LIVE with Q&A! Was the OT Written in Greek? Responding to
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 พ.ค. 2024
- Ammon Hillman is a classicist with some bizarre ideas about the Bible, early Jewish religion and the origins of Christianity. He was on a show recently speaking about these and more topics, and in today's stream I will be correcting some of the misinformation there about the Septuagint (LXX) and the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Come, and hang out!
Audience Q&A will follow, and with any luck the Edmonton Oilers will get unceremoniously deported back to Edmonton.
Original video: • Ancient Language Exper...
I now have Channel Memberships! Join today to unlock emojis, special live chat options and early access to my videos.
If you would like to help with the completion of my new book, "Propaganda & Rituals: Religions of Ancient Israel & the Bible" (working title), then click here, and click often: www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted...
Patrons get early access to all my material for as little as $4 a month: / kippdavis
Buy my 14-hour, 18-lecture course, "Real Israelite Religions: Facts on the Ground and Propaganda in the Bible," and own it for life:
sales.mvp-courses.com/israeli...
Follow me on Twitter: / drkippdavis - บันเทิง
![Fc ครับ ขอแนะนำให้รู้จักกับ "น้องเปียโน" l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HQU6Q_IYTLo/mqdefault.jpg)
I think what needs to happen here, and I haven't found yet in this case with Hillman. Is if he's to be disputed, someone with knowledge in both languages needs to go line by line, showing here is what Hillman is saying this text says or means and here is what it actually means. I'm far from an expert on this, but very interested in the topic and I really want to know....are you saying that the provocative translations Hillman speaks about, drugs, prostitution, sex etc are completely false? Or are detractors coming out to attack him in other ways just because of the provocative nature with which he speaks? I genuinely want to know, is he completely wrong in his explanation of the sources or not? Thank you
They won't debate him
Yeah, this has been tried, and it is futile. I had an exchange once with Hillman, and this is exactly how it was supposed to go down. But, it didn't because he was incredibly condescending and rude, and then when I discovered that he neither knows the Hebrew text, nor is he willing to listen to anyone who does know. And, when it came to that, I left because that's a headache I do not need.
@@DrKippDavisyou don’t know the Greek Kipp, so how are you the one qualified to do this? Your criticism of Ammon (only focusing on Greek) applies to you as well (only focusing on the Hebrew)
I’d say Ammon has the advantage because Greek is undeniably a sort of Rosetta Stone when it comes to ancient languages
@cat_and_cabbage4662 Except that 1) I ACTUALLY DO know the Greek, and, 2) my critique ACTUALLY DOES compare BOTH texts in BOTH languages.
Ammon Hillman uses a Hebrew/English interlinear and a list of Hebrew glosses, like a dumbass. He doesn't consult Hebrew lexicons, nor additional, relevant Hebrew texts because he does not know them, and he CANNOT read them.
@@DrKippDavis lol I have only seen you attacking his personal character yet you talk about him being incredibly rude. Tbh. He is not even the first one to claim these things and all of his sources happen to be true. He provides the sources. It is well known that indeed the ancients where practicing many of the things he talks about i don't understand what exactly you are trying to contest. It is well known that there were prostitutes in the temple. It is known that prederasty was and still is part of the Christian rites( priests literally get acused of it all the time) and we know the ancients indeed used drugs r medicines in their daily lives. All together you are just in denial. Hebrew is a reconstructed language that is also well known.
Fascinating! Loving all the insights into the nitty gritty of the languages' grammar/syntax and how that appears to have factored into translations.
Thank you thank you thank you for this update and review of this topic; which I much needed.
Thanks for responding! I think I had Gmirkin in mind when I asked, but you addressed that later in the video. Thank you for putting out great material. Take care in the Mainland!
Wild how the sons of light were still writing the dead sea scrolls into the 2nd century CE when they had been dead for a hundred years or so. Truly a miracle.
The Essenes stem from Onias IV, the displaced Zadokite priest by the Maccabes, the Hebrew scriptures were completed before the exhile, and redacted on Jews return from exhile, and how Onias IV had something to use to propagandize with against the Maccabees, and the source of other varients.
I can appreciate Mr Ammon because as a child raised in Catholicism I found it difficult to believe in a naked man on a cross. Now I know that as a child I knew the truth
DR. AMMON HILLMAN
It was a stake in Marcion's *Ev
Ammon set the forest ablaze
oh gaahhhd! i love it!
@@maamaablaacksheep damn I literally had to clap over my head. Good shit. I need to go procure myself a whip!
@@miweb3235 THE WAY HE WHIPS MAKES ME LAUGH SO HARD.
Lashes on backside , then it my turn, whip me, why won't you whip me? ( Cheech and Chong, the Corsican Brothers)
Like some who burn things to hide the real evidence ??
Ding ding ding, subject change, what hard plate set up is that and what's the board hanging above?
Suffice it to say, Ammon is the gadfly. This is stimulating a serious re-examination of the basis for our beliefs.
