context of a medical book it strictly means to poop.
@@JohnDee633 The problem with his statement is he didn't provide any data to support his claim and certainly not just beyond one example. We only have the documents to refer to what something means and you can't just say "well they were separated so you can't say it means the same thing". Yes language changes but not all words change the same way over time. He is using general theory to try to discredit specific examples.
Dude this is basic common sense about how any language works. "Charge" in the courtroom isn't the same as "charge" on the basketball court, isn't the same as a "charge" on your credit card, isn't the same as a "charge" on your cell phone, and all of these senses exist in the same time and in the same place. You can't just zero in on one specific usage and then insist that the same usage is intended in a completely different context. Or if you're Ammon, that's exactly what you do.
The sapphire under their feet that McClellan mentions (15:30), which is at the bottom of Mt Sinai.
McClellan has no clue about this.
In reality, this is the black basically pavement, at the bottom of the Great Pyramid.
McClellan sees the twigs, but not the forest.
Yes, Mt Sinai is the Great Pyramid.
Ralph
He starts things off immediately with a "Bandwagon Fallacy". Come on man, at least try and use some substance to back your claims up.. oh you can't.
so the apologists, guided by faith, choose to translate they texts like they want and ignore all evidence that contradicts that faith
we were created.. something cant come from nothing...there is a light that animates our forms. it leaves and goes some place else when we leave this form. we all will have to answer for the thoughts,words, and deeds for better or worse. its your choice as to whether you see this or not. free will is a God given right/honor/responsibilty
@@michaelvenezia9673 LOL and then you end that with "God" given. hahahaha. that's a seriously P poor argument. Clearly, there is no such thing as "free will". Guess you haven't thought that through.
@@michaelvenezia9673 In the OT it says God breathed life into us. That wasn't a soul then. It was nemesh, breath. And really this is what I read, how can I know for sure? How can you know the light that animates us goes somewhere. What does that mean anyway? Does it merge with all light?
I am not trying to argue friend. We don't control our thoughts. Try to predict your next thought.
And answer to who? And why? And for what? Even among the Abrahamic God, Jews Christians and Muslims differ. And among those groups there are differences. Hinduism was earlier.
Same with free will. Why is it a right? I don't even want it. Honor? How? So I can walk on a razors edge and be condemned for the slightest screw up? Responsibility? Who asked for it?
How much have you studied free will? Or sociology. You can predict so much behavior based on IQ, education and wealth, learning disability, parental abuse or alcoholism, neighborhood, nutrition, genetics, and a thousand other things a person had no control over.
There is actually a common mental illness, OCD, where intrusive thoughts are part of the illness. The person literally does not want the thoughts. How much have you studied psychology and sociology? Brain disorders are real, and even normal brains are not like you thing, as if you are riding a horse. Your brain is not a horse you ride and pull the reigns to make it go right or left.
If you think that McClellan is a Biblical (Christian or Mormon) apologist, you really have not paid much attention to his scholarship or arguments.
Dan is far from an apologist. Accusing him as an apologist shows you have no idea what you’re talking about.
Look at his face of confusion when you brought up the main arguement for the greek word for child trafficker… its like he either forgot to watch over the main point of the OG hillman video or he blatantly pretended hes never heard of it cause he knew all he could say was basically “ its up to interpretation” …. Again notice his expressions when asked
Thanks now I don't have to watch the rest of the video.
but it isn't. you like many others are not understanding what is being said. the context matters so you can't just use the words generically across the board much less apply the generic medical context across the board. you have to follow the context in the bible and that in which it is laying out. so if you are not doing that you are getting various inaccurate translations throughout the text that paint random pictures that don't line up or make much sense at all. ask yourself why he focuses on and promotes primarily the versus that could paint Jesus in a bizarre light and destroy the Christian view but does not bring up any other examples from the bible to prove this is the correct way to apply the text? because it is deliberate and he knows it is specious made up nonsense that makes the text as a whole not make a lot of sense and he hopes you are too stupid to realize this yourself and believe him off face value. Ammon is an agent of disinformation and of the devil, and or one of the great teachers who set out to deceive for the great deceiver and lead believers away from the faith or anti-christ.
I just don’t understand why anyone hearing Hillman for any period of time doesn’t see the contextual problems of every word of Greek that comes out of his mouth. It’s particularly astounding that an ‘expert’ ignores the biggest clues to translating ancient languages…
"So Ammon says this text means this, what do you think?"
"Well, it could be translated that way, but that'd be silly. So no."
Excellent rebuttals....
"The biggest problem with Christianity are Christians themselves."
You only listened to that 30 second clip?
