Ba'al Busters Broadcast
Dan McClellan on Danny Jones Argues from Inside the Book (pt 1)
This is a pattern you will recognize once you deal with enough "biblical scholars" whatever that means. They use the book to verify the book. They don't look at history from outside of what the pages say, and too much of the account is non-historical. So you get caught in a circular argument that revolves around what the book says to verify itself. That's not how that works. The writers weren't witnesses, nor do we know their names. No guy named Mark or John, etc actually wrote the portions attributed to that name. And the account was written long after the alleged occurrence. When you get into the Torah you have even less historical accuracy and a ton of similarities to Greek Mythos. We're having people dictate from a superhero comic book what we're supposed to accept as reality. It's a polished and airbrushed collection of stories heavily borrowed from the Greek to give the Yaoists some claim to a rich past they simply never had. This is a Hellenistic era writing for the Old Testament and a bizarre construct in the New. Dan McClellan in my view inadvertently makes a better case for why biblical scholars should be challenged. Danny Jones is a huge channel on YouTube. Must be nice...
GET COMMERCIAL FREE PODCASTS and Exclusive Content: Become a Patron. https://Patreon.com/DisguisetheLimits
My Clean Source Creatine-HCL Use Coupon Code FANFAVORITE for 5% Off
https://www.semperfryllc.com/store/p126/CreatineHCL.html
Signed Copies of my book:
https://www.semperfryllc.com/store/p93/Priestcraft%3A_Beyond_Babylon_%28Signed_Copy%29.html
Amazon: Priestcraft: Beyond Babylon is getting Great Feedback! 8.5x11 Paperback, Hardcover, & Kindle: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CNGX53L7/
Barnes & Noble: Priestcraft: Beyond Babylon 416 pages, and ebook: https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/book/1144402176
KOBO: https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebook/priestcraft-beyond-babylon
Brighteon Store DISCOUNT Link: https://brighteonstore.com/BaalBusters
Take Back Your Health NOW! DR PETER GLIDDEN, ND All-Access https://leavebigpharmabehind.com/?via=pgndhealth
Add to the Kristos Family Apocalypse Fund: https://GiveSendGo.com/BaalBusters
DR MONZO Products: https://drmonzo.kartra.com/page/shop
DR MONZO ATB BOOK: https://drmonzo.kartra.com/page/ATBBook
USE CODE: BaalBusters15 for 15% OFF Dr. MONZO’s store items
Dr MONZO AzureWell https://www.azurestandard.com/shop/brand/azurewell/2326 and use code BB5 for 5% Off for Life!
Get KRATOM HERE: https://klaritykratom.com/?ref=BaalBusters
Have...
- Duration:
- 1h 58m
- Broadcast on:
- 30 Jun 2024
- Audio Format:
- mp3
good morning everybody welcome hello everybody out there in speak free radio land hello Twitter hello bradyon and hello rumble those of you out there we're unaware we are going to continue there's a little bit left in this video that I put together now both of those both of those videos from myth vision podcast were over three hours long so I broke it down a little bit I'm sure there's more there that you could get benefit from but it was just a a little bit too much to show everything so you can go to YouTube and find myth vision is all one word if you're interested there's what I find when I listen to Derek too long especially when he's a you know he's on the screen talking is that he seems artificial is whatever it just doesn't seem like he doesn't come across as somebody who's not honest and sincere but the information that is accurate and that you can get something out of is what I present not the extra crap side comment nonsense that is also added to it to little destructive black pills that are thrown in there with you know some kind of political spin on them I take that crap out because same thing with nostic informant person doesn't need to go into things that they don't understand and make dumb statements it discredits them on other levels or you just realize okay well you got this right but you still got a long way to go you know so let's go ahead and bring this up we'll get rate it started right away and then once we're done with this portion we're gonna go right into the Dan McClellan Danny Jones interview where he he's discussing in I guess apology you know like an apologist but he's a biblical scholar who put out some posts after Emmon Hillman's David Emmon Hillman's appearance on Danny Jones which maybe we'll watch at some point but he I did see it but I'm just saying maybe we will together he questions and challenges a few things but I think his answers are more just crediting to him and I don't think even realizes it it's a circular argument where it's you can't he can't step out of the thing that was wrapped together and called the Bible in order to verify it through historical accuracy he just uses the Bible to prove the Bible will know see because it says so it's like that's not that's not it's not how you work that like hey I have a book here it's called priest craft beyond Babylon I reference things why because if I just told you it's be it is so because I said so it wouldn't be a very good book right I would love to have armies of people who you know it and cult this thing and say no you don't understand it says so right here so it must have been happy must have happened it must have been true must have been real oh oh wait there's references to so apparently it did oh oh yeah how about that okay so here we go let's let's get this thing started so we can get going oh by the way speak free radio I love you guys sponsored to know just wanted to know and I hope you enjoyed the the other couple days when you got a 12 12 22 dr Brian artists talk that we did it has a blast from the past but it helps to refresh the memory of the venoms right because these are used in the in the burning purple as well that they talk about here in the the Greek the Dionysian Bakken cults Saturnal what do you call it and potentially the the orphic the ophights the the sibilene oracles and also potentially in Christianity the the venoms that are in the drug that they use and then the antidotes to those venoms problem with that is it continues to destroy your body I don't know if they picked up on that back then but they wanted you to make the drug yourself through your body so they would slightly slowly poison you with venom the slits in your arms until you were producing apparently the the antibodies or whatever they call that whatever the real reality of our medical crap is a tolerance built up or whatever but that doesn't make for a healthy person in a sure as heck doesn't make for a natural person if you're generating and producing something it right it's it's a it goes right back to what we're looking at right now with these shots now they're killing people so hopefully you got a chance to go check out that dr. Brian artist I put up on I believe loose Wednesday and you should check out the rumble channel when you have a chance because I have Thursdays with dr. Peter Glidden that aren't on the radio show because it happened at 11 but you can go to rumble and watch them and last Thursday yesterday dr. Monzo and dr. Peter Glidden were on together it was good times okay here we go I'm gonna finish this up I backed it up like three minutes because it was kind of like in the middle of the practice or practice prixus story and I wanted that to be a full thought because it's kind of interesting and it deals with the oh Jesus Christ I didn't do anybody wrong but guess what you just did you got yourself kicked up no he was a douchebag he was acting like a douchebag and your douchebag as well so go fuck yourself Scott Scott yeah later moderators moderate all right fucking little children out here go fuck yourselves and the binding of Isaac indicates a source derivative relationship one a thomas king of Biosha married Nepali a cloud goddess created in the image of Hera by Zeus to a thomas and Nepali had twin children a son frixes and a daughter heli three a thomas afterwards rejected Nepali and married Eno for Eno hated her stepchildren frixes and heli so plotted to have them killed by their own father number five Eno bribed messengers who told King a thomas that the Oracle of Delphi speaking for the God Apollo required the sacrifice of frixes on Mount Lefischian in order to end a famine in Biosha number six just as a thomas was about to sacrifice his son frixes Zeus or Nepali in other versions sent a golden winged ram to rescue frixes and heli by flying away with them number seven heli fell off hence the hell's pot heli's sea number eight the ram brought frixes safely to culkus Georgia number nine in gratitude today I say prixes frixes sacrificed to Zeus the golden ram that saved him and hung its golden fleece on an oak tree number ten now while it may seem quite inconsequential probably the most important ingredient of this myth is that it is the prologue of the epic of the Argonauts who will come to culkus years later to bring the famous golden fleece back to Greece we can recognize the resemblance to the binding of Isaac in Genesis 22 to test the faith of Abraham God orders him to sacrifice his only beloved son on Mount Moriah Abraham submits to the command and binds his son at the last moment God sends an angel and interrupts the sacrifice Abraham sees a ram stuck in a bush and sacrifices that ram instead of his son yeah there was gonna be a killing there no matter what right Abraham had to kill something that's like a but note the inversion of one small detail in the Greek version the ram is killed first then its fleece is hung in a tree whereas in the biblical version the ram is first stuck in a bush and sacrificed afterwards this inversion of detail can lead us to wonder whether these stories could both derive from a common source and apparently that that kill zone where Abraham was murdering everything he could that's where they made the dome of the rock right that's over the top of apparently the big stone that he was doing all his killings at that's what everybody's talking about when they're talking about the temple the dome right what they want to destroy and build a new temple on it's a it's a sacrificial stone according to them one could derive from the other or that the resemblance is only due to coincidence therefore we must examine the place and role of these stories in their own contexts respectively the epic of the Argonauts and the biblical narrative see God frees comparisons here one you've got this divine command to sacrifice one son it's real in the case of Isaac a lie in another in the case of fricksis fricksis's stepmother bribed messengers to tell the father that God required the sacrifice one the father's pious unquestioning submission to the command to the last minute deliverance of the human victim by divinely sent ram direct command to the father in the case of Isaac direct command to the sacrificial victim in the case of fricksis three the fastening of the ram in a tree or bush before the sacrifice of the ram in the case of Isaac after the sacrifice of the ram in the case of fricksis for the sacrifice of the ram as a substitute for Isaac as a thanksgiving for fricksis what is significant is that these narrative units in common to both stories exist at a level independent of the particular stories and here's something fricksis gets in a lot of friction or where he did imagine that imagine a deity sends you a a flight out of danger and then as a thank you you killed the pilot and hanging in a tree that's essentially what fricksis did that's not a thank you they can be inverted reorder to create different stories the question to ask is are these units similar by coincidence or has one set been borrowed from the other that particular detail about the ram in the tree or thicket is certainly distinctive enough to justify this question in relation to the whole set to consider the bibles quote-unquote old testament books being written as late as the Persian or even Hellenistic eras and given the proximity of Jewish and Greek cultures the possibility of direct borrowing cannot be rejected out of hand secondly the chances of the Jewish story of the binding of Isaac being influenced by Greek myth is increased if both stories are located in a similar structural position within parallel narratives both near human sacrifice narratives serve as the prologs to larger tales of one divine promises of a land to be inherited by a hero's descendants two a special divinely chosen people three a the chosen ones oh nice thing pre-arranged time schedule a four generation I have a hard time looking at these types of structures from above anymore and not seeing what Michael Telinger was showing that these look like the plugins on a circuit board and you know that they were you just using sonic technology