I believe this reaction from others is to be expected but some of us had already seen what ammon talks about. Deep down most know three isnusut something not adding up with abrahamic religions. I mean priests, imans all these ppl are know to molest children constantly. And nothing is ever done. So this might open people's eyes about the origins of their religions. Ammon gives you the sources and the txt. He isn't Making any of it up
Very astute. Keep your discernment
Thank you very much for all your engagement, your work and your care! To have the knowledge of both languages is the fundament to get thing clear for all those people who do not have that knowledge. Of course people can ignore your knowledge - but ignorance is never a good base to deal with information.
This was very enlightening indeed! Thank you very very much!
no it wasn’t. well maybe if you have a TBI.
@@alchemicalvisionstudios3969 Well, to me it certainly was. But you are obviously fully entitled to your own opinion. Although the party about a traumatic brain injury was rather boorish, or... philistine, if you will 😁
What I understood was that, Ammon was reading bits of medical transcripts.
As in, drugs and procedures that hinted at common complaints and treatments.
Then you can kinda connect dots because of human nature.
Humans, use power for everyrhing imaginable and there just might not be any "good guys" 😅
Yes, he was initially focused on translating medical Galen & such, but what Kipp does here is claim in ignorance of that unveiled new contextual information that none of those proven contexts have any bearing on his previous belief that the Hebrew, which is a much weaker language (and by common sense therefore less capable of handling concepts within it!) is the original text. He's preciously defending it like his favorite toy. Only it's a BROKEN toy now. It's sad, Kipp; quit clinging to your germ-infested, hole-y blanket.
*Gmirkin per chatGPT*
Proposes that the Hebrew Bible, especially the Pentateuch, was composed in the context of Hellenistic Alexandria and was influenced by Greek literature and culture during the 3rd century BCE, around the same time the Septuagint was being translated.
Uh, uh, uh there you go.You can't challenge these long hailed beliefs. They're not going to accept that they built a society based on a lie.
"I think that's Father's Day, but you know, no one cares..." 😂😂😂
Fellow Dad... feel that
Thank you. Watching and Listening from Alaska.
🤔
Awesome. I’ve got a lot of connections up there. I’ve worked there a bunch myself. Mostly Kenai Peninsula and PWS.
Dr. Kipp, you have it backwards in minute 34. He's saying when you translate from the more exact language to the less exact language you lise a lot, and the other way, the work wouldn't be so exact.
This argument holds some virtue and is considered the reason Greek is the language of philosophy.
Yes, but you could also argue that going from a language with less words to one with more may require the latter to distinguish implicitly understood distinctions by utilizing more words.
@@owenswabithat is true but a translation to a richer language would imply there are more concepts expressed so there would be no need to use more words. Having a richer language means more words pointing at more distinctions thus not needing to be verbose.
Does Ammon really not read Hebrew,? That seems unlikely.
It's true. He told me this himself. He has enough knowledge to recognise letters and he knows a handful of words, but he cannot read these texts.
You mentioned that the Tetragrammaton doesn’t appear in the LXX but the earliest Greek manuscripts found at Qumran had YHWH written as “ιαω”. 4Q120 I believe. Was changing the Tetragrammaton into “Kurios” a later idea for the LXX or would the original LXX most likely have said “ιαω”?
I think the forms appearing in the older mss, ιαω are probably original. My point was that the play-on words in Exodus 15 with YHWH's name only make sense in Hebrew, not in Greek.
Dr. Hillman got the ball rolling.😅
His name is David lmao
Ever since Covid bike stuff is ridiculously expensive.
During Covid I often had to source my own parts for professional repair shops to work on my bike.
In Seattle.
Bike stuff?!? Enjoy Seattle lmfaooo
I recently saw Ammon on the Danny Jones podcast. Honestly, it's a riveting and very enjoyable video. Heard some things that really stopped me in my tracks. As with everything, there's an opposing argument to be heard. Academia can be a cagefight. Thanks for this, Kipp! Taking it all onboard and cogitating on it. Knowledge is power.
Thanks for this, I really appreciate opposing perspectives. I'm curious if @drkippdavis have you studied the Ancient Samaritan Hebrew?
I have not!
@@DrKippDavisThey still use it and it looks more like Paleo. They still speak it for Festivals and teach it to their kids. It's fascinating! There's a channel by a young Samaritan Israelite in the priestly family named Abood Cohen ( @aboodcohen ) to find some cool info. He also shared in a video that his DNA is 99% Canaanite (as another interesting fact). They reject Judaism and don't accept anything from the Hebrew Bible except Genesis - Deuteronomy (Torah). They believe The Jews changed details and moved the place of worship from Bethel (Mt. Gerizim today in The West Bank) to Jerusalem. They have a museum and copies of manuscripts.
Yeah, it's pretty amazing. I am well aware of the Samaritans, and the text-I just haven't spent any time analyzing the linguistic features.
I actually think the idea of a "Torah" may have originated with the Samaritans.
