8:18 Judaism is not dualistic. Yhvh is the source of all good AND evil 9:38 this is an entirely Christian conception and nothing to do with Judaism. The verse you cite about lucifer has nothing to do with Satan in Judaism
OK, you present as a well versed and intelligent person. But you're wrong on far too many points to be taken seriously. First off, Judaism in not dualistic. Isaiah 45:7. As to the point of why the writer of Mathew, the only one that mentions or includes the Magi is the birth "story", would include them is pretty obvious. But we should also recognize that the writer(s) of Luke does not. But why would Mathew elect to include them? For the simple reason of providing the very bait that you took. You are very correct that Zoroastrianism would have been widely known at that time and the writer(s) of Mathew included them to provide the reader with some legitimacy of its claim. Much as you have demonstrated in your own comments. It's also pretty clear that early christian writers, when imagining the gospels, were heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism and borrowed the idea of dualism (good vs evil) from the much older Zoroastrian religion. Not from Judaism.
@@DaleBrose how is Judaism not dualistic? Maybe in its current form it isn’t, but historically it 100% was. Yes, Zoroastrian magi adds legitimacy to the claim of Christ but is anything but “bait”, as we’ve established in the video they would have reason to take interest in a Jewish messiah. Also, why would the apostle matthew be willing to be martyred for something he knew was made up?
@@MatthewBitty You miss the point. It's a made up story and the Magi were written into the story. But don't think for a moment that I think any of it is true. It's all nonsense. But every reason you provide makes my case and the reason that Mathew would include them in the fictional story to make it appear to be a legitimate claim. As far as the dualistic nature, be it the original form of Judaism or present, I gave you the text that clearly states that the Jewish God creates good and evil and that all things are done through that god. For it to be dualistic, good and evil would be equal but opposing forces.
@ you ignored my question about why it makes sense for the apostle to be martyred over a lie, also the verse you’re using is a common atheist quote-mine. It’s more accurately translated to calamity, if you use the older Septuagint you will find this to be the case. God being the existing one philosophically necessitates that he is all good, and evil cannot exist in him. Evil is simply a deviation from his nature, so your interpretation of the verse also makes no sense. If you watch my whole video, you’ll find that Daniels words predict the crucifixion 490 years to the day of it happening, which I think leans far more to the claims being legitimate than being completely made up. Matthew was writing to a Jewish audience, Jews who would’ve been familiar with Zoroastrianism, and recognized their similarities to their own faith. That’s why it’s only in Matthew’s gospel.
@@MatthewBitty I fully understand that you're using the typical apologetic gymnastics to make the story work and, in order to do that, you're willing to overlook the contradictions between the gospels of the birth narrative. But you bring up an interesting point, the story changes depending on whom the intended audience was. Which only highlights that these are just stories and NOT an accurate account of anything historical. I have little doubt that both Judaism and the early christian cults borrowed heavily from Zoroastrianism as it was already widely known by people of the region at that time. If the inclusion of Zoroastrian priests were such an important element to the Jews and it was an actual historic event, I would think Paul would've mentioned it since he surely would've known about it if the story was floating about at the time of his writing. Suggesting to me that the accounts found in Mathew, being much later writings, we're not known. As for the Is Isaiah passage, I take that right out of KJV. So if you wish to say that the KJV is not a reliable translation, I will concede that point if you will concede to the point that biblical writers frequently changed and altered the text leaving us with nothing but unreliable text. But credit to you for looking to the LXX. But even there, you're relying on text that maybe came for the 4th century and itself was probably heavily edited by Origen in the 3rd century to reflect the christian bent. Anything earlier is simply fragments and incomplete, which relied heavily on someone filling in the blanks.
@@DaleBrose there is no evidence of origen altering the Septuagint, or any ante-nicean writer for that matter. Can you even tell me who origen was? Or did you just pull that out of thin air? It was the oldest and most widely available translation to the early Christians, and our oldest manuscripts line up with what we see in the 1st,2nd, 3rd centuries. It’s not that KJV is unreliable, it’s that Greek is a far more expressive and specific language than English, and it’s worth looking at the original Greek to decipher confusing passages. I’m not sure how you can accuse me of mental gymnastics when your presuppositions are literally all over the place. You’re also not addressing any of the arguments I’m making, and choosing to drag in new info that’s not relevant. I ask you again, what is your explanation for Daniels 70 weeks, and Matthews martyrdom? Also to say that Paul does mention it means nothing, it’s an argument from silence, and not a very strong one. A failure to mention something Is different from an apparent contradiction.