back then so the reverberation on the on the pillars that just it's hard not to see that now and when you see some of the other structures and what else was around him in some of these sites they look certainly like an above over the head circuit board very interesting and before the land would be inherited four deliverance through a leader who initially protest because he stutters five an additional delay because of human failure to the stuttering part is really interesting like that is a that is a very distinct commonality between the two holds fast to a divine promise six a wandering through desert with a sacred vessel seven guiding divine revelations along the way not only are both tales of escape from human sacrifice prologs to these larger comparative narratives but they also serve as a reference point in both they hold the respective larger stories together by serving as the origin point of the divine promises that guide the subsequent narratives of journeying to a promised land and that origin point is referenced by way of reminder throughout the subsequent narratives the biblical narrative is about much more than the way the children of Abraham inherited the land of Canaan the laws in the Pentateuch are often remarkably alike the laws proposed by Plato you've got laws that require a central religious authority you have laws of a need for pure bloodlines especially for priests laws that condemn homosexuality witchcraft magic laws unless you're the less you're the inner group who does that as a matter of habit of inheritance boundary stones laws of allowing slaves to be taken from foreign peoples only laws against the need for a king laws governing involuntary homicide laws regarding rebellious children laws against usury against taking too much fruit from one's fields but here's the here's the catch there everybody the laws against usury were only the only applied to the group themselves if you were an outsider they could do anything they wanted to you and this is the part that I don't understand how that doesn't translate over to why Christianity Christians would think that this is their God when it they specifically say that any outsiders that are in the Judean center group are fair game the 10 commandments don't apply to you they can do whatever they'd like you are fair game because you're not them and quite a few more and often found listed in the same order between the Greek and Hebrew texts the ideal state moreover is divided into 12 lots of land given to 12 tribes the king it is warned is subject to the vices of love and this will lead to oppressive tyranny one might think here of the sins of David and Solomon watch and bomb applies the structural analysis of myths as developed by Claude Levi Strauss the Bible and one can see his coverage is much more extensive than can be covered in a few blog posts here is where God free is focusing only on structural place of the frixest Isaac sacrifices and their respective wider narratives the frixest episode serves as an introduction to the adventures of Jason and the Argonauts and this set of adventures functions as an explanation of the founding of the Greek colony of Cyrene later after the descendants of the Argonauts had settled on Thera a direct descendant of Euthomus was commanded through the Delphic oracle to lead his people to settle and establish Cyrene in fulfillment of the promise made at the time of the Argonauts were retrieving the fleece of the ram that had saved frixes this descendant was known as Batus a name that means stutterer he argued against the divine command on the ground in Moses had Aaron with him because he was a stutterer around that he was not a great warrior and that he had a speech impediment but the Delphic oracle refused to listen to reason and made him do as he was told anyway this sounds like Moses Herodotus tells us that Batus ruled Cyrene for the familiar 40 years hmm that doesn't sound familiar we are reminded of the promise to Abraham that his descendants would settle in Canaan after 400 years of slavery in Egypt Egypt serves as a delaying detour on their way to their destiny as Thera was in the Greek myth God commands Moses to lead his people to Canaan by invoking his promise to give it to the fathers Abraham Isaac and Jacob Moses at first refuses by pleading that he stutters if Batus ruled the Argonauts for 40 years Moses also once called a king and known as a king in Philo led his people for 40 years also this narrative structure joining Abraham to Moses echoes with accuracy the promise made to euphemists and its fulfillment by descendant Batus both Moses and Batus invoked their trouble speaking in order to avoid their divine mission and both ruled over their people during 40 years therefore the similarities between the interrupted sacrifice of Isaac and that of Frixis appear as part of a similar narrative structure it seems as though Abraham plays two different characters from the Greek epic King Athamos who almost sacrificed his son Frixis an episode from the beginning of the epic and the Argonaut euphemists who received the promise of land for his descendants an episode from the ending of the epic the order of the episodes has been reversed in the same way the detail of the ram hung on the tree after the sacrifice in the Greek version appears inverted to the account of the ram stuck in the bush before the sacrifice in Genesis the similarity between Frixis and Isaac is not sufficient by itself to speculate about any possible borrowing but when placed in the wider framework of the epic of the Argonauts and the foundation of the colony of Cyrene it allows us to question a likely influence of the Greek mythical tradition on the writings of the Old Testament Herodotus's histories as the blueprint for the first books of the Bible that the narratives in Herodotus have influenced the biblical narrative but there is one significant clue thus far missing Wajenbaum's remarks what might the founding of a colony in Cyrene in Herodotus have to do with the settlement and kingdom established in Canaan by Israel Wajenbaum points to an answer we must investigate the writings of another famous Greek writer to find the description of a statement to be a colony a state that would be divided into twelve tribes and ruled by perfect God-given laws the ideal state imagined by Plato in his laws how late was the Bible and who really wrote it Neil Godfrey again comes through as has Russell Gomirkin and several of the scholars we've brought up so far but I'm impressed with what Neil puts here here's what he has to say it has become a truism that the Bible or let's be specific and acknowledge we are discussing the Old Testament or Jewish Hebrew Bible is a collection of various books composed by multiple authors over many years all of these authors are said to have coincidentally testified to the one and only true God of the Jewish people the mere fact that multiple authors spanning generations wrote complimentary works all directed at the reality of this God working in human affairs is considered proof that we are dealing with a cultural and religious heritage a common tradition belonging to a single people over time a few scholars have challenged that thesis and the most recently published of these is Philip Wajenbaum he writes to have a single writer for Genesis through Kings and possibly for other biblical books contradicts the idea of the transmission of the divine word and of a tradition proper to a people the idea of a single author does not conflict with the understanding that the sources of the Bible were drawn from archives of Israelite and Judahite kings as well as Mesopotamian and Canaanite and other sources watching bomb claims that the traditional scholarly hypotheses of authorship and origins of the Bible are in fact secular rationalizations of cultural myths about the Bible let us imagine that Judea has now been conquered for a century and its saccharodal class is now fully Hellenized. A man educated in the Greek fashion perhaps in Alexandria has grown up learning all the Greek classics Homer, Hesiod, Herodotus the great tragic playwrights Plato and that which he may have read in the Alexandrian canon established by Aristophanes of Byzantium and Aristokus of Samathracie he wants to create a literary work that can compete with those he has read one that will give birth to his political and religious utopia Israel. On the one hand theories about the origins of the Bible tend to admit that the same writer wrote some books. On the other hand several books and articles compare Greek myths with the Bible it is the absence of a synthesis of all these data that is questioned here. Could it be the other way around? Philip Wajenbaum rejects the alternative suggestion that it may have been the Greeks who were influenced by the Bible or related stories from cultures neighboring the Jews. Essentially the reasons for resisting this idea are one Greek authors were generally identifiable personally and they quite openly referred to their predecessors and contemporaries whom they immulated and yeah they didn't hide their sources and they didn't hide who they were imitated they had no need to copy the Bible and leave no evidence that they had any awareness of it. Two the Greeks portrayed their myths through painting and sculpture and here there is no suggestion of borrowing from Jewish myths. The only contemporary images from Palestine are Canaanite relics. Three Wajenbaum argues that almost every chapter of the Bible corresponds to a Greek myth whereas the opposite is not true. Four Greek myths are linked together in a logical narrative progression from the birth of the gods themselves down to the Trojan War and the beginnings of the historical era. This rich and complex intertextuality has allowed the biblical writer to create an original epic on a fantastic level of sophistication. We will see how the Greek mythical genealogies have been dismantled and reconstructed through a specific filter. I hope that everybody watching this goes and subscribes to Neil Godfrey's blog. He is doing fantastic work mining scholars that are not well known and we're highlighting them today. Please show him your appreciation. Show Russell Gomirkin much of his work was shown in this documentary and I want more people to show support to the good scholars we bring forward here on MythVision. To be continued as we unravel the intricate narratives of the Bible it becomes increasingly evident that understanding Abraham's tale requires a detour through the annals of Hellenistic lore. This synthesis of Greco-Biblical traditions isn't merely an exercise in historical curiosity but of pivotal key to truly grasping the layers and intricacies of biblical narratives. If today's exploration has piqued your interest I urge you to like this video. Subscribe to our channel and join the conversation in the comments below. I hope you tell us what your favorite part of this video was. We're just scratching the surface. All right so you get it that is MythVision on YouTube. Again if you listen to Derek too long he might be disgusted by him but the information is good sometimes until they get into political crap then they suck at it. Anyway so that's that part. Now there's a lot more to that video even though it seems like he was stopping there I think there was actually a lot more but I just had to cut it down for our purposes today. Now we're going to start off the next section and we have to do it this way because you'll see well some of you will see because you'll be watching others. I'll have to explain it to you why this is so this fits too well not to not to do it done first. You guys didn't think we're going to have a song today. We have a song. Oh we've got a song. You ready for it? Come on let's put this on the full screen. [Music] Life is like a hurricane in the duck bird. Race past lasers aeroplane. It's a duck blur. Rights of a mystery or rewrite history. Or rewrite history. Every day that I've been in can not tell. Tales of daring through bad and not tell. It's a danger which behind you. There's a stranger how to find you. But the girl just traveled through some of the tales. Every day that I'll be making the tales. Tales of daring through bad and not tell. Not only to us but to us but to us. All right so we have Scrooge McDuck who may resemble some of the banking elites there. And we have it on a Disney cartoon right? Now let's go take a look at where our minitraction here today. And you'll see exactly why I did that for some of you out there we'll see it. So this one is titled look at this shirt. It says Ducktales. It's a green ducktail shirt. He's wearing a Disney shirt. And we know all about Disney and their psychological operations. So straight up in your face there's some ducktails for you. This says biblical scholar responds to