@@DrKippDaviswow!!! I feel like a study on the Samaritans is untapped, so I'm doing my own research as a hobby but if a scholar took it on....that would be amazing. Part of me wants to go to school for a PhD to take the route of scholarship too, I have a Master's of Science. But already paid off my student loans 😂 so hobby studying it is! Thank you for all you share with us!
Thank you for clearing up Genesis 6:4. I came to the same conclusion differently, but you compared the Greek and Hebrew. Your awesome.
His awesome what? You didn't finish your sentence?
@igortakesabride1139 From one pedant to another, Welcome.
I really enjoyed listening to this! Very fair and well argued. I'd love an episode on the astrology and magic of the DSS, maybe you could connect with esoterica on that topic?
It's all Hamlet's Mill, isn't it.
WHAT WAS JESUS DOING AT 4AM WITH A NAKED KID YELLING I AM NOT A LEHSTES!?!?!?!?
Well, he didn't say that.
He said: ὡς ἐπὶ λῃστὴν ἐξήλθατε μετὰ μαχαιρῶν καὶ ξύλων συλλαβεῖν με; καθ’ ἡμέραν ἤμην πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ διδάσκων καὶ οὐκ ἐκρατήσατέ με· ἀλλ’ ἵνα πληρωθῶσιν αἱ γραφαί ... "As if upon a robber, have you come with swords and clubs to detain me? I was every day in your presence [this is a Semiticism] in the temple, teaching, but you did not prevail upon me! Except that the scriptures shall be fulfilled."
The word λῃστὴς is pretty commonly used in the LXX for "bandit" or "thief"-a translation compiled by Hellenistic Jews, like the author of Mark. It is also used this way, and for "insurrectionists," by the Hellenistic Jewish author Josephus. I see no good reason to accept that it means anything more than that here.
How's it go? I think you protest too much..... They didn't feed people to lions for nothing.
@@mbp1652 Gadfly
@@MikeGalosi well,thank you. The annoying, pestering, unremitting little question that will not stop bothering you. Yep, that's me.
Sometimes reality just will not stop bothering me to.
What the hell are you even talking about? At least when someone cites a passage, they should get it right. Ammon constantly misreads this text, because he wants it to say something about paedophilia and drug use. He is an irresponsible scholar.
You can still say a lot with a limited vocab - it is how you use the words that are available. As for word count - even as a mostly monoglot who did languages in High school, I know that across languages there are words that need a whole sentence in the other language to express. And it is not necessarily the language that has the most words in the vocab that has that word.
No idioms don't translate - but we all know about dynamic equivalence in translation; where the idiom of the receiving language is used, because the translator had enough understanding of the meaning within the original idiom.
Original has to have higher technicality? Why? Does this person think that translation always loses info? So much interpretation is involved in any 'translation' . And it gets used. My English Bibles repeatedly insert husband/ wife into OT texts when the Hebrew texts used (MT usually) only have man /woman. So that is 'more technical' about relationships than the translators source text.
So even to me those assumptions just don't make sense.
Lady Babylon did a 2+ hour episode with gnostic informant on Hebrew and Greek... it be interesting if you could go into a deep discussion about that
What is the title of that video?
@@DrKippDavis it's on the channel Gnostic Informant titled "From Canaan to Israel - Ammon Hillman"
@dragonsplay they won't
@DrKippDavis please do this one thanks. I’m actually a Christian and very much a believer outside the contradictions in the bible because of my personal experience with the rosary and Christ. So regardless of these intellectual faculties in which god is being looked at and disproved I hold on to my relationship with god and will not break it off - I won’t be calling it faith as I have a solid experience. Sorry off on a tangent, my point is this dude is pretty creepy and speaks ill of Jesus and I really do appreciate a fellow atheist has come to defend at least the character of Christ to some extent I guess. Thank you.
@@sharang747 as a catholic. Aren't you ashamed of these priests molesting children ???
Anyone know where to find this encounter between Kipp and Ammon mentioned at 9:30? Which Gnostic Informant video?
The video was so bad that Neal removed it as soon as the stream had ended. I was on for about 25 mins before Ammon told me to my face that he thinks I am full if shit, and that he would destroy me. As I was led to believe this was going to be a friendly conversation, I saw no need to continue with a bad-faith actor like that. By that point, I had also learned that Hillman has no working knowledge of biblical Hebrew, and also didn't see how this exchange could be in any way fruitful with someone so far out of his depth.
@@DrKippDavis lol I found the video
@@FindingNemo01where?
@@tylerdavis520 20:30 Danny Jones Gnostic Informant podcast
This was extremely enlightening and will be highly helpful in my discussions with Christians as to the historicity of their holy texts. I do so appreciate you taking the time to provide a detailed explanation how we know the Hebrew came before the Greek and in a simple enough way that most will easily understand it.
Surprisingly to me, I understood two of the concepts of the Hebrew language you referenced, parallelism and the infinite adverb, that I could have only gained from watching your videos, Dr. Kipp.