So all the children 2 and under ended up in hell bc they didn't have the chance to accept Christ into their heart and they were born sinners? What a religion 😂
Jesus said multiple times that the kingdom of God welcomes the children, or he who is reborn into a child (through the Spirit). A child follows his father's voice, and love his parents from the heart, such person has no Harmatia ="missing the goal". Matthew 18:3 ERV and said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye turn, and become as little children, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven.
@@mrfuzzy2954 can you please tell me where it say that? If you have time. Also I think they were referring to the flood. A time when I don't think most of the world had even heard anything of God.
Oh c’mon now you are a slack reporter…the messiah is a temporal Jewish liberator/leader The Christ is a cosmic matter nothing at all to do with a jewish resistance accolade Continuing to be generous…The Magi is a later addition …amongst thousands …it remains an interesting story even though its a later addition. Someone must have wanted to connect with eastern traditions - Zoroaster is one of various possibilities.
Incredibly high quality video. It's amazing that the UA-cam algorithm is able to bring me to your channel
Thanks for the kind words, consider subscribing!
Interesting stuff, you reminded me of ETERNITY IN THEIR HARTS book!
Love hearing Hayward’s insights!
This was worth the wait!
Very solid video Brother. Thank you, and Merry Christmas 🙏🏼
so the appearance of the magi is just another "fulfilled prophecy" written in...
Good video
@@CowOfTheNile many thanks! Merry Christmas
@@MatthewBitty Merry Christmas to you
Satan sent them. Remember the star visited Herod the Great first, then set off to Bethlehem.
lol I don’t think so
8:18 Judaism is not dualistic. Yhvh is the source of all good AND evil
9:38 this is an entirely Christian conception and nothing to do with Judaism. The verse you cite about lucifer has nothing to do with Satan in Judaism
@@tbishop4961 I’m not talking about rabbinic Judaism, which was a complete invention of the Pharisees, I’m talking about Old Testament Judaism.
@MatthewBitty 😂 no you aren't. You're talking about what Christians think Judaism was
@@tbishop4961 you should watch my video on the Talmud
@@MatthewBitty why would I do that? You've made so many errors in this video alone, I don't feel compelled to waste time watching more blunder
יוצר אור ובורא חשך עשה שלום ובורא רע
אני יהוה עשה כל אלה
It is the story of Epiphany
OK, you present as a well versed and intelligent person. But you're wrong on far too many points to be taken seriously. First off, Judaism in not dualistic. Isaiah 45:7. As to the point of why the writer of Mathew, the only one that mentions or includes the Magi is the birth "story", would include them is pretty obvious. But we should also recognize that the writer(s) of Luke does not. But why would Mathew elect to include them? For the simple reason of providing the very bait that you took. You are very correct that Zoroastrianism would have been widely known at that time and the writer(s) of Mathew included them to provide the reader with some legitimacy of its claim. Much as you have demonstrated in your own comments.
It's also pretty clear that early christian writers, when imagining the gospels, were heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism and borrowed the idea of dualism (good vs evil) from the much older Zoroastrian religion. Not from Judaism.
@@DaleBrose how is Judaism not dualistic? Maybe in its current form it isn’t, but historically it 100% was. Yes, Zoroastrian magi adds legitimacy to the claim of Christ but is anything but “bait”, as we’ve established in the video they would have reason to take interest in a Jewish messiah.
Also, why would the apostle matthew be willing to be martyred for something he knew was made up?
@@MatthewBitty You miss the point. It's a made up story and the Magi were written into the story. But don't think for a moment that I think any of it is true. It's all nonsense.
But every reason you provide makes my case and the reason that Mathew would include them in the fictional story to make it appear to be a legitimate claim.
As far as the dualistic nature, be it the original form of Judaism or present, I gave you the text that clearly states that the Jewish God creates good and evil and that all things are done through that god.