Emmon Hillman. Was Jesus Christ a trafficker? Dan McClellan. Dan McClellan is a biblical scholar and an active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He's a Mormon. McClellan was a winner of the Society of Biblical Literature's 2023 Richards Award for Public Scholarship. Just a bunch of people massaging each other's egos and giving each other awards for agreeing with each other. So there's lots of chapters here. All right. So we're probably going to jump around a little bit. So we're going to listen to Dan's academic background. We're going to we're going to waste a little time with that. And then the Septuagit predates the Torah? Question mark, break dead seas. When they don't like something they just say it's not real. Yeah, that doesn't fit our narrative. Therefore it's something else. In accuracies within translations, biblical scholar paradox, Dan's personal bias, which isn't really all that important. He just admits that he has one. Which is admirable, I guess. And Moses never existed. Was Jesus Christ a drug? That's taken it a little too out there. But the response is interesting. Did the Bible misinterpret words? And then Jesus in the public park. This is where he gets into the Ammons stuff and he kind of starts going into it. And so this is two hours long. So we're not going to be able to watch the whole thing together. But let's get it started and maybe we'll do a little bit more tomorrow. So we're going to get let Dan talk. We're going to let him say his thing. Let's just try to do the right about 12 seconds in. Oh no, not that far. So he doesn't always like pair up to what you're doing here. Come on, bro, don't screw up on me now. With your little spinning dial thing or whatever. Let's just start here. Agree and Jewish studies. And I wrote my master's thesis there on textual criticism of the sub-tuigent. Then I went and did another master's degree at a university up in Canada called Trinity Western University. That was in biblical studies where I started working on cognitive linguistics and wrote my thesis there on the conception. So the two things I look at real quick is solosity is out there and speak free radio land are not going to be able to see this. He's wearing the green ducktail shirt. That's a Disney thing. That's one, right? Number two, look at his whatever it is. It's either a wristband or it's a watch. Now I don't know if it's because it's June and he's showing his support for wokeness. But it's a rainbow wristband or watchband. And it's waved around an awful lot because he uses his hands and talk like an Italian does. So I get it. But it's just it makes you wonder is he a Mormon with a with a tendency for bums, you know, as in butts? Or is he just wearing it because that's the hip thing to do when you're a scholar in your in academia? I don't know. Sexualization of deity in the Hebrew Bible. So when they talked and thought about gods, ancient what exactly were they thinking about? And then I did my doctoral dissertation under the watchful eye of Professor Francesca Stavicapullo at the University of Exeter. And that Francesca Stavicapullo that is someone who is referenced and highly regarded by myth vision podcast Derek, which is interesting because she challenges some of the stuff that the Bible states. So I found that interesting that he worked under her yet doesn't seem to have the same views on stuff. Was on concepts of deity and divine agency. So now I'm looking at what is a god but also what is a divine image and how does like an idol how does that work? What was the logic they were using for how? And we were told that the medians, the medias, the mother, the one who was mixing up the potions, the image was what you focused on when you're going through the right. This could be both the deity and not the deity. And then I looked at how we can better understand some features in the in the Bible related to divine presence associated with that. And during the the COVID lockdowns, I was at home with not a ton to do. And I started seeing people posting TikTok videos on on Facebook and Instagram and elsewhere where people were talking about religion and the Bible. And I kind of was wondering who's in charge over there. So I got an account and went and checked out TikTok and saw that there wasn't really who's in charge over on YouTube in TikTok. So there wasn't enough censorship for him. Wow. That's that's quite the statement. There were not a lot of credentialed experts who were commenting but there was a lot of discussion going on about religion and the Bible and stuff. So I thought I might as well just kind of position myself as a bit of a an umpire calling balls and strikes out there. So my my channel is all about self appointed expert. Trying to my motto is data over dogma. The idea being that I'm going to try to yeah he says that but he rejects or ignores data when it doesn't support his situation or his his position. Center the data what we can say about the Bible and religion based on actual research and try to prioritize that over and against the the dogmas whatever they may be from whichever side they come whether they're related to identity politics or they're related to one's own personal interests or things like that. So and I was kind of expecting to not find a big audience for someone who kind of stands in the middle and tries not to play for either team but to my surprise there are a lot of folks who are interested in that and so it's been it's been a fun ride but but sometimes I also run into people who push back and off a lot and so I've made a lot of wonderful friends getting into this field I'm kind of learning well the the academic world of the study of the Bible and religion I knew a little better but getting into the social media world of the Bible and religion I had to go through my own crash course. Yeah you seem like you're you're the guy that calls out the bullshit when it comes to religion. I try to yeah. And you said you also had what was your degree in classics? And let me just say Dan seems like a humble nice guy I'm I'm going to be critical here because of what's that what's that stake okay but don't think that I am not except you know appreciative of what he seems like a good individual I just think he has very strong maybe you know highly conditioned views on things. So I did a minor in classical Greek. A minor in classical Greek okay so that's interesting. So the minor in classical Greek versus the 35 years of study of texts that nobody else translates that Ammon has. So there's going to be a difference here in what is perceived and that's that should that should not go with you know that that's probably should go without saying because I would be a whole lot more experience and exposure to the material that Ammon has and I'm not saying that Ammon isn't biased I'm just saying that if he's talking about a word he's probably he probably knows the definition and how it's used. So you do so you do have some knowledge of classics and you did study classics a bit. A little bit yeah although I transitioned into Septuagint Greek New Testament Greek and that's kind of where I've spent most of my time. Okay what is the difference between a classical scholar and a biblical scholar? So a person who studies classics is primarily engaging in the the Greek and the Latin literature from the middle of the first millennium BCE down into the first few centuries CE and and I use BCE and CE where people use BC and AD and so classics doesn't really have a ton of overlap with the Bible but the the people who wrote and transmitted and consumed the New Testament and as well as the Septuagint were also people who engaged with classical literature and there's a lot of influence from classics on the Bible but a lot of people who study the Bible will also study what's going on in the classical world because of the influence. Yeah it's you frequently see a lot of overlap, classicists going into biblical studies, biblical studies sometimes going into classics so there are folks who try to straddle both of those fields but that's a very difficult thing to do. Okay so classicists do entertain the Bible. Oh yeah not not all of them but but there are plenty who will work with early Christianity just because early Christianity was engaging with with Greco-Roman intelligentsia so there's relevance to what's going on there. Okay so I discovered you obviously after you made those two videos from the response videos from Amund. So I'm looking at Danny Danny Jones's shirt and that looks like butt heads mouth like his teeth on his shirt. I wonder if that's a Beavis and Bullhead shirt. It's podcast. He said two things that you responded to. The first one was about the word hryo. Hryo is a it's a Greek root word that he claimed was the meaning to apply a drug to the skin. Yeah. And he also mentioned that it was to be stung by the gadfly. I think that was those are two separate meanings for hryo. Yeah. And then the other the other point was the he believes that the Septuagint came before the Torah and he thinks that the the Greek was translated into Hebrew. Yeah. So which one of those do you want to start on? What should we talk about first? Whichever. We can probably let's why don't we start with the Septuagint. Okay. I think that's a little a little easier. Okay. There's there are no specialists in the study of the Septuagint who would do anything other than laugh at that claim. Can you so because they control the information they're going to laugh it off with fits challenged. That doesn't really state much. Just to give people who might not be familiar with what we're talking about can you give sort of a basis of the period of time we're talking about in history and give me an idea like just lay out the argument. Yeah. So the development of the Hebrew Bible is pretty complex but in short there were a lot of traditions a lot of poetry some legal text that began to be written down between around 800 BCE and down to around 400 or 300 BCE and as they're being written they're being collected they're being redacted and edited and they're coming together to into this corpus of texts. Now most there's most scholars these days would probably say that it's not until around the middle of the second century BCE around the rise of the Hasmonean Kingdom. So this is a this is the Maccabees. This is the story of the rededication of the temple that Hanukkah is based on. But before that time there were a lot of Jewish folks who weren't speaking Hebrew anymore. They were speaking Greek because any more or ever were they just taught Greek for the first you know there was early language potentially. At least the ones that were living there for the last 100 years in the after Alexander in 333 I believe it was conquered the area. Mainly they were the ones who were living in Alexandria and Egypt. In the late 4th century BCE Alexander the Great sweeps through all of this area takes it over and then as his successors are fighting for control of these regions. Tell me. The land is is hellenized meaning that Greek becomes kind of the the lingua franca. This is what if you want to engage in international business and sometimes even business between one city and another. Usually a type of Greek is going to be the language of wider communication. And so a lot of Jewish folks are living in Egypt and Alexandria they're living elsewhere where people are being raised speaking Greek as their native language not Hebrew. Now Hebrew is still being spoken. So it wasn't a dead language. Wasn't dead language that that I don't know where on earth that idea comes from because we we'll talk about that later. We'll let them and explain that it was a dead language and also that you can't take a 7,000 or 8,000 word language and upscale it to. So it's so it you can you going from a greater to a lesser rather than a lesser to a greater you're not going to be able to identify all the words in a bigger lexicon with a limited one of your own. So it's nearly impossible to go the other direction with it. We have letters and inscriptions and things in Hebrew all the way down past the life of of Christ. Yeah, what does that even mean a dead language? How can a language be dead? What does that? So if people are growing up learning a language as their first language and then they're out there using it in public discourse, the language evolves. So you get new words are brought in. Old words change their meaning. You get semantic drift, right? That's one of the things that can happen. There's a lot of stuff that can happen but once a language is no longer being learned as a first language and is not being used in public discourse, when it's limited only to texts or rituals or things like that, then you don't have that continued change and of evolution. And at that point they tend to refer to it. So what you're