I cannot thank you enough.
What about the idea that the Hebrew Bible was collected and redacted in Alexandria at the same time as the Septuagint, or more specifically, the Pentateuch?
I think if this was the case, then our manuscript distribution would look dramatically different. The fact is that we have quite a high number of Hebrew and Aramaic mss, which date well into the early second century, several that are probably third, in Palestine.
How does hillman skip over the resurrection though?
I don’t know how anyone can take him seriously after this. Saying something as crazy as he did in this video with such confidence would make me question literally everything else he says on any other topic.
Why is truth, crazy? I'm extremely curious about your answer
They didn't tell you? The kids think he's a righteous dude
What thing was said pray tell
Hillman said that the Torah was written in Greek, and that the LXX was "back-translated" into Hebrew.
That is crazy.
@@DrKippDavis I was wondering what op was talking about specifically, but I suppose they are referring to the subject of the video
Philo’s account of the translation of the Septuagint claims it was translated from the “Chaldaic” the Chaldean neo Aramaic. Wow! What a shock. 😂
Just a piece of advice as an admiring listener: I got through the first hour of your commentary but it seemed like you conceded so much to Ammon that you actually managed to convince me that his argument might not be as crazy as it seems. To make your correction more effective, you should have started with your strongest criticism, not by conceding the context to Ammon's view.
It's becuase dr hillman is. And the more these ppl try to refute him the more they make his case. Beucase dr. Hillman gives you the original sources. Nothing else. He also doesn't take money from ppl like this greedy charlatan
The most important thing Kipp said throughout this was
" thank you for the $2.00"
Ah, yes. Another viewer who has poor comprehension skills, and should definitely watch the stream again to ensure that they have an even halfway decent grasp of the points I was making.
The most surprising thing to me about this stream is the sheer number of non-critical thinkers it has revealed in this space.
@@DrKippDavis Exactly Dr. Kipp. You made my point for me, hence my comment.
I expressed my opinion. You respond by questioning/commenting about my comprehension and critical thinking ability , as you have with many others in the comments to your videos.
I watched/listened to this twice.
It was not easy.
Not due to the subject, but due to you and the way you present.
You struggle throughout to maintain your train of thought. It does not create a a confident experience for the viewers. As an orator you lack flow and rhythm and are tangential in a way that detract from the point you are attempting to make. Your condescending attitude and way of expressing what you are trying to get across is infused with what comes across as your douche bag dickish ego.
I assume you have many reasons you put your time into making your videos. One of them has to be for viewers to consume.
You are putting out a " product" or content as it were.
My opinion is yours has a strange off putting stench of fecal material around it.
I couldn't quite put my finger on it earlier, but your reply nailed it.
Sorry, but you didnt earn my $2.00.
But seriously, if you really want to do this
There is a lot of room for improvement.
Dont get confused now dude, its not the production value.
And my response has been removed.
Fitting.
@@Aboriginalmetazoan Well, that certainly is not me. I don't censor comments.
Yup he is greedy thinks every body is stupid if he keeps on repeating about "lack of coprehension"
There are a lot of pieces to the thory Lady Babylon has built up. After listening to a bunch of academic youtubers in archeology, there are many of those bits i can get behind. Amon has a tendency (if you hear him, trauma based) to look down on organized religion and focusing on informal, drug centered forms of belief. His belief is that Dyonisios travelled with wine, and he was part of a larger Indo-European belief, with a divine father more similsr to Kronos than Zeus. Then, this belief gets around through the Mediterranean (this must be Minoic or before. Bronze age at most). Thus, he sees this drug-centered belief in the gaps of organized religion in most regions. Specially, he points out how ιως has more similarities to cronos than to Zeus, and how in primary 4th century greek sources, the greeks understood the people of the lavant as followers of dyonisus and kronos.
The great problem in Amons point of view is how little he considers the semite traditions that influenced the inhabitants of the region. The influence of El, Baal and Marduk. But, i find it an open question:
-how hellenized where the inhabitants of the lavant in a general sense when the ssp was redacted (even if it was redacted in hebrew) ?
-How much of the population was ιω-ite vs Non-denominational politheist?
-heard somewhere most of Deuteronomy was similar to Athens constitution, and the greek translation of exodus translates the first earth-waters separation as Uranos-Gaia. How useful do you think the ssp would be to a hellenized hebrew? And the other way around, a greek ssp for a """gentile"""".
On the topic of Christos, to be anointed also means to be covered in oil, it doesn't need be read as a "kings get anointed" every single time, does it? My deadname is Christoforos, from the greek "to carry christ", but cant imagine a byzantine christian using the name without thinking also of healing and maybe drugs.
And Joseph-us points out how absolutely diverse and non-monolithic were the inhabitants of jerusalem by the revolt. Jesus as a religious grifter trained in traditional greek drug use is absolutely viable and makes a lot more sense than a simple faith healer (what current faith healer is clean of drugs?).