@seekingtruthgaming8887 I watched the whole thing. That's the point. His whole argument was, "No one I know believes this. That'd be silly to read it like that. Yeah that word means that in Greek but the bible uses a different unique definition, etc etc."
@@wackyswacky1374 well you've strawmanned twice now. It's not that it's just silly so no lol
Any scholar denies ammon on the basics of how words are used in context of pther words put together. A word by itself means one thing but changes when you add other words to it.
For example imagine you fins a saying of a person in California in the 60s and they say I'm so gay
Then find another guy in Alabama mahatma says I'm so gay!
You'd know from the surrounding context that the Cali guy is talking about homo stuff and the bama guy is talking about being happy.
@seekingtruthgaming8887 yeah but the surrounding context still supports Ammon's reading. At the very least, Ammon's reading is plausible. So for the scholars to outwrite dismiss it on face value is IMO their own biases showing.
Thank you Ammon for making me aware of this dark alley. I surely would have got gotten. Give me liberty or give me death!!! Hail the Muse!
I don't understand how Dan McClellan says he is an expert in translation, but he doesn't know Greek. χριστός is an adjective, "to anoint, rub on" and he should know that; ὁ Χριστός is a title and used as a proper name in the New Testament--*and specified as such in the NT* : Jesus, who is called The Christ (ὁ Ἰησοῦς ὁ λεγόμενος Χριστός).
Ammon knows Greek, but he has 0 knowledge of linguistics. Words have core meanings--lexical semantics--and they have pragmatic uses where their pragmatic sense is very often clear. He is taking the pragmatic use of a word (prevalent in medical texts) and applying it to any and all instances in non-medical texts like the New Testament (and rattling off dictionary definitions and applying them all to the biblical texts). This is a textbook word-study fallacy (The textbook? James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language).
at 1:07:05, Ammon has shuffled the translation of the proper name ὁ Χριστός into the nominal adjective χριστός , translating it as "Christ." I.e., he has substituted one word for another, making his own case, but without evidence. This is called begging the question.
I.to be rubbed on, φάρμακα χριστά salves, Aesch., Eur.
II.of persons, anointed: χριστός, οῦ, ὁ, the Anointed One, the Christ, as a transl. of the Hebr. Messiah, NTest
A Mormon deciphering biblical texts without any bias reminds me of that movie Diddy Day Care.
you must be an idiot then
I don’t know if u meant to type diddy day care but it made it funnier 😂
the hebrew bible has 8,679 words 1,480 of those are expressions that only occur once...where is dan getting 80k words from?
Probably learned that in university.
There's only 33K in modern Hebrew.
And only 1 mill + in ancient Greek?
He wasnt talking about the bible
@@fred-62he'd be wrong either way. Modern Hebrew only has 30k words in it.
I'm really sick of experts opening statements sounding like "any expert would laugh at that statement" thanks for literally saying nothing lol names of experts or you're just saying nothing
Because academia also relies heavily upon consensus. Look, if you want to exalt or dismiss any scholar simply from a second rate podcast, go for it. I enjoy Hillman, but he's got a lot more wood to chop for his take to be labeled credible on any academic level
@@percyblok6014The point your making is exactly what I'm complaining about. I've seen so many of these biblical scholars laugh at different assertions, claim it's laughable, then never explain why. If Hillman has ideas that are refutable then I'd like to see a scholar actually explain why that is instead of ignoring and disregarding them. If someone can't or won't explain their reasoning then it seems they also have plenty of wood to chop. So far I've yet to see a scholar claim Hillman's assertions are impossible. They all frame it in the sense of well sorta, kinda, some people, not most, possible, plausible but unlikely. To me if you're saying something is unlikely but possible it's the same as saying he has a valid argument or else they would say it's impossible and give actual evidence instead of conjecture based on their opinion and studies.
One thing thats makes me skeptical about Ammon is that the Bible and the many many manuscripts are the some most read and highly scrutinized texts within the last 2000 years and Ammon comes out and says I'm the only one who can read this properly. I find this unlikely.
** having a double masters and being off on from 80k Hebrew to Danny clearly showing 8k only in Hebrew ** makes anything else this guy says invalid and shows how smart Ammon actually is
I'm halfway thru but he does show him its 8? 😆
I’m about half way in and I’m utterly impressed with Danny’s questions!