seeing here is an explanation as to why the Hebrew is not being used very much and what Hammon says is that the Hebrew version of the Bible didn't come around until much much much later than the Hellenistic period and that the Old Testament, for those of you out there who didn't know that this is the argument here, wasn't written or an archive of something that happened as far back as when they claimed Moses was around but rather or Abraham even but rather that it was constructed during the Hellenistic period and it was heavily influenced and used. You know it was it was utilizing the Greek mythos that was popular during that time. Or to a language that doesn't it's frozen, it's not changing at all. They will usually refer that as a dead language. So like Latin for instance, nobody learns Latin as their first language. There are people who can speak it fairly fluently and but it's limited to usually liturgical things and rituals and things like that. So we're not building the Latin vocabulary. The syntax is not changing. You don't have old guys going in my day. We use that Latin word to mean this and the kids these days, you know, they're understood. You don't have that kind of thing. So they used to think that Hebrew was more or less a dead language by the time of Jesus and that most everybody spoke Aramaic but there's a growing contingent I would say it's probably if not about 50 percent. Some would argue they all spoke Greek. Scholars probably even more than that think that Hebrew was still quite active. Now most people think Jesus probably spoke some degree of Greek. I think it was probably some marketplace Greek, you know, like the way that I can speak modern Greek. I can't hold a conversation. I can't argue with somebody in Greek but I can find my way to the restaurant or the you know I can buy or sell what I need. So that was and you know Cephyrus was right over the hill from Nazareth. So if he was doing any any work for people who were living in Cephyrus or something like that growing up as a as a mason or whatever he was then he probably would have picked up some Greek but there's a mason or a cult leader and utilizing burning purple whatever he was doing there. There's debate about the degree to which Hebrew was a living language around the time of Jesus but I think most scholars would say it was probably still a living language although Aramaic and Greek were the more common languages of wider communication. Now when the Septuagint was translated Hebrew was very much still a living language. That's probably around 250 to 100 BCE. You have the process of translating the Septuagint. There's an old tradition from a text that scholars usually call pseudo-Aristaeus about the king in Egypt wanting translations of all the laws of the world and so he calls sends some people to Jerusalem and they bring back 72 elders, six from all the 12 tribes of Israel and they are locked up in towers and they each translate the entire Torah into Greek and they all come together at the end and miraculously all 72 translations match word for word and so that's that's the legend about the translation of the Septuagint. The reality is that the books were translated by different people over the course of a few centuries and there were some versions that were probably more popular than others and by around the turn of the era so the end of the first century BCE, beginning of the first century CE around the birth of Jesus, there was probably a set of kind of more or less standard translations of the Hebrew Bible into Greek and one of the reasons that we know that this is a translation is because for instance the Torah, the Pentateuch, the first five books of Moses, each of the books has a different translation profile like some of the books are more literal, some of the books are less literal, some have certain habits that they do in translating certain Hebrew things others have other habits and so when you look at all five of them together there's no way this is an original composition, it has to be a translation and my... You're talking about it? I don't I don't see that that has been an argument really but let me continue. Septuagint. Septuagint, the ancient Greek translation. He keeps calling it a translation rather than the original. We look at the Hebrew there is some there is some distinctiveness from book to book but as we kind of drill down to the foundation of this distinctiveness what we get is the different source texts, the different sources for these traditions so Genesis were probably composed separately from Exodus. Deuteronomy was composed separately. We have what's called the priestly source which is adding layers to several of the books of the Pentateuch. The holiness code is an even later portion of the priestly source that is responsible for things in Leviticus and things like that so but there's a there's a consistency that is related to the type of Hebrew that we see being used outside of the Bible so in the inscriptions in the letters the Dead Sea Scrolls there were a lot of biblical texts but there were a lot of other texts that were discovered there as well that aren't part of the Bible part of other apocryphal pseudopographical books but other things that were unique to that community that was living in Qumran and there's there's nothing in there well so we have Hebrew, Samaramak and some Greek texts that were discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls and there's there's nothing in the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls that indicates it's being translated from Greek. All of the data point in the other direction that is going from Hebrew to Greek and in one of the videos I pointed out that for instance they need this for their identity so there's a very big push for this to be accepted as true because otherwise the whole entire house of cards or the Old Testament falls. You have these idioms that exist in Hebrew that don't exist in Greek not classical Greek not the coin. Can you explain what an idiom is? An idiom is something where like a colloquial metaphor it doesn't the the semantic content of a given set of words isn't the sum of the whole. Like a butterfly? Well that's a single word but a common one you hear these days is you know in a thousand years they won't know the difference between a butt dial and a booty call. Because butt and booty are synonyms dial call are kind of synonyms it doesn't exactly work but but those are those are things where you combine words in a way that has a specific kind of semantic impact that you might not be able to decipher just from looking at the words themselves. So in the thesis I wrote at Oxford I was looking at Exodus 24 10 and this is the story of Moses goes up Sinai with all of the elders and it says and they saw the god of Israel and there was and the text would be Yahweh or as the Egyptians viewed him as set and set wasn't a good dude at all. I was on to say there was like a sapphire paving under his feet and they and they sat down in the eight there in the Greek it doesn't say that says they saw the place where the god of Israel stood but it's so there's you're saying there's way more detail in the Hebrew? Well no the the point here is that there's a difference between what the Hebrew saying and what the Greek saying but the Greek is not phrased how you would normally phrase that in Greek. Well here's the thing though when you have less words to use you're going to lose detail so that's going there's going to be a difference when you're trying to cram it into Hebrew. So it actually says they saw they saw the place which god stood there and so the which and then there are an odd way that that's not natural Greek but it exactly matches something called a resumptive pronoun that is used in Hebrew where you would say stood a sheriff or witch a mod he stood sham there and so what it's what it shows is that the Greek translator is translating very literally so much so that it doesn't make a ton of sense in Greek but if you know Hebrew you could be like oh I see that's that's doing this Hebrew thing and so there's I'm trying to think of some English examples of like translationese or some things well I guess just saying they saw the place which he stood there that would that doesn't make a lot of sense in English but a Hebrew speaker would be able to see oh I see what you're doing that's something that we do in Hebrew with this resumptive pronoun and adverb yeah one of the interesting things that Amun pointed out to me when he was trying to make a case for the Greek being original was dude his mic sounds phenomenal I love that mic it's kind of like mine except it's the one step up from that this episode of the podcast brought to you by man unless he was showing us the differences and there was like for one word in Greek when you translate it to Hebrew there's like three or four words just to equal that one word in Greek so there's so a couple of things there one there's just like with logos you have to basically spell out a whole paragraph in order to get to somewhat the idea and concept of what logos is and it's not word that's not what that means nowhere near that many Greek words there are ancient Greek you've got I think 275 000 is the estimate more or less of how many ancient Greek that words there are if you look at all Greek ancient medieval and modern you've got four to five hundred thousand okay so he's wrong about that but they're going to show that in a second on the stream but let me go ahead and read to you from my book it's the book called logos amok epic that I wrote when I 2002 and it says logos a complex Greek word associated with the philosopher Heraclitus Heraclesian logos is both an account of reality and that which is revealed by the account the logos is the fundamental reason for things being as they are it is the fundamental principle of the world and that's Douglas Jay's social quote and what's that lexicon website where we can actually look it up uh the source lingua graika yeah okay okay clg can you find uh the tlg and and is there a way you can just search for unique words in a certain language and it'll tell you uh you have to have an account I think to to do the most robust kind of search with that oh so um for those of you just want to get to the answer definitions 275 000 in the ancient greek uh unique words one million seven hundred and fifty thousand give or take in the ancient Hebrew it's uh I think it's somewhere like 8400 or something they they show that part on the screen though at some point what do you but I think you should be able to do some pretty basic stuff okay see what you can find Stephen um okay and then you keep going and then there are um there are 79 000 900 like 45 words in Hebrew and he was only off by about 70 000 Hebrew Bible alone so 79 000 79 000 yeah so I think he may have heard it so when you hear that it should automatically tell you that they're using uh a more modern Hebrew not the ancient Hebrew which would date the Bible well ahead of where it's supposedly have written been written and only points more to the fact that if that if what he says is true about the 79 000 words then it was an ancient Hebrew that was being used so it was a translation of the greek it kind of just flat out says he it came out kind of right there 80 000 somewhere and he said eight yeah I think he may have mistook 80 for eight because they're no he did not the Hebrew Bible itself which is not all of ancient Hebrew like there's there was a lot of Hebrew right here we go so it says number of distinct words in the Hebrew Bible is 8 679 of which 1 480 are hapex legamena words or expressions that occur only once writing and speaking outside the Hebrew Bible but the Hebrew Bible itself has 80 000 different words in it yeah you're only off a by about well 70 000 so um but when it comes to translation there are and this is a biblical scholar who should know this a lot of different ways that between one language and another one word may need a whole phrase in another language yes but at the same time in that language there may be another word that needs two or three words in any other language it's just fat it's just wild like it's bizarre that even let's even just let's just say what you're saying is true and it's it's 80 000 in Hebrew and it's only 250 000 in greek the fact that you need four like multiple Hebrew words to match one greek word is like pretty wild I think more frequently you need more um greek words greeks you that's not at all true this is greek uses um articles a lot more frequently like you don't you don't just say Jesus in greek you say the Jesus yeah but the whole concept thing right one word would define an entire concept that requires a whole explanation if you're not thinking in greek terms if greek isn't your first language which it