While Amon has a greek-supremacist view of history, and he should walk back on some of his rambling sometimes, i find that the truth probably is in-between his wild speculation and mainstream academia's under-playing of greek influence on the lavant. Theres no doubt that theres a babilonian origin of the flood myth and the babel(on) tower, theres the probable ethnic historical miss-remembering of other stuff like the Judges, and the exile, and then theres narrative negations of mediterranean mainstream narrstives (say the twin brothers that live for each other negsted in Cain and Abel). Those negations point to a very isolating hebrew speaking base. Leading to Amon having an "outside looking in" feel of the lavant (hellenized, Bacci, cosmopolitan) while mainstream hebrew studies has an inside looking out feel (how old is this phrasing in hebrew? What other semitic lenguages have words that kind of sound like these garbled text on a manuscript?). And thus, probably the truth would be better built by a middle magic point.
I like that Trouble intro.
My goodness unbelievable the comments! We as a species should always question all information and data, when you only comment to be heard from your point of view is actually not contributing the conversation unless you have study the ancient text over a very long time. What you think you have discovered in your resources and research is only prevalent in the fact that your channel is not based on true research, only for the benefit of clicks and generating an income from you tube. I see this everyday. Really a debrief? Give me a break.🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
"What you THINK you have discovered"??
My presentation is NOT my opinions. These are the irrefutable facts borne out by the manuscripts and the languages. These are matters of centuries of total scholarly consensus.
But, by all means, continue to wallow in your myopic ignorance.
Very well said. This charlatan doesn't nothing but profit from his nonsense.
Thank you for setting things straight. I was very depressed for the past 3 days until I saw your video because it made me think Jesus was the monster Ammon sets him out to be.
Thats kinda pathetic. Also you can't handle the truth. Deep down you know there's a reason why there are so many priests molesting children and why there isn't any justice. You know that it's all a big lie to control you. That's why you reacted that way. Becuase deep down you know there is some truth if not all truth to it
A better way out is to look at the original coptic Gospel of Thomas which is probably the source material of all these texts (see Martijn Linssen's work). The "Jesus" of Thomas is quite different than the Jesus Ammon discusses.
Could that Zachariah translation be something Matthew knew which is how he got to 2 donkeys for Jesus?
I consider the book of divisions aka Jubilees as inspired scripture as do the levites as they say in their own writings in the dead sea scrolls. In this book it says Abraham was retaught the language of creation after the tower of Babel and that language was Hebrew pre babylonian exile hebrew aka Paleo hebrew. It also says he transcribed the books of his fathers Enoch, Noah etc. This means that they were written in pre babylonian hebrew. Everything else is a translation. Appreciate your work.
Lee
Your next opening theme song should be south of heaven from slayer
That would be great, but I would get demonetised for it.
So, to summarize this debunk, it's... "No u"? You don't speak ancient greek?
You should watch again. To summarize, it's "the manuscript evidence and ALL these numerous syntactical and literary features demonstrate that the Torah was written in Hebrew, and later translated into Greek."
Great stuff! 🔥🔥🔥 his fanboys are in clear denial in these comments.
Snake oil salesman vibes personified. 🖤
Obrigada Dr.Kipp
Thank you.
*Hebrew first*
1. The Hebrew part of the Hebrew Bible is written in forms of Hebrew that span 700+ years and some of those are intermingled.
2. Some of the Hebrew Bible is in Aramaic
3. Hebrew grammar and syntax makes sense, but Greek doesn’t (Infinitive absolutes, resumptive pronouns)
4. Hebrew puns
5. Hebrew Atbash
6. Colloquial phrases
7. Various names/titles for God. (Septuagint Genesis 1:1 has generic “Theos”. Hebrew has the ambiguous “Elohim”. Septuagint 2:5 also uses “Theos”. Hebrew has “Yahweh Elohim”.)
8. Historical accuracy. Although much of the Hebrew text is wishful thinking, hyperbole, etc, some is accurate to different degrees, such as that the Israelites and Philistines had intimate contact, the destruction of the northern kingdom, the existence of Omri and Hezekiah, and the reforms (however hyperbolic the biblical description), the reforms of the late 7th C. I wouldn’t expect people in the 3rd C BCE to know about these things.
9. Unknown place names. There are place names in Northwest Semitic languages that were no longer known.
10. Older texts: there are “biblical” verses that predate Alexander and even Herodotus by hundreds of years.
11. Former beliefs: Song of Moses in DSS has Yahweh as a son of El. Yahweh elsewhere is described as the god of only Israel.
12. Babylonian mythology: Genesis 1:2 in Hebrew, darkness was over the face of Tehom, a Babylonian dragon of primordial chaos. The Septuagint just has “abyss”.
13. Newer Greek geography. Nubia (“Ethiopia”) is referred to by the vague term Ks, which expands to Kush. In other contexts, this consonant combo in Hebrew could refer to two other locations. If this were a translation from Greek, they could just use the more specific Greek name, _Aethiopia,_ which the Septuagint uses (incorrectly, I would argue) in Genesis 2:13 for the region that the Gihon River encircles (obviously no river could encircle a coastal region).