Not so much this dipshits answers
WE NEED AMMONS WHIP
As a bilingual person native Spanish speaker who grew up in the United States I agree a thousand percent with Dan. One Spanish word can mean so many different things among all the different Spanish speaking cultures. A word that is simple and that has an innocent meaning for me and my culture to an other Spanish culture, that same exact word and pronunciation of it is offensive and demeaning to another Spanish speaking country even though it is the same word spelling and all. We see this in Spanish all around the world. In today’s American context a switch has taken on a whole different meaning. Outside of the hood it means one thing and inside the hood it means something totally different. Same word, same country, same language. I don’t know why this makes peoples minds run in circles. It’s not rocket science, unless one wants to bend things to make it mean what they want it to mean and fit their agenda. Education is so important all though people want to sell you the idea that it isn’t. Much respect to the scholar Dan for having the patience.
Different meanings for the same word in different languages, cultures, and countries are known. There's nothing new here. Dan's response to Dr Hillman loses through insults 'nonsensical' and 'laughable'.
Anyone else cringing trying to watch this and eventually had to just tune out?
Yeah, I tuned out , this. Guy has nothing on Ammon
We. Have been lied to , deceived, Truth is a hard pill to swallow
He is a Mormon. Yikes
Definitely thought Dan would have more knowledge than Ammon. not even close
Yes, me. This guy is steeped from birth to death in Mormon beliefs. FOS
He's like "I don't let my religion affect my opinion" but yet the only references he sees as credible are the Christian references hahaha!
Exactly, he can't even admit to himself that Ammon could be right because Christians can't accept a negative interpretation without losing their faith. It's like bringing someone out of a cult who's been brainwashed their entire life that the outside world is wrong. There's no way to be unbiased about it when your views of life, death and everything important to you is at risk of going away.
@@_witchdoctor yes it made all the bs he was saying finally make sense
Exactly!
@@interstateneek McClellan's work at times also undermines Mormon authority on the Bible (which he discusses in one of his videos). I don't think you understand his arguments.
As an Ex Mormon I've never known one to not let their religious bias into every aspect of their lifes
so this is the infamous ‘Dan’ i’ve heard so much about? *Ammon sends a spanking
"smack smack smack" 😅😅😅
Ammon is a poor unfortunate soul.
Amon is cool I find him interesting but he's fighting the truth so hard it's obvious he's scared of it... stop trying to put square pegs in round holes ammon, Jesus is Savior Annointed
@@MagnusGalactusOGwho are you to condemn anyone's soul?
@@MagnusGalactusOG so sad, in need😅
“Jesus probably spoke market place Greek, LIKE ME.” 😂 These bible guys are guided by EGO and they don’t even realize that’s what discredits them.
So true 👍
I noticed that too. 😅
As far as I know the word σεβεια (σεβασμό) NOT "fear" means respect. WTH are they talking about?
Jesus spoke Aramaic. Jesus wouldve only used Common Greek speaking to Gentiles. The Jews all spoke Aramaic although they used Greek in business for contracts, loans, buying, selling, etc.
@@thetruthchannel349 Implying that Ancient Greek came first and could only be spoken partially, even by the ppl of that time.
This guy is a janitor for the Mormon church.
If ya know, ya know. Would be that all men were
Janitors for the church.
Wtf does that have anything to do with anything? He has a degree and supporting/serving people in his community through low end labor is something to be respected. Mormons belief are pretty luny from my POV and he didn't back up much if any of his claims by evidence in this interview, but don't shit on him for not believing cleaning after his community is below him.
Exactly!!! He’s a Mormon apologist, used to try and shore up the Mormon doctrine.
respect the profession that Ammon feed his children while in st mary school, janitor or not the knowledge the personal mind is wonderful
not defeding dan but just the mind separate from the body
Thank you ammon. We aint ever goin back now! Must push foward with the truth!
Passed the point of no return, indeed.
What "truth"? You realise Ammon's taking you all for a ride! I agree that Dan did a poor job, but I post thorough rebuttals regularly in the comment thread of the Lady Babylon shows. But Ammon is terrified people will read what I say so hides my comments (or his protectors do). I've lost count of the number of times he's hidden my rebuttal of lēstēs - but I can post it here 😄
The definition of the word, lēstēs, is crucial for Ammon's entire narrative: the only crime in Ammon's books that Jesus did, was to be profiteering from the Mystery rite through trafficking - apart from this "sin," Ammon actually fully endorses all the atrocities that he alleges Jesus was doing as an essential part of "the Christian Mystery" - which he has also clearly stated many times, is his ambition to replicate, himself, as part of his Satanic commission to initiate the Apocalypse.