was their first language these concepts wouldn't make sense to people because you would need those actual words to even conceptualize what is being said you would need the greek you would need the understanding of greek and it would most likely need to be your first language in order to really fully grasp the concepts so if you were just speaking in in Hebrew or Aramaic you would just say yeshul or something like that and you wouldn't have to use the article you have and greek is a much more systematic language in Hebrew Hebrew is a lot more vibes going on in Hebrew you kind of have to just get a sense for for how things are being used but also in Hebrew things get packed together into individual words so you can have your direct objects tacked onto the word you can have the definite article tacked onto the word and so if you're looking at a text you may only be looking at one word but it could be he did the thing it could be three different words in english and so i i actually tried to figure out what he was talking about with this going from more complex to less complex i honestly yeah he did he did a debate with a guy named kip kip davis kip davis yeah he did a debate with him i think it was on neel's podcast where they were debating with what came first the greek or or the um the Hebrew and and this is the example i was talking about okay i forget what the exact word was steven maybe you can find it on neel's channel um his kip he is like uh he's a scholar of dead sea scrolls the dead sea scrolls okay he's um in fact he was on a team that helped demonstrate that a bunch of the dead sea scrolls fragments that have been discovered and purchased in the last 20 years were all forgeries so he's um he's a really good uh dead sea scrolls forgeries yeah so there were there were a bunch that were discovered with the initial excavations that went on and all the caves down and kumran and elsewhere right so since then every now and then a little piece of it of of something that somebody calls a dead sea scroll will pop up somewhere on the antiquities market or a school will say oh we we just purchased this uh this was just discovered and in fact there were just uh some uh some texts that were discovered just a few months ago um in a cave that was adjacent to some of these others but there were uh about 80 of these fragments that have been purchased since 2002 by different institutions i think the museum of the bible purchased a bunch azusa pacific university uh a handful of uh of faith institutions purchased them and uh one of them that i really thought was fascinating was a fragment of deuteronomy 27 which uh it ends there's a variant reading where uh it says that they're supposed to be on mount garazim and this is what the samaritans have always said should be the reading over against the the traditional jewish reading and so it was a this shocked a lot of people it's like this is very very early evidence for the samaritan reading uh and they were given access to a number of these uh fragments to do uh analysis and they did a bunch of different types of analysis and came back and said forgive me but i'm gonna skip ahead of this to let's see right here right there let's watch they're gonna watch too translating into a dead detergical language when you go to the synagogue into translating into a dead detergical language not when you go to the synagogues you see greek why don't you see why don't you see any hebrew you see greek in the synagogues nope so it fails to bear is what this guy jobe has and i want you to see that this is that sabah that sabah of zayus or theos good keep going now right very now how does this translated right on the master excite you just use an adjective for being afraid and you drop in elohim look phao sabaya is taken by the heber back translator and done literally they have no internal concept of phao sabaya or sabah all right so what is he saying there do you understand what what's yeah phao sabaya is is godfearing uh it was a title that was used uh you do see synagogues inscriptions where somebody and and godführer was a title that was used in the Hellenistic jewish world to refer to somebody who was a greek or roman was not jewish but supported the jewish community so it was like he's a friend of the jews he's a godführer and so you have like uh funerary so we want to be fearful of our god who's also jealous inscriptions uh we're on somebody's headstone that says this is dave godführer so that was that just meant he was a friend this is dave godführer yeah what a great what a great way to sum up someone's life end of the jewish people uh yeah or you it might say this synagogue was built thanks to the help of so-and-so theosabis okay godführer so that's so that's a title that developed within Hellenistic Judaism as it's interacting with the Greco-Roman world so it's not unusual that there would be a title that is unique to greek because that title developed from the interaction of jewish and Greco-Roman individuals the notion that this Hebrew didn't pre-exist that title that this is a translation from uh that title is is nonsensical so and then he's also mentioning here that the or the synagogues the synagogues they had astrology or zodiacs they had like greek astrology on the ceilings and stuff like that so they had mosaics that would have greek astrological symbols zodiac signs zodiacs yes so most of those are from uh second century CE and later dura uropos is the most famous one uh but yeah there's and and this is again the the interaction of jewish communities with the Hellenized world they're living in a world where everybody around them is speaking greek and so there are you have a whole spectrum of people from the folks who went ran off into the desert at kumran and these were the hippies that went out in the desert to live by themselves okay we're we're sick of the man we're gonna go be by ourselves and then you had like the maccabees and others who who fought against uh the saluted tyrants like enticus the fourth epiphanies and these are the folks who went to defend their culture they're not about to go out into the desert but they're also not going to adopt the Greco-Roman worldview and then you have other folks and this was primarily the elites the people who are well off who um you know the greek tax well i'm sorry the the jews who were tax collectors in alexandria right they didn't they didn't have it too much of a problem with uh with the whole system because they were making a killing there's a lot of social capital associated with integrating with the broader Hellenistic world who are fine with it and what we find in in what has been preserved in you know what we call the jewish scriptures is mostly uh the production of the people on the more conservative end of that spectrum so the folks who are very insular running off into the desert to hide from the roman's and the people who are fighting against the roman's christianity is kind of the folks who are a little closer to the assimilationist the uh the the people who are accommodating to the the Hellenistic world accommodating they're in their world man like what do you mean by accommodating it's it's not there it's not their place they're the they're the outsiders it's it's silly how they say that but anyway let's let's get up to this part we're going to get into some of the translations here again you can find this it's called biblical scholar response to amin hillman was jesus christ a trafficker dan mcclellan and it's on the danny jones podcast i think it might be the most recent one still if you go to the videos tab language we're not dressing like them so there's there's a there's a whole spectrum of distinction versus accommodation going on with people who are consuming and using the scriptures the jewish scriptures whether the the he revival or the uh what would ultimately become the new testament okay so the point he's making here is steve you should play like the next like ten seconds of it to see what if we get to um the greek go ahead one who feared god you're saying it's it would it would be really hard to go the other way around to translate those two words into steo sebeo right it would be impossible neil because you were adding so he's saying it would be impossible to translate elo heem and weiré into feo sebea is that what he's saying it seems to be what he's saying which is nonsensical because there's because translation is is not just a a surgical technical reproduction of the same words in another language it is just as much in art there's there's a whole range of ways to translate something um yeah particularly when it comes to things that are considered authoritative or or even inspired and so you have a word like theo sebea which means is to one who fears god so it's it's that's one word in greek right and then so if i say it's a compound word though because it's theos and uh and the verb for fear so there's two of them being yeah but that's how greek works that's why there's so many different words because that's how it's built and that's what makes it such an interesting and very uh useful language and that's why you can create one million seven hundred fifty thousand words with it depending on what you're trying to conceptualize right so that's not really an argument that's just a statement of how greek works but acting like it's somehow different or unique because it's no that's just how that language operates together in one word it's a compound word okay so it's kind of like booty call uh well we that would be two words or a hyphenated word but football football there we go okay got it thanks steve um okay so this is like that we're taking a word like football and we're translating it and basically so you're saying they're separating it and they're taking each part the person who's doing the fearing and the entity god and they're separating those into um he brew and he's almond his almonds point is that it's impossible to do to do this i i i worked in scripture translation for ten years that's laughable the notion that that would be impossible is just not because you already know what the outcome is that you want so therefore you already have a confirmation bias going into it so you're going to make it fit and you're going to rationalize how it fits nonsensical that's that has absolutely no basis in any kind of valid translation theory that that exists um there's there is a a presupposition in the translation of the bible that anything that is said in one and in a given language can be translated into another and i think there's a degree to which that's accurate but at the same time there's so much nuance and so many layers of meaning that can be added by the non-verbals this sounds like word salad to me by emphasis by context by all this kind of stuff that um that you can't really communicate in writing so there are ways to say you could you could have a text and a translation and you could say this is an accurate translation because these words means this and these words mean this and then you could say this is an inaccurate translation because there's also this thing going on here but you have to be on the inside you have to get the joke and the translation doesn't communicate that there's in in bible translation you're trying to strike a balance because what you're doing is you're taking something that is a product of a specific time and place and you're in this doesn't even go into what the bible really translates out to be so this is again another showing of how the Hebrew failed to express the things that we then took as biblical ha ha ha and lost a whole lot of the the defining words that tell you a whole different tale you're trying to render it understandable to a different time and place and language and there are a bunch of ways that you can your translation is going to fall somewhere between those two and you can make it a lot closer to the original like if you use the same word order or you use you ensure that the same number of words are being used or something like that and that makes it closer to the original but then the reader has to do a lot more work to understand it they have to get themselves closer to the original time and place in order to understand what's going on so they're just straight up telling you that they're dumbing it down when they translate it so that the people of that period of time will understand it more that completely takes away the meaning of the original um and so like an interlinear people think they understand the bible better if they look at an interlinear or something like that and that's that's not how language works it's it becomes harder to understand the other thing that you can do is you can accommodate the language to the target audience you can move the translation closer to the understanding the conventions