There is nothing stopping a translator from making the text more specific or technical than it was in the original. Those are generic qualities of later, more technical societies. But the above issues are highly unlikely, and some virtually impossible in a Greek-first scenario.
Kipp Davis
Esp. 1:01:01-1:35:17
“… Was the OT written in Greek?”
th-cam.com/users/liveD20YLY_ydY8?si=6BNIJdW0Wn236okX
Dan McClellan channel, “Is the Septuagint an Original Greek composition?”
th-cam.com/video/Qcwwgc8Pcfg/w-d-xo.htmlsi=mPVTLmeiruQu94UI
Thank you for this video.
I've seen ammons bs in my feed for a while, and was sadened by the lack of push back he received.
Great job!
Thank you.
The guy that recreated your Hebrew language used Arabic to fill it in just so you know
Modern Hebrew that was created in the 19th century? So what? You are aware, I hope, that ANCIENT Hebrew is not the same as MODERN Hebrew. It predates Arabic by at least several centuries, and was widely used in the Levant during the Iron Age.
@@DrKippDavis gaelic is the oldest language ....Sanskrit is a fire language ...Hebrew is garbage gets nothing done Israel aka the feminine satanic occult. ..hebrew is Arabic .....Chinese is Arabic turned sideways ......and Latin is Arabic backwards
Ah, I see that you are an ignorant moron. Carry on.
@@DrKippDavis so you have nothing intelligent to rebut me with is what your saying right ? Toddler
@@DrKippDavis ahhhh I can see your a talmud reader....a blood libel protector ....I see your obsessed with the aleph that's shaped like a bull head from worshipping the bull like a good Canaanite ....sacraficer any kids lately ?
Thanks Kipp. Judges 12:6 would be an interesting comparison between the Hebrew and Greek. As it relies on a Hebrew pronunciation. Incidentally I caught that discussion on Neil’s channel. I don’t blame you for calling it short.
This really needs timestamps
We do not have manuscripts we have fragments of manuscripts. Ammon is making some real reaches at points. There are things he is saying that are not supported. But claiming more than what is there is unfounded.
He reads all the txt medical everything u only read certain texts how can u compare your knowledge with his
Exactly.
It's also important to know more than just linguistics, such as endocrinology, bacteriology, and ancient pharmacology, which is where Dr. Hillman surpasses you. I would say that, if you really want to disprove his claims, look at his sources and comparisons between the different disciplines, and then make a statement. Until then, it's just your opinion as opposed to something that actually refutes what he's saying.
Personally i think the fact that the Greek didn't use the Tetragrammaton, but adopted the tradition of masking the name of YHWH, is a strong case that it was a translation from Hebrew. I have also noticed the play on words, I believe Nehemiah Gordon calls it "Hebraisms."
I AM NOT SURE WHAT IS DR. KIPP QUALIFICATIONS.
You could look them up. They are easy to find. I am not sure why you are lazy about this.
@@DrKippDavis Wow lazy is a strong word...right away it tells me your EGO was bruise. Dr. Ammon Hillman is a true researcher...speaker...for humanity first ,he is humble and believes that everyone deserves the truth plain and simple he is not looking for acclamation from anyone eccentric that he is and we love him. Yes he has his followers you may want to call its disciples. You have a wonderful day.
@@daniellewhiteside1199 Ah, yes. It is always best to psychologise interlocutors online, whom you have never met. You clearly know nothing about me, nor does it seem that are you interested in actually answering your own question. I don't care-my ego is not affected in the slightest, but it is amusing to me how often, how little, many people are motivated to do anything that might threaten their own presuppositions and entrenchment. YOU ARE ENTRENCHED.
As for Hillman, he is a crappy researcher, and I know this because of how many things he gets just willfully wrong. Things that he would know with even just a small bit of insight or diligence that he simply ignores. Whatever "humility" you think you see in him is a facade, for how arrogantly he posits his own utterly bankrupt ideas, and denigrates scholars for doing the ACTUAL work to learn and know about antiquity.
Ammon Hillman is a hack. His cholarshsip is garbage, which is why every other historian, classicist and biblical scholar ignores him.
@@DrKippDavis Your lack of concern is amazing. Jealousy will get you nowhere and lack of confidence as well. I wish you all the best with your endeavours.
@@daniellewhiteside1199
You sound like a cult member wtf
1st, do we have any copies of the Torah in Hebrew dating before the 2 century BCE?
2nd, coming at this from the study of computer science and reverse engineering, once code is translated (compiled) from a higher level language like C++ or Rust, etc, into an intermediate representation (elaboration) and finally into machine code (ones and zeros), it's very difficult, if not impossible to go back the other way while preserving the original source structure (reverse engineering). That is to say, to go from Hebrew to Greek would give you Greek that is difficult to read or sounds very strange or overly simple. For example, there are tools to "decompile" binary executable back into C or C++, see Gihdra for example, but the result is nothing like the original source code, and to make any sense of it is very very difficult. So much information is lost.