For it to be dualistic, good and evil would be equal but opposing forces.
@ you ignored my question about why it makes sense for the apostle to be martyred over a lie, also the verse you’re using is a common atheist quote-mine.
It’s more accurately translated to calamity, if you use the older Septuagint you will find this to be the case.
God being the existing one philosophically necessitates that he is all good, and evil cannot exist in him. Evil is simply a deviation from his nature, so your interpretation of the verse also makes no sense.
If you watch my whole video, you’ll find that Daniels words predict the crucifixion 490 years to the day of it happening, which I think leans far more to the claims being legitimate than being completely made up.
Matthew was writing to a Jewish audience, Jews who would’ve been familiar with Zoroastrianism, and recognized their similarities to their own faith. That’s why it’s only in Matthew’s gospel.
@@MatthewBitty I fully understand that you're using the typical apologetic gymnastics to make the story work and, in order to do that, you're willing to overlook the contradictions between the gospels of the birth narrative. But you bring up an interesting point, the story changes depending on whom the intended audience was. Which only highlights that these are just stories and NOT an accurate account of anything historical.
I have little doubt that both Judaism and the early christian cults borrowed heavily from Zoroastrianism as it was already widely known by people of the region at that time.
If the inclusion of Zoroastrian priests were such an important element to the Jews and it was an actual historic event, I would think Paul would've mentioned it since he surely would've known about it if the story was floating about at the time of his writing. Suggesting to me that the accounts found in Mathew, being much later writings, we're not known.
As for the Is Isaiah passage, I take that right out of KJV. So if you wish to say that the KJV is not a reliable translation, I will concede that point if you will concede to the point that biblical writers frequently changed and altered the text leaving us with nothing but unreliable text. But credit to you for looking to the LXX. But even there, you're relying on text that maybe came for the 4th century and itself was probably heavily edited by Origen in the 3rd century to reflect the christian bent. Anything earlier is simply fragments and incomplete, which relied heavily on someone filling in the blanks.
@@DaleBrose there is no evidence of origen altering the Septuagint, or any ante-nicean writer for that matter.
Can you even tell me who origen was? Or did you just pull that out of thin air? It was the oldest and most widely available translation to the early Christians, and our oldest manuscripts line up with what we see in the 1st,2nd, 3rd centuries.
It’s not that KJV is unreliable, it’s that Greek is a far more expressive and specific language than English, and it’s worth looking at the original Greek to decipher confusing passages.
I’m not sure how you can accuse me of mental gymnastics when your presuppositions are literally all over the place. You’re also not addressing any of the arguments I’m making, and choosing to drag in new info that’s not relevant.
I ask you again, what is your explanation for Daniels 70 weeks, and Matthews martyrdom?
Also to say that Paul does mention it means nothing, it’s an argument from silence, and not a very strong one. A failure to mention something Is different from an apparent contradiction.
Astrology is real 😂
So all the children 2 and under ended up in hell bc they didn't have the chance to accept Christ into their heart and they were born sinners? What a religion 😂
Children aren't condemned as long as at least one of the parents are faithful. Maybe read the Bible before you criticise
Jesus said multiple times that the kingdom of God welcomes the children, or he who is reborn into a child (through the Spirit). A child follows his father's voice, and love his parents from the heart, such person has no Harmatia ="missing the goal".
Matthew 18:3 ERV
and said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye turn, and become as little children, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Ever heard of the Holy Innocents?
@@mrfuzzy2954 can you please tell me where it say that? If you have time. Also I think they were referring to the flood. A time when I don't think most of the world had even heard anything of God.
😂
Oh c’mon now you are a slack reporter…the messiah is a temporal Jewish liberator/leader
The Christ is a cosmic matter nothing at all to do with a jewish resistance accolade
Continuing to be generous…The Magi is a later addition …amongst thousands …it remains an interesting story even though its a later addition. Someone must have wanted to connect with eastern traditions - Zoroaster is one of various possibilities.
@@naradaian What you’re saying doesn’t reflect the understanding of historic Judaism, but the current, rabbinic one.
Bro is the stinkiest goober of all time…. Good video tho