the history of whoever's going to be reading it see there you go that's what they're saying they do so they augment the original intent and that makes it easier to understand but it also moves it away from the meaning that it had in that original it's original context yeah and so the the example of but dial and booty call again in a thousand years if for whatever reason they lost all knowledge of this uh both of those are going to feel pretty similar because they don't they're not close enough to the uh the source culture right to be able to understand what those words meant yeah and here we are two thousand years more than two thousand years away trying to figure out what was going on back then yeah that's the hardest part about this whole thing is trying to figure out the context of what the hell was going on back then yeah that's that's where the meaning is is found is in reproducing the the history the the literary context why why somebody was writing um and so and an example i use a lot a lot of people like the king james version of the bible i think it's um it's a great literary artifact but it is an awful translation of the bible and it's an awful translation yeah yeah why is it all for a number different reason um because they were using inferior manuscripts because they were uh frequently being overly literal and so they weren't uh they if they didn't have a clear understanding of what something meant in the source they would frequently just render it literally translated as literal as they could follow the same word order and everything like that and and sometimes it's just nonsensical like there's we have passages in the king james version that are semantically meaningless because they were just they just punted they were like no just just render it literally and right but uh an example of why it's also outdated we nobody speaks the language in fact when they when they publish the king james version nobody spoke the language of the king james version because it is a very conservative revision of the bishop's bible which was a very conservative revision of earlier translations and earlier translations back to tindall tindall's new testament in this panatuk and then cover dale's uh translation of the rest of the old testament from almost a century before and so the language is almost a century out of date on the day it was published and now it's more than 400 years further out of date but a good example is um the epistle of jude in the new testament uh verse 22 it says of some have compassion making a difference and i've seen sermons preached on this where people say have compassion on people it makes a difference in their lives it has a positive impact it has a positive influence that's how we interpret making a difference has absolutely nothing at all to do with what the king james translators were trying to say because in 1611 making a difference didn't mean have a positive impact or influence it meant to distinguish one thing from another so what they were trying to say was of some have compassion but be discerning but exercise discernment regarding whom and that phrase making a difference didn't start to mean having a positive influence or impact until around the year 1900 so our experience of of the language of the king james version is different from the experiences of the translators so then there are a bunch of different ways that we misunderstand the king james version but but even that's an example of how we can be far enough away from the the source culture that we don't even need a translation the same language that we are speaking we're too far away from the source culture to understand it so when you're talking about a translation from one language to another you know it's it's it's so funny that we can be so far in the future and still be arguing about what the hell they're talking about it's kind of goofy yeah well and it's unfortunate because you know it still means life or death for some people what the bible says i know what people think it says yeah that's that's an interesting point you make it's it's perplexing to me how people can be a scholar of the bible and dedicate their lives i mean to to to go to school and to get a master's degree in studying the bible it's a it's a science you're trying to figure out the truth about something and it seems to me so counterintuitive that you have all of these people who are bible scholars but they're also subscribing to the very belief of the thing that they're studying that is uh one of the things that causes me an awful lot of uh of being too close to the material to be objective that's a good point right a heartache is the fact that there are folks who ostensibly want to understand this as it was understood anciently but conveniently it always seems to line up with what they want it to mean today right um and and i think that's to there's a degree to which that's inevitable because we don't have the authors here with us today we can't drill them for um understanding we can't say what did you mean by this did you mean this or did you mean that we we can only try to reconstruct their perspectives and what we think they meant and for a text that is authoritative you know this happens with the constitution and and other things as well for the texts that are authoritative or are thought to be inspired or anything like that uh just intuitively not even on purpose just the way the human mind uh interprets language we're going to be nudged in the direction of uh an interpretation that serves our interest or makes sense to us and for a text like the bible which there's so much power and authority and values wrapped up in it uh i i think it's just so incumbent on people who do make it their life's work to study the bible to distinguish what i want the bible to mean from what i think right what you know what they originally wanted it to mean because if it just conveniently always happens to be the exact same thing there's a problem in your your your math is wrong yeah um it's because they lived in an entirely different world recently they don't magically hate all the same people and magically love all the same people and magically need all the same things all right i'm moving up a little bit here there's a commercial through that so i'm just going to go ahead and dance personal biases and all that important let's go to the toro origins right now going back real quick to the subtoo agent um is there any evidence that um we can date the tora let's say the tora was first the subtoo agent came after is there any evidence that places the creation of the tora in the Hellenistic era there have been some theories about that but it's not the the composition of the tora it is the um it is the consolidation of all these traditions and texts together and their arrangements that so what he's saying there is that he's he's admitting that it's possible that it was all put together during the Hellenistic period but what he's saying for the tora meaning it's in Hebrew right but that it was already pre-existing for a very very long time and they were just assembling it there it just happened to be that they were assembling during the same time it appears that they were borrowing all these ideas and concepts from the greek mythology and the greek greek legends that seems a little suspicious almost certainly took place in in the Hellenistic era so um for instance like the book of genesis has some of the oldest poetry in all the Hebrew bible may go back to a thousand b.c like genesis 49 it also has can you show us where that comes from can you show us something from 1000 b.c that you can pull up and say hey here it is some traditions that are post-exilic that come from around uh maybe the late six or the fifth century b.c.e. see where they use the bible's statements to date the bible's origins so the if somebody back dates something to to gain legitimacy for their claims then they just say well no because look they're saying that it came from there so you're using the same book to validate and verify the book and that's that's circular argument right it probably did not take the shape that we know it now more or less until probably around three or two hundred b.c.e so there these these uh to me that's an open admission right there x and these traditions all have very very long lives but i think that's uh the actual uh arrangement of the five books of the pentatook in the way we have it now that probably did take place during the Hellenistic era however the stories in them and many of them in the actual textual form in which we now have them probably existed for several years prior to that yeah i watched a video with the guy god bernaya god bernaya god bernaya and he says that if he insists that the Torah was at three hundred b.c or later um for yeah and usually these scholars are talking about when it all came together in the shape that we have it now okay um i which is close to the Septuagint yes yeah oh yeah very close yeah within uh within a century within a century yeah so while we have an in addition to that i just claims that there's older texts and that they're pulling from something that actually was written or conceived of back when Moses allegedly was walking the earth otherwise the agreement is yeah that was put together during the Hellenistic period in the same time the Septuagint was so what does that tell you? and and at the same time you know when we look at the Septuagint the Septuagint translation of Jeremiah is one sixth shorter than the Hebrew version and so what who did that math and also yeah the complexity of words in Greek would allow for that right you can get centralized things a whole lot quicker when you have words that you can build on a lot of scholars think uh happen there is that the version of Jeremiah as it existed when it was translated into Greek was much shorter and that it was expanded scribally in the the centuries after so there's probably a lot of stuff going on right or in between 300 and 100 BCE there's probably an awful lot of stuff going on and it's an incredibly complex thing to try to to unpack and parse apart but but in general we in kind of broad strokes we can talk about yellow journalism and revisionist history that's what was going on during that period the main source is being the the Deuteronomist source the priestly source and then the other we call non-p of the Pentateuch probably the Deuteronomist probably started under King Josiah the end of the 8th century or excuse me 7th century BCE show us that's when the earliest layers of Deuteronomies probably started getting written down and but Deuteronomy in the shape that we have it now probably is around 300 200 BCE so there's there's over 300 to maybe four so here's the thing too if it was 700 BC Moses was to have lived way before that so nothing was written down about Deuteronomy until then so how do we how do we know that that's an accurate portrayal of what was going on? 400 years of development apparently 100 and 200 years is enough cultural differences for things to mean different things and to have a different application so why would we expect something that happened in 1600 BC give or take to be accurately written down and even if it was truly done in 800 or 700 BC elements of that text here's another thing I don't understand yeah Moses so the first time what the first time Moses is written about is hectaeus of abdara outside the bible um yeah that was talking about yeah hectaeus this was like 320 BC outside of the bible but we haven't gotten into a specific date of when that bible was originally put together right so hell in this period once again go straight back to it outside of the bible meaning somehow a bible is the authority it's timeless there's no no date you need to worry your minds about but yeah hectaeus of abdara was the first person to talk about Moses and i bet you hectaeus of abdara may possibly be heber i don't know may possibly be a Jew we should look that up you see or something 300 something BC yeah yeah so how come we have the we don't have any mention of Moses between when he supposedly existed 1200 BC up until 300 BC so uh most scholars would say the Moses tradition probably started being written down uh in the 700s um they would say that do they have paperwork to show that and do they have do they even have any idea like what really was going on in 1200 BC if it wasn't written down until 700 BC that's a pretty big spans of time 500 years of nobody saying anything about it nothing what does what does that mean maybe the late 800s bce but probably uh in the 700s bce and up until we get to uh the Greco-Roman period there's not a lot of interaction between these cultures so the classical authors who are away in Greece they're not they're not really interacting with what's going on in Jerusalem they