That's the argument that Hillman is making, and it holds from the perspective of what I study, which is programming languages, if it is true that ancient Hebrew is less complex than ancient Greek.
1. We don't have copies of the Torah in ANY LANGUAGE before the second century. The earliest evidence for a "Torah" is all in Hebrew, and it comes from mss that are dated to the second and first centuries. Probably the strongest evidence comes from the so-called "Reworked Pentateuch" mss, which date between 2nd B.C.E.-1st C.E., and which reflect the existence of a combined text as early as the 3rd century. In addition to these, we also have several mss of Aramaic translations of the Torah dating to this period, which were unquestionably translated from Hebrew, and not from Greek. By sharp contrast, the ONLY manuscript evidence that have of the Torah in Greek prior to the first century are tiny fragments, most of which probably do not even belong to complete books, and all of which are later than the much more substantial numbers we have of Hebrew scrolls.
2. Whatever contribution the behaviour of modern programming languages to this situation in antiquity makes, it does not make a dent on the facts that the mss reveal. The Torah was written in Hebrew, and later translated into Aramaic and Greek. Moreover, as I have noted numerous times, there are literally hundreds of instances in the LXX which linguists accurately characterise as "difficult," or "clunky," and which are easily, syntactically explained on the direction of translation from Hebrew to Greek.
@@DrKippDavis
Point 2 isn't so much about programming per se, but about translation from one language to another while preserving semantics, which is a vital for the translation form higher level languages into machine instruction sets, as such it is well studied.
Hillman translates some of the examples you gave from Greek into English in a much more 'elegante' way than you did here, while also using a translation from the Hebrew to English that makes no sense or completely miss out on concepts that were in the Greek. While you do the reverse.
I think what probably happened was an effort to canonize the texts into a single set around 3rd century BCE. Some of this was probably done in parallel in Greek and Hebrew. Ofc with the "original" stories in various Hebrew/Canaanite dialects. In short, I don't think there was an "original", some of it Hellenized and preserved in Greek, other parts in Hebrew and Aramaic.
@toddfulton2280 Right. But, let's be clear here that Hillman does not translate anything from Hebrew to English. He does not know the language.
How are the words counted?
Are different verb forms counted as different words? If so, it's not comparable.
I do think Hebrew and Latin and Greek are more closely related than people think, and I'm not convinced of Hebrew primacy in the writings in general.
But none of that is more than an interesting debate.
This kind of discussion is what is needed to push scholarship along in the field of NT studies .Ammon's approach raises questions not only into the Hebrew is a back translation debate, but into the idea that classicists can bring new insights into NT scholarship. The push back against it only serves to show the dogmatic view that saturates this area of study. In my view , sources are key, what do they say?
Interesting. The Septuigint is complete. How is that possible? 🤔 How odd. I mean, you answered your own quandary.
What do you mean, it's "complete"? When is it, you think, that this happened?
Hillman’s got it right. The mysteries were corrupted. No one can die for you. You must die before death to Know Yourself as nothing more than an illusion.
Perhaps you should watch the video.
Yes. All forms of Christianity stems from Roman Catholicism. With that said the Bible is nothing but a translation of the Laws ,Statues and Commandments from the Most High.
Sounds like someone is having to justify their existence in the face of differing narrative with greater detail and depth of information, free of the emotional attachment and fear of change/truth/insight . 😢
Or, I know what the hell I am talking about, in the face of unadulterated nonsense.
Exactly. Hillman never mentions any of the Septuagintal scholarship (and these texts have been studied in great detail!), he never interacts with any LXX scholar. He just makes claims with no real argument to support them. Just because one obtained a PhD in Classics doesn’t equate to expertise in all Greek literature. Hillman’s background is in Greek medicinal literature not the Septuagint. As Kipp points out, he knows no classical Hebrew or Aramaic. Hillman says he lived in Israel for a year and took some study in Modern Hebrew. So?? Modern Hebrew is quite different from classical Hebrew.
Aahh gawd! Give me the sources!!
Sources for what, specifically? In this video, I provided ample manuscript evidence which shows without a shadow of doubt that the Hebrew Torah texts predate the LXX.
Awwh gawd it’s a joke! @drkippdavis
@@jordaneldridge838 Sorry. I saw that after I fired off my response. I was really twitchy after this.
You're trying to prove him wrong in his language, but what about his translations and what he speaks about can you prove that wrong?
I don't care about any of that stuff.
However, given what I know of his work from his chaotic ramblings, I would say that A LOT of the idiotic things he spouts is almost certainly totally false. What Ammon Hillman seems to have no grasp of are concepts of literary genre and cultural contexts. He is a specialist in Greek medical texts, and what he has a tendency to do is to over-read these rather arcane highly specialised texts, and apply them to virtually everything else. This is a hilariously stupid mistake-its being a hammer, and thinking that everything is a nail.