He claims that when Jesus sees the "swat team" coming to arrest him, he is "screaming, I'm not a trafficker!" By itself his paraphrase of Mk 14:48 is utterly wrong because it's merely an exclamation of surprise at the size of the force coming to arrest him *as if* he's a lēstēs. It is not a guilty confession! But in the context of Lk 23:2-3, 13-14 it shows that they went to arrest him believing him to be a dangerous "rebel" about to lead an insurrection with an armed gang. "Rebel" is not the definition you will find in the LSJ because it still means brigand, outlaw, but when Josephus published his works, he disparagingly calls the *rebels* "lēstai" 114 times. All the Gospels were written after his publications, so their use of the word in this way is entirely understandable.
Whenever I post a comment on his videos i know beforehand that mods will protect Ammon who will not ever engage with any knowledgeable and scholarly pushback that clearly shows the errors in his narrative. I have added the bracketed translations to it just now for people here, but the latest comment I made even started with:
"If all mods and Ammon honour Diké (Justice) and Alētheia (Truth), they will leave this comment and any further replies in public view." And they still did!
There already exists a Greek word for "human trafficker" that stayed unchanged from Classical to Koine times. It's andrapodistēs:
Aristoph. Pl. 521, reads in Classical Greek:
κερδαίνειν βουλόμενός τις ἔμπορος ἥκων ἐκ Θετταλίας παρὰ πλείστων *ἀνδραποδιστῶν.*
Translated, it means:
"Perhaps a merchant wanting to profit through many *slave-dealers* coming from Thessaly."
1 Tim 1:10 reads in Koine Greek:
πόρνοις, ἀρσενοκοίταις, *ἀνδραποδισταῖς,* ψεύσταις, ἐπιόρκοις, καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερον τῇ ὑγιαινούσῃ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀντίκειται,
(The law is) For fornicators, for males who lie down with males, for *kidnappers of free men,* for liars, for oath breakers and for all things opposed to the sound teaching.
Andrapodistēs has *ALWAYS* meant "kidnapper/slavedealer/menstealer/trafficker" - this meaning has *NEVER* been legitimately translated from lēstēs, in any *KOINE* text anywhere. (The NT was written in Koine, not Classical). To my knowledge it's not translated "trafficker" in any Classical text either.
No-one in Lsdybabtlon666 has ever yet acknowledged this truth from the texts when I have raised it, before (and it's had a little exposure before being hidden). Are they always going to be too invested in being an unthinking echo-chamber?
But I hope Danny's subscribers are more open minded - let's discuss it, please 🤔
Incidentally he called for Greek scholars to critique his own "translation" in his New Satanic Version of Mk 14:51-52. I have and it's VERY revealing of deliberate manipulation to force his false narrative into the text!
docs.google.com/document/d/1_iTWlYWio7TKDqmLWWuqhwFiWr7K6tyt5TlBAi5CsUM/edit?usp=drivesdk
You won't find the truth from Mr Hillman
@alirowan1999 you don't need to believe Hillman to reject Christianity for the farce that it is. Actually objectively looking at the actions that the god of scripture will plainly do that for you. A god that's fond of killing mankind and allegedly sacrificing his own son. For what? So he can justify himself for forgiving mankind of their sins? An omnipotent god does not need a sacrifice to forgive sins.
To top it off, Jesus will allegedly come back to kill us all for unbelief and set up his theocratic dictatorship.
And those who don't believe get cast into the lake of fire to burn.
Sounds all very lovely coming from a fod who is supposed to be "love".
I was a Christian for around thirty years, so please don't think I haven't been through all the issues with the doctrine.
I left Christianity behind long before Hillman started gaining popularity.
Christianity will *definitely* take you for a ride way more than Hillman ever can.
@@alirowan1999 nice reply. Make a channel and explain it
@@alirowan1999 I thought I posted a reply to your comment last night but apparently I didn't or youtube is doing something shifty.
Anyway, nobody really needs Hillman to understand how intellectually bankrupt Christianity is.
I was a Christian for around 25 years before I finally left, having seen too much inconsistency and contradiction that I couldn't deny anymore.
There is literally no reason for an allegedly omnipotent god to need a sacrificial atonement to justify himself in forgiving mankind of their sins.
It just begs the question of why create a reality in which something god abhors (sin) can exist in the first place. He abhors sin yet commits numerous atrocities himself to "purge" sin from the earth. Like, you know... supposedly drowning everyone with the flood. Who knows how many people he killed with that one.
if anyone wants to say the god of the OT is evil, then they would have to say Jesus is evil also because he is said to be coming back to literally kill everyone that doesn't bow the knee to him in the apocalypse.
Hypocritical at best. But no, god is more immoral than anyone else... at least, as is presented at face value in scripture.
Danny-“I think what Ammon was saying is the Bible is misrepresenting what the term were or changes what the terms mean.”