they may know about it there are some um some travel logs people who are um traveling through and taking note of some general traditions but uh but yeah i i don't think it's a huge surprise that we don't hear about Moses until uh the Hellenistic uh period so hec taste of a dearest 300 you're saying there's someone else who wrote about it in 700 but not not somebody outside the bible i'm saying the but you haven't dated sufficiently to to anybody's satisfaction when that bible was allegedly written originally and so far all we can get come up with this 300 BC during the Hellenistic period under the occupation of the Greeks the the account in the book of Exodus probably comes from the 700s originally not not the not as we have it now but don't you love probably's probably's work but the Moses tradition probably originates in the 700s so you're saying okay you're saying the account in the bible refer to the 7th century BC um i i think it's uh kind of like this if your grandfather was um had some kind of cool war story or something like that and it doesn't get written down until 100 years after he dies and then but that would bring that to 1100 BC and nobody did that according to him um hundreds of years later i wouldn't believe it people people are starting up there you go Danny exactly i wouldn't believe it publish it yeah uh it's kind of like that but the the data don't support the historicity of Moses for the Exodus so the data what the data don't support the historicity of Moses or the Exodus at least how it is told in in the Exodus in other words there is not good evidence that there was a historical Moses that Moses existed it's not good hey there you go good good job Dan McClellan could i'm glad you said that right most likely this is a tradition that got started up and over time accreted more and more details and got altered and got changed and got added to and there are a bunch of different theories about how this happened some folks think that one theory is that uh there was a a band of Levitical priests who were enslaved in Egypt and they escaped and made their way to the northern hill country and that their story of escape grew to you know millions of people and we trudged along in the desert for 40 years another theory is that it was just a small group of people who were already in uh the northern hill country of Israel who escaped enslavement and told their story and over the centuries the fish got bigger and bigger and bigger or it was the origins of a victimhood that they would utilize to garner sympathy and subdue minds or aeons and we have you know what we have now um in the story of the exodus but the way it's the way the story is told the language that is used um most scholars would say this seems to be something that developed between the eighth century and um and probably the the fourth century so uh but and another important point is that when a lot of these stories were being written they're being used as scribal exercises so it's they're they're being used to train scribes to write train scribes to lie so they're not you know not everybody has a copy of exodus in their living room if you go to if you get special training to be a scribe you will have read this because it will be something that you had to to write out or they're also being used uh the elites are using these texts that kind of structure power yeah there's there's competition between the palace and the temple and and they're writing different kinds of uh texts to try to show that they're the ones who should be in charge and then particularly after the exile um there's a lot going on with with groups who who want to return to israel and want the land to be pure and so we wouldn't expect to see people from speaking another language in another nation being aware of these texts because they didn't publish them there was no new york times number one bestseller list that they looked at these were texts that were kind of internally circulating uh and until we get into the Hellenistic period when they're probably more widely known and and there's a uh there's a book called the origins of Judaism by um yonatan adler uh that was recently published that argues that we don't see widespread knowledge within the people of judia of the laws of the torah and their enforcement until the middle of the second century bce so well isn't that interesting like one sixties is when you start to see widespread avoidance of pork when you start to see certain kind of uh purity practices suddenly start being practiced uh and and so the argument there is that the text that we now know is the pentatook is the torah were not used by the whole nation they were just they were the scribal exercises they were passed so the explanation as to why it wasn't widespread is because it wasn't circulated not because it didn't exist that's that's the whole argument here it's just because the people didn't know about it but it was it was all right there just needed to be distributed around the elite they were used to try to um uh structure power and then when uh we had this war the maccabees and the salusids and uh we have the establishment of the hasmonean dynasty so for a brief time period after the Hellenistic period uh there was actually an independent quasi independent kingdom of judia and it was at that time period that the people who were in charge of that kingdom probably said all right everybody needs to follow these rules now because we're we're a people again we're our own nation and this is how we're going to um identify ourselves these are the identity markers that are going to distinguish us from the people we just fought off uh and so that's a theory about the rise of all the practices that we now associate with Judaism yes okay that makes sense um okay let's watch the second video you did okay the second video you did was um about the Christ the Christ right uh what's the what's the root of Christing the word again creo creo creo there's also the Christing was uh when they were putting the stuff in the eyes um there we go yeah hold up we'll just watch it what is the Christ what is the Antichrist what is the Christ if you have to know the Antichrist you have to know the Christ right all right let's see it it's a great word four four applying a drug to your eyes so they may be open that's what the Christ means in Greek yes the incredulity on the face of this podcast host is warranted because that is pure and utter nonsense from the verb heo to be stung by the gap fly so as with many words in many languages the verbal root creo in ancient greek can mean more than one thing overwhelmingly it refers to rubbing with some kind of sticky fluid of some kind either after rubbing into the eyes how's that different? debating or for some kind of ritual purpose or something like that so in the context to annoyance be anointed anointing something like that is going to take up the majority of the real estate for the occurrences of this verbal root however it can refer to the sting of a gadfly but that is overwhelming so he just up and says that he wasn't wrong and in the context and what he what Ammon reads is all the pharmacological all the all the drug literature from greece from the greek time period where nobody's reading this stuff thousands upon thousands of pages so he understands how it's used in the context overwhelmingly in the minority of occurrences of this verb and it's limited to classical and later greek lyrical poetry none of which that's based on your your exposure to all of the writings of the that the greeks left behind and you not you had a minor in greek so you're not seeing it all as anything whatsoever to do with early jewish or early christian literature not the septuagint not the new testament not the earliest literature okay so he did correct me on something there i said it was limited to classical and early greek lyrical poetry but it's also in classical and early greek medical texts and and he pointed out out so oh he did yeah now that has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the claim that that's what it means in the new testament but because apparently words mean something different when you put him in a bible and you call it a bible all of a sudden those it can't possibly mean what it always means because they wouldn't say that in the bible okay but it is in medical texts okay so he so is it true that the word trio means to apply drugs to the eyes of the skin so it can if can if the context indicates that that's how it's being used okay so so the way almond described it to me he said what classicists do is they take the meanings of words and they figure out what part on the human timeline where in history the context fits where they fit into the where they come from and what was going on at that time in history to figure out what it meant then to figure out because there's like the semantic drift over time so we're going to go ahead and we're going to go back in the time machine to 100 bc and during that time he's saying the word creo meant overwhelmingly to apply drugs to the skin yeah that's not that's just not true like there are you can isolate certain texts where they're using it in that context to indicate that okay but if you just if you just gather all the occurrences of the word for a given time period uh the the majority are just going to be more generic about how do you know that you're not interpreting those portions of what you're looking at incorrectly and that it is consistently meaning the same thing but you're just not looking at it like that rubbing with something either you just got out of the bath and you rub some some oil on you so you smell good or somebody you know uh just uh who knows one one a contest and so they get a little smudge of something or Simba is born and you go on his forehead like all of those things could be called this anointing uh that was another disney reference i just want to point that out and with and but you have to look at each individual occurrence in its context because the context is what determines the sense yes and so what and and uh Amman did a whole uh two and something our live stream responding to me arguing that i was wrong about all this but all he ever did was show the non-Christian and non-Jewish texts so you can't say look at all these texts over did you catch that so the words have different definitions if it's in a christian text using ancient greek that doesn't make any sense you put a label on something and call it a bible in all seven words mean something else over here they are using this word to mean this but i don't think he's i don't think he's saying when he said in the podcast he didn't say it was in the bible he just said it was a greek word well he he's trying to define what the christ is and his theory is that he's saying that the term christ means this yeah why would you use it why would you use that word if that's not what it you know i mean like why would they pick it not why wouldn't they not pick a different word than christ then if christ already has been defined as rubbing something in your eyes then right the anointed one christ right Christos right right well you you asked about he said what is the christ you said what is the antichrist and instead of you christ and antichrist as we use those words today are our biblical terms they're biblical terms right but what i get what his point is what i would be the dope and the antidote by the way is the the in the sources and the original sources when the people around that world we're talking about and we're writing about this kind of stuff he's what he's saying is outside of the biblical context christ meant drugs and antichrist meant um antidotes to drugs like venom and and and anti-venom they they could be used that way sure um what is this is this what uh would this help this is uh yeah so that's yeah that's that the word yeah that's yeah that's that's a greek word sort of christ right here in the definition so this is a crease dose and then okay she had definition that's where is that the property is that the what so are you saying this is is that the word we're talking about so crease dose right there yeah crease dose is a title this is the this is the greek actual greek letter up here and this is the english translation okay so it says to be rubbed on used as ointment yeah so you don't have you have you occasionally have occurrences of this uh of this form of of the word in classical greek but but uh this was not this was not a salient title so he's staring directly at the answer he still has something to argue like if you were just in a if you just had some random greek text and they they just referred to the hochristos the christ no one would would know what on earth you were talking about unless something in the context were to indicate as a title christ and antichrist uh are overwhelmingly for us today and in the ancient world are um are going to evoke uh christianity and because of that's how we've been conditioned for the last two thousand years now because that's what the words intentionally meant so again you're arguing through the programming that no one is going to ever recognize this word as that well yeah because good job you guys fooled everybody for a long time and it's been conditioned into us to to trigger that response within us but that doesn't mean that that's accurate in the new testament where the words are used very differently they're never used to refer to it's not that they're used differently it's that we're perceiving it differently and because years and years and years of people preaching to us telling us what things mean uh and and this was something that i pointed out that but this was before christianity yeah yeah this is before christian right so it's but it is there's uh the way it was used in the centuries prior to the development of the new testament don't necessarily govern how they're allowed to use it in the new testament so we can change the meanings of words especially when it makes more sense when we're trying to sell you a concept of our religion got it thanks my whole point was that uh if you're talking about jesus in the new testament if you're talking about the translation of this word in the septuagint because this occurs in the septuagint uh like syrus uh the great is called my christ in the greek translation of isiah 451 the anointed one and that is a translation of the heberward michia which is a pre-exist that also long predates christianity that is used to refer to uh people who are anointed for certain purposes they're consecrated whether they are prophets priests or kings so because that's how the heebies retranslated the greek but the greek was creased crystals and that means rubbing in the eyes the the rubbing of something an ointment or a drug or you know samuel anoints saw and david to be king so um in that sense there which could specifically mean that they were put through a ritual so that they would have the death and rebirth and then they would be eligible to be kings because they went through the ritual they went through the ceremony uh anointed because they're given special authority uh or uh prophets could be anointed and jesus is the anointed one because this this tradition developed that uh primarily in the greckle roman period and we can also say that christ being anointed one would mean that they were giving him like they were conditioning these other children in the past to be given this this dough this drug this venom into little slits in their skin over time so that they would develop the antidote and they would be the antidote so that would be another way to look at that that there were there was going to be some special figure who had special authority who was going to be kind of a mediator between god and humanity who was going to be going to be known in some circles as the anointed one now there were a bunch of other titles as well and when the jesus tradition starts so he was the antidote get it he was the anointed one to arise he kind of consolidates all these all these different titles but the one that that takes over and at least in the New Testament is christ so how come when we type in this word here it only pulls up this to be rubbed on to use his ointment because this is the most this is the generic sense but then in in different contexts it can have more specific reference do you does anyone else buy this so um yeah like you could uh you could use the word anoint today you know if somebody uh if you hit somebody with with something that was wet and you know knocked him out and they and they got all the face wet you could say you anointed him just to be funny like um so the word has this kind of generic sense but in that context there's all that additional semantic content that's associated with it with with the generic sense and this gets into some complexities of how of how language works but now his in his book the chemical muse he makes the case that during this time that during this classical period the classical era that life was was absolutely brutal and terrible people were not dying from heart disease people were not dying from old age people were dying from hand to hand combat plague and famine and he was he was making the case that that medicine and drugs which weren't distinguished there wasn't really a difference were were ubiquitous everywhere people needed them just to heal from wounds from battle um from everything to get through the day basically and he was saying it wasn't drugs as we look at as we as we look at drugs today right we have the war on drugs we have the schedule system of scheduling drugs on depending on how bad they are what the crime is going to be or how much jail time you're going to get that that did not exist it was just it was just they were viewed as medicines and ways for these people to get through life and to make life more bearable so he's saying that because he's i think he's he's connecting the dots here i think i think he's kind of using that that was what his dissertation was about and he's taking the meetings like you look up the word for christ then it means to apply nomin he's connecting the dots there with drugs and he also showed a passage from um what was it you forties you're i saved i saved it now emailed you but there's a passage he showed me is this is this it why do famous greek authors like okay okay yeah this was an example right so this was from what this was from line five one six of uryphides of hippo apolytus the greek is very simple um so what that's a sentence in greek and he's he's saying translated it means what kind of drug is it is it a christ or a potable meaning to potable means to drink it yeah so it's is it topical or is it or is it something you right consume right so this is anyways my point like this is this is his point of view you can see where he's coming from yeah and i and i don't i don't disagree with the fact that that they were using whatever they could find to um to get by you know doTERRA is around today because people want to use whatever they can find to um to try to cure what else i'm sorry but to use that as an interpretive lens to try to entirely renegotiate what what christianity was what g but the thing he doesn't catch here is that this was prior to definitely prior to the the new testament so these words had their definitions already it wasn't because after the fact they decided that this word's not going to mean the the christ meaning that a person who is going to save you that's the same thing as saying to nana doe in a sense as an idiom right but it's also has its own definition already so what he said he's arguing forward to explain something that happened prior arguing forward it's kind of frustrating to think to listen to this because it's all about what people perceive it to mean not what it actually means and that's what his argument is no no one would ever think that when they're talking about when they're reading the the book that we've been told this is supposed to mean a certain thing well that's the whole point the whole point is we're told that it's supposed to mean a certain thing when you come to find out that it means something completely different you have to reevaluate what the hell it is that they're saying and he's like no no that's not true it's because it's not how christianity is supposed to be seen as so therefore these words have to have different meanings and remember this guy he was a graduate of Brigham Young University so he states in the very beginning that he's Mormon which isn't even more out there and they have their own sra issues and they they protect people who are uh you know guilty of satanic ritual abuse an awful lot in that and that uh church as well Jesus was within early christianity is like at least be able to use evidence from those texts because Euripides have to see that don't don't don't argue the bible from outside of the bible don't because that's the authority apparently because we said so because we wrapped a bunch of stuff together and put a cover on it and called it the bible therefore it's impenetrable because we said so and therefore you're not allowed to argue anything that's not in the bible against the bible even if it's words and words have meanings and meanings are important doesn't matter if it's what we tell if you we tell you to read this book a certain way in that this is what it means you have to use that in order to argue against it what what are you saying has no bearing whatsoever on how the author of the gospel of mark or how Paul we're using the term christ if you go every biblical scholar sounds the same after a while and it's always the same circular argument look in their text they're not using it in a way that's um that is amenable to these other medical texts like just the genre of text is different it's not a medical text let me ask you something if you know what the definition of a word is if you write medical texts over the top of it or if you write uh religious work over the top of it or if you write journal entry over the top of it does that make the definition that we're different when you're using it in your in your writing no it doesn't in case you're wondering so you have uh kind of greek oroman bios is is part of of what the gospels are doing and you've got a bunch of epistolary stuff a lot of paradigmatic stuff um a lot of tangents being talked about all right so we're going to pick this up again tomorrow uh we're at one hour eight minutes and 18 seconds into a two-hour talk so we'll be able to finish this up tomorrow and if you want to see more of it without the commentary by me you can go to the danny jones podcast on youtube there's 857 000 people or give or take that have found it already so good for them must be nice must be nice i get kicked off every time i go on youtube or uh shut down so i can't get back into the account to add more content that happened to three different channels i probably have a little bit more subscriber account if i wasn't for all the times i had a restart and i was kicked off of twitter for two years and had to come in incognito in order to get back on anyway so everybody that is the show for today i'm just going to do my thing here if you are on speak free radio thank you for listening and thank you for the support i appreciate it for those of you who are not aware on speak free radio and moneytreepublishing.com you can use well on moneytreepublishing.com you can use code B-A-A-L to get a discount at the store on moneytreepublishing.com where you'll find books many different books and DVDs and blue ray discs well you'll find Europa there you'll find a bunch of other stuff we're going to actually go back into that material again after i go through this probably starting well today's friday so probably starting Tuesday after we finish this off we'll go into uh maybe the AI generated uh what do you call it translations of hitler speeches i'll try to i'll try to work that into it but for now we'll finish up by the biblical thing but point is moneytreepublishing.com B-A-A-L for a discount and then you can also support your favorite hosts on speak free radio on the speak free radio site and all is appreciated we don't get a paycheck from the man we don't get a paycheck from the the evil man because we're saying things that contradict what they're trying to feed us so therefore we are always at your debt and gratitude because that is what makes this thing keep going givsongo.com/ballbusters if you want to support there patreon.com getting more people every day and that you'll find commercial free podcast versions and exclusive content and if you're on the second tier you'll be able to listen to the talks that i have with niche from the cosmic salon second tier is only ten bucks a month first tier is five all right and then you can also go hit up the book in the description of my videos you'll find the and if you're on speaker radio there's a little like description area where you can find links to my book you can get it from amazon you can get it from other places as well and you can also get it for me directly if you want to you know roll the dice and wait a little bit for me to get them so i can sign them and send them back out all right there's hot sauce there there's creatine there's all kinds of stuff on semper fright lc.com all that helps to support because that's what i do for a living so that's that's how it gets the bills paid for the family the bills are not there that small okay so thank you so much my daughter's birthday is in four days she's gonna be eight years old it's pretty awesome you guys have a wonderful day [BLANK_AUDIO]