Dan-“ and that’s where I’d like to see evidence IN THE BIBLE.” 1:09:10
Like dude do you even hear yourself? Like seriously..
there are a lot of holes in his arguments - sorry Dan but you didn't say anything to convince me because you provide no substance - he states he tries to call out the bullshit in religion - and at the same time he is mormon???? wth??
Look at the video gnostic informant did on Dan recently. The guy is a straight up snake oil salesman.
How could you learn all the biblical languages and still end up in a cult?
Even cults, pay to have a propaganda minister !
crazy right lol
Money and friends.
Funny how Dan says he's all about "data over dogma", but turns 100% dogmatic, and vicious, when somebody hints that Jesus might be fictional.
Having followed Dan for a while I think he follows his religion not because he believes its dogma, but for social reasons that appeals to him and his personal needs. In fact, I think many religious people do that.
For the people in the comments: Dan, the guest, admitted after the podcast that he was wrong and that Ancient Hebrew really does only have approximately 8,000 words in it. So, this so called "expert" in Hebrew doesn't even know how many words are in the language......
All together now: OOF
The question was about the ancient greek language
For me the cringe moments were when he said (1) christianity was not a standard-issue mystery cult with dyin'n'risin' god, and again when he pretended (2) early apocalyptics, among them nascent christianity, were not all fundamentally about an expectation of their savior figure being executed so he could rise again. Without the full suite of mystery-cult trappings (including also baptism and a meal ritual) it would have been unable to compete with the dozens of others current throughout the Roman empire, so would have vanished along with the Judean state. And, without an executed savior, it would have been totally invisible in the Judean apocalyptic milieu. Its only unique feature was pacifism, which it needed for compatibility with Roman occupation.
If you look it up yourself it says there are over 33000 words in Hebrew get it right
@@brenttrandall9247 That's modern Hebrew after inventing words for airplane, machine gun and telephone call.
Classical biblical Hebrew has under 9000 words, no one disputes this.
Get it right.
1:17:07 First, he says we have to look at usage contemporary to the time when the text was created. Then, when a contemporary reference to the usage as 'trafficker' is made he says we have to look at context, which he conveniently claims is missing. Yet, it isn't. The context is that Jesus was captured, alone in a park, with a small child whom is specifically mentioned to not be fully clothed, but instead "naked, EXCEPT FOR a linen cloth."
He earlier ignores that context and attempts to portray the boy as fully clothed in a robe. It doesn't say that at all. It makes no mention of a robe.. It specifically says NAKED, EXCEPT FOR. That context would indicate that the cloth did not predominately cover the child to begin with.
He isn't making a strong case by continually shifting the goal posts.
I was getting into this, then I realised a subtle difference between this guy and Aemon. During Aemons podcast with Danny, Aemon constantly brought up sources for what he was saying, this guy just sits here like "that's just not true".... "Believe me because I know.".... Aemon had sources bro, this guy just flexes his credentials and hopes you buy into the glamour 90% of the time.
Biblical theologians are just people who historicize their beliefs.
This guy has nothing on Dr Ammon though like where are his demons bringing forth the anti christ?
Omg lmao
😂😂💀
Daemons
Did you guys catch that instant debunk about hebrew? He claimed 80k words in hebrew then but its a very commonly known fact that there were around 8k hebrew words was the truth. Danny misspoke about the 1.5 million Greek terms, thats today. Ammon had given a more conservative answer of 250k word in Greek to this guys 275k.
Finally someone smart who’s brain is not scorched with meth , and who is not speaking like he’s sitting on toilet and trying to push out crappies that mostly came out of his mouth . Thank you Mr. Dan McClellan .
I'm just here for the obligatory "Hail, Satan."
He's a moromon religious academic. That's all you need to know.
So basically a liberal arts student
Thats an oxymormon 😂😂
You clearly have not listened to what he actually says… at least glance at his work before commenting and showing how little you know.
Never!!!! And I mean never, trust a grown man who wears a Duck Tales T Shirt!
It certainly wasn't the best choice of attire for this podcast & discussion.
A female host probably would have suggested he change, its driving me nuts!!
@@KP-zj3zj He wears those specifically to needle people just like you. It is very conscious.
not relevant.
What's your problem with duck tales, clown?
1:08:12 the gospels are not avoiding medical context. He said prior that later texts are not relevant for saying how the earlier texts meant. Now he's backtracking
I look forward to hearing Dr. Ammon. His presentation was so detailed and full of sources. I did not appreciate the disrespect. This was dismissive of him and it did not seem an unbiased and “data” focused.
20:22 ~8000 words Hillman is correct here. someone please explain the 80,000 claim by Dan.
80,000 is approximately the total words in the hebrew version not unique words. Ironically he claims Ammon mixed his numbers up when actually he is the one mistaken
Fact Checked in real time. Too bad he didn't actually point that out for a real time response..
He is wrong.
Ancient Hebrew has 14000 words and that includes names
i know he says he tries not to include his dogma of being religious but i think it’s virtually impossible to separate from your religion because if you stumble upon anything that disagrees you scoff or look away from something that might make your religion “wrong” or not what yoh think it is
The reason we do not hear of Moses, is because he had other names.
In Egyptian he was called Osar-Seph and Tuth-Moses.
Read Manetho, the historian.
Osarseph means ‘Son of Osiris’, a standard Egyptian title.
Tuthmoses means ‘Son of Thoth’.
In other words, Aaron and Moses were Pharaoh Akhenaton and Tuthmoses (his brother).
And yes, Tuthmoses was an army commander, the same as Moses.
Ralph
This guy had a real 'experts say' vibe about him
Trying hard to take Dan seriously but knowing that he is a Mormon makes that sooo very difficult 😞
They are the real Israelites, dontcha know? :)
@@emac1177no no African Americans were the Hebrews, Egyptians, native Americans, they were the original everything.
@@JohnDee633so we are gonna forget Arabs? 🤣🤣African Americans aren’t Israelites I’m sorry my brother. Not defending Arabs because I’m not one, but do a little geography study of the Bible and the places it took place at.
He looks so uncomfortable being asked these questions. Its like he knows what he is saying is bullshit which he is being made to say by his masters behind the scene. Would of been interesting to see ammon's interview after this one because this bloke dont make sense after hearing ammon's interview
He’s winging it
holy hell. dude is tough to listen to.
keep up the awesome work, Danny.
You're getting into some bad ass territory these days.
It’s always extra fun when Danny has a sane guest. Watching him bounce the crazy theories of his… less sane guests… off actual experts leads to really interesting moments.
So basically this guy is saying everything Amonn said could be interpreted in that way 🤦🏼♂️
I believe Amnon
The funniest thing ever
Context is king in linguistic semantics. Interpret, "I'm dying down the street". On it's own there's multiple valid interpretations, once cast against the light of our current era, one would most likely deduct a vehicle or "ride" of some sort would be involved. A person with a hoverboard would be dismissed, although some day in the future it may be very valid.
@@percyblok6014 why Jesus didn’t quote the Hebrew & prove a Hebrew Bible before the Septuagint
This guy thinks that saying "context" is his "I win so shut up" word.
exactly. Therefore all Biblical Theologians are people who historicize their fairytale.
It would be cool to get these 2 in a room together.
Yeah or at least on conference call to debate
Why did the Jews stop using the Septuagint? To distance themselves from the Greek speaking Christian's! It's synonymous with the religion, of course the Septuagint is the oldest, unless I completely missed something....
Dan would never. He has been confronted with facts many many times and just quits responding.
Actually it wouldn’t because he doesn’t deserve spot to go against Ammon
So he’s saying in a thousand years from now the Bible will be interpreted as Jesus died on the Skibidi for our Rizz?
So this dude got a award from the Bible elites to let him know he was following the script!. Here's a another layer!!
Omg. Yea. I believe a doctor of classics rather than him push this agenda
Danny: have Dr. Ammon back on to dissect this interview
Lady Babylon channel has a livestream scheduled for Weds night
AGREED
That guys a joke though 😂😂
Clearly the apostles were not children at the time of Christ. Look at all the books. They are definitely not children. Peter definitely wasn’t a fisherman at 10 years old.😂😂
@@CatholicCanadianConservative YOU ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION
@@CatholicCanadianConservativewell in the holy Bible when Jesus tells them to come and they want to ask their father???
I'm learning the word Christ accommodates multiple subjects. Christ as the Sun of God on the Zodiac Wheel. Christ as our spinal fluid, the Cristo's. Christ as being the ointment for drug use. It's even a medical term. Christ as the Son of God who made an ultimate sacrifice. This is 4 examples off the top of my head how the word Christ is used to represent something.
On one hand you have an almost literally excommunicated professor of classics who studied ancient texts and discovered seemingly coherent narrative from these. Who had an a-ha moment somewhere and found in many texts his rhetoric and enhance on previously found clues. Connecting dots very well. Capable and well educated. Some ofcourse pointing out personality traits where I mostly recognize traits of someone who's mind works faster than his mouth can put into words and has not been trained to take a breather. But personality aside...
on the other side you have again another scholar, highly capable and educated (whether you agree with religion or not). He also found, or learned from others' , a-ha moments and how they reflect on findings thereafter. connecting various dots in a maze of 2000 year old combined scripts when they had no access to reference checksum databases.
Both equally willing to be put on display for all of us to see. So I won't shorthand either one. These are 1- to 3000 year old pieces of writing, with no certainty that texts were written by the person or in approval of the person that made any of these findings. There could very well be a badly written copy of a copy, made by a 9 year old somewhat retarded malnourished nephew of a gossiping descendant of the original writer, who was drunk when writing down some dear diary moments in the first place.....and this abomination of a copy was the only one to survive and to be discovered and be put in bible or what ever manuscript decades or more later.
yes you have great proven artifacts from great minds but these were well supplied with students and aids for writing and work. ( example: davinci didn't do all his signed work himself. students plethora )
holy vs unholy. dark vs light. sinner vs saint. left vs right. fiction vs fact....History is written by the victors...That does not mean that it is forever obscured and is completely lost to history ofcourse. Not at all. From Homer's epochs to a President's son laptop....The truth is like most of the time, somewhere in the middle. Everyone is a little bit right in some aspects. but where's the middle? That's a part where us beings who like to question everything once in a while, will never agree on. And that's beautiful.
As an alternative, I'll Ask the metallic silver luminescant orbs that are floating outside my house next time if they can possibly clear things up. But now we are still busy with getting an understanding of a Nintendo DS in exchange for some quantum field material solutions, you know, the usual.
So - Dr Hillman and Google say 8000 unique Hebrew words, and 1.5m Ancient Greek words, but Ducktales says 80,000 Hebrew, and 250,000 ancient Greek. I was already hooked on Hillman, but this might actually get me to persevere with his crazy podcasts 😂😂❤❤
Ammon can be hard to watch. But he never fails to provide evidence for his claims.
Other than Greek/Hebrew which one came first. I've heard compelling arguments on both sides. What I have concluded on that topic is "who cares."
His podcasts are definitely out there….but I would challenge anyone to offer an actual genius from history that wasn’t also…..definitely out there 🤷🏻♂️
@CrawfordDalee where the hell did you find that . .. my Google says 14000 words and that includes names and that there's 7000 plus words in the Hebrew bible..... nice try DAN LOL
He didnt even know his "data" so that says enough
Super hard to take a grown man wearing a duck tales shirt and a rainbow wrist band seriously, but i will do my best
😂😂😂
Duck Tales was a really good TV show. One of the best Cartoons of all time. To be fair.
@@MagnusGalactusOG and? WTH that have to do with a grown man wearing one
he is a walking billboard of soyface
Things that make you go Hmmmmm 🤔
I got into gambling and was down low. I ended up homeless and on drugs, and then I got to know Jesus. He told me he could help me cross the border and next thing know I’m being sold into human trafficking…
Ammon deciphering never before translated ancient greek medical text and giving you source Dan seems to have had no experience with medical text so how can he even comment on the meaning. (especially ancient Greek drug's and there applications) He is so conditioned by the current manifestation of the Bible. And haveing all this supposed biblical knowledge but choosing to be morman doesn't make sense as the older the source the closer to the truth you get.Yet Mormon is one of the newest versions and it's founder/foundation is sketchy at best.
Not only that, there's ACTUAL evidence that the Mormon church was built on a foundationof lies. Mormonism and Scientology just baffle the heck out of me. 😂😂😂
He's saying the medical text use of Christ doesn't translate to the normal use of Christ these days which have Biblical origins. That's what I got from that.
@@energybasics totally and I get that along with the regin and time frame that should give it more context.But also medical text is more like a account/documentation of what happened and what works or not to help with the issues (needed for future help to others so needed to be accurate) it woukd read more like a dictionary than a tale handed down and translated through time and culture.Im thinking the medical text are even closer to the origin of the word/meaning.
The Duck Tales shirt was pretty distracting 😂
Should change it to "fairy tails"
Gotta watch this fruit around your kids
Saying that scholars think something is laughable, is not a defense nor proof.
It's so common from scholars it's insane.
The words "Mormon" and "Scholar" don't belong in the same sentence. Anyone who admits to believing Mormonism has no business in this arena.
brain dead take
Yeah, his statement that he is a religious and a Mormon had me scratching my head. It highlights the fact that he’s not skeptical enough when approaching “religious” texts. Mormonism requires its adherents to believe some pretty unfounded stuff.
@@robdoubleyou4918 all religions require you to believe in the supernatural. brain dead argument. you can believe you can become a god yourself and not let that undermine your ability to study the Septuagint and classism without bias. take your head out of your ass before you suffocate.
@@robdoubleyou4918 *exactly*
@@Rityam369nah, pretty spot-on really.if you're listening to a Christian (which is what a Mormon is) defend Christianity you're a special kind of gullible. This shouldn't have to be said but I realized recently that it does so; my statement includes all other religions as well implicitly. It would seem that 85% of the world is composed of so-called "adults" that believe in children's-fables AKA religion. There's nothing wrong with being agnostic, but to follow a religion by your own choice in modern day is literally insane. Literal, normalized insanity.
Ammon shows us the texts.
ua-cam.com/users/liveSV1zHCWeJfM?si=cLXyakB4WF5TQ2-U
Props for getting another perspective and interpretation on the issue, Daniel-San!
And he's Mormon 🤣🤣🤣 oh man this is going to crack me up for a long time
Im really surprised more ppl aren't pointing that out.
Trying not to be disrespectful, but yep being lectured by a Mormon is laughable. All religious raised people can't be of independent thought. I'm from UK, and I wince when Thanksgiving comes around. The pilgrims were extremist puritans. Too extreme for UK and Europe which was a zoo at the time. Our Empire was built on blood and suffering, but God approved apparently......
@@genestone4951most people comprehend the world at a 3rd grade level.
It’s obvious, to me, he’s an LDS plant. One of those “reach the youth” type guys. The equivalent of the marines setting up a booth outside of detention.
He said a whole lot of “Scholars think this or that” without showing evidence of why they think that unlike Ammon who pulls the text up and shows us why he claims what he claims
CONSENSUS DOE NOT EQUAL CONFIRMATION
"Credentialed experts" is the red flag.
😆
So strange, Dr. Hillman would have taught the classes he minored in. Yet, Hillman doesn't know how to understand or translate greek?
Good point, it helps to see how it's used for the referenced text.
@@ELC-h9b did I miss something? I didn't know he ended up getting a PhD in something.. I just heard him spout off a bunch of random master's degrees
@Happycow567 Hillman has a PhD. I haven't looked into the other guys credentials
Anyone whose affiliated to a religious organisation can't be truly independent. Anyone who believes any of the religious texts are easily led and gullible. Such texts are rules of the road, bylaws written by those in power to keep power. The best place to look are books of accident reference literature, broad subjects. That way you'll get a better idea of what was happening. However you must be careful, remember history is always written by the victors.
👍
To all the people who say this guy is not making a good argument, I will give an example of what he is trying to say. Imagine you have a word in the Greek that is translated as thief, or stealer (someone who steals). However, there are many different types of "stealers": shoplifter, burglar, armed robber, strong-arm, pick pocket, etc. Just because one story uses the word to describe a shoplifter, doesn't mean every other use of the word should be translated as a shoplifter. You have to look at the context of the story. If Paul is casing a bank, then puts on a mask and goes in and "steals" the money, you know from the context of that story that he is not shoplifting, but probably armed robbery or strong arm. This guy is right when he talks about the context of how the word is used.
Or if a kid says that a guy wearing a leather jacket is cool.
If you look at the root or apply the word to a period before it came to mean impressive than it would mean he is cold to the touch.
It is a good argument if we ignore the naked child running away. That kind of gives context to argue for ammons point.
But it's all still stealing and means the same thing. Taking something that isn't yours by force or trickery against the will of the owner.
Everybody knows this! Of course, context is important, but It's not explanation enough to discount Dr Hillman's translations. Listening to Dan was like listening to a religious education teacher during high school. Incredibly disappointing on many levels.
I love the part where they highlight the search that showed there's 8,000 words in the Bible. Haha
“Oh definitely 80k words in Hebrew!”
Insane ratio
2 second google search for ancient hebrew and its 8k. They should pulled it up.
@@joekigerhe needs a Young Jamie...
@@joekiger he literally did @20:18
Dan told them his mistake and that’s why they put it there. He posted on his social media 2 weeks ago about it.
Loved this show. Danny basically forced McClellan to debate Ammon's arguments as if he was Ammon himself. Something tells me Dan McClellan would not have agreed to debate with Ammon in person.
This is turning into my favorite podcast
for real, its feels like old JREs before it sorta toned down
It's been a top 3 for me for almost 2 years.
I enjoy the subject matter, but Danny needs to step his game up a bit.
1:16:53 So if we discard the "medical bandage" as well as the nakedness, what we're left with is that Jesus was alone with a child, at 4am in a park, while he directed others to perform 'look out' duties, as the authorities were searching for him and that's something to be laughed at and dismissed?
I hope this guy isn't a parent...