So, when it comes to the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, the LXX; when it comes to early Jewish literature; when it comes to the writings of the New Testament and post-first century Christianity, Hillman just gets all of this literature DEAD WRONG, on practically EVERY LEVEL. These ARE NOT Hellenistic medical texts. They are ALL products of Hellenistic Judaism, and there is no indication ANYWHERE that there was much of any distribution or knowledge of Greek medical texts. A question I and others have posed to Hillman directly is this: What reason do we have to think that Hellenised Palestinian Jews had ANY familiarity AT ALL with Hellenistic medical and magical texts and ritual? We have NONE.
So, since Hillman cannot see the forest for the trees, because his myopia prevents him from clearly understanding the context for virtually all Jewish literature, he gets it all fatally wrong.
I’ll wait till Ai can read it all in all and the tablets of time. Then the truth and fairy tails will come to light
I couldn't have said it better myself, thank you
I'm neutral in this debate and really enjoying the different view points and arguments. Everything Dr. Hillman said was very difficult to listen to and took me some time to even understand what he meant by it all. You can tell that the last 5 years or so have taken a huge toll on him. This is an insane battle he's chosen to take on.
But yeah.. all of your points are well delivered and I do like that you're at least trying to provide these sources. But dude, idk.. it might just be me but at '49:00' that tablet looks like complete scribbles and I do not at all see how they are getting those characters from those lines.. and on the right it has these perfect phrases like 'may the lord make his face shed light upon you and be gracious unto you'.
I mean, to 99.9999999% of the population these are going to look like chicken scratches. But for the tiny, tiny few people who can read ancient Canaanite inscriptions the text is remarkably clear and secure. There is no dispute about these artefacts.
36:25 sound like a Terrence Howardism.
IDK MAN, YOU ROCK THE GOATEE WITH NO MUSTACHE?? HOW CAN I TRUST YOU.
How???
@@DrKippDavis but I will subscribe. This was a great video, thank you.
Hold on tight bud, it's slipping.
Oh, I saw this dude on either Derek or Neil’s channel, and decided he was an obvious crank so stopped watching. I love both those guys and their channels, but they could do a little bit more due diligence on some of their guests. Like that Persian nationalist guy they both had on who was going on about the angles of the cross bones on the pirate skull and crossbones flag representing some aspect of ancient Zoroastrianism or something, and all sorts of other sacred geometry type stuff, without providing any sources or evidence.
The book Iranian Leviathan has all the sources in the back. If you watch other videos he posts all the other sources. Sorry everything can be spoon fed to you in a single TH-cam video with you doing zero works on your behalf to check the sources.
@@Aleks.Markov I did look into that guy. He is well sus.
You cant translate upstream because you would be adding absent context. You took that the wrong way.
Well, you can, and it does. This is just the dumbest argument, since we do this in EVERY language-there are no insurmountable barriers to translating from pretty much anything into something else. Hell, we have even developed written forms of oral languages with the expressed purpose of translating English into new texts.
I know Ammon Hillman keeps saying this, but I it just shows how ignorant he is about linguistics, and broader philological fields outside of Greek. He's stuck in a bubble.
@@DrKippDavis can you speak dog?
Hmmmm...so if the dates on the Greek are different from the "hebrew" version? And the Greek version has more depth and technicality, then that would mean the BC dates on the Hebrew are full of it.
"Depth" and "technicality" are not tools that philologists and linguists use when appraising translations. That Ammon Hillman keeps saying nonsense like this just demonstrates that he is a rank amateur with no clue what he is doing.
I mean, id like to hear sources or evidence rather than just opinion.. at least Ammon doesnt give any opinions and just states the facts letting you think whatever you want and come to your own conclusion
What are you talking about?
The comparisons made between the Hebrew text and the Greek text that I walked through on my stream are drawn FROM THE SOURCES. These are NOT my "opinions." These are how the languages actually work. If you would like to see some of the texts I drew from in this stream, you can also check out the Community post I made about this yesterday. It's up to you, whether you are going to actually engage with the sources, or just take Hillman's word for it.
In addition, I SHOWED several images of ACTUAL Hebrew manuscripts, ALL of which pre-date ANY existing copy of the LXX.
It's so god damned frustrating when people like you just refuse to pay attention, or when they just irrationally ignore the evidence. You are only hurting yourself.
He claimed Lestes in greek means child trafficker but i looked it up and it says it means to plunder or to rob which has nothing to do with child trafficking.
Yes! Hillman takes advantage of the fact that his audience does not understand what the hell he is doing.
I like Ammon's personality, and I like some things that he say, but! He also is very inconsistent in telling his sources! He says "this happened...", but he doesnt says in what text he found that. And he makes too many stretches to explain some things.
I believe a lot of he says about the Misterious Elusianos. But the Bible stuff, I dont kniw...
Thank you Dr Kipp . Discovered your channel recently and agree with your insightful video on this nonsensical Hillman and his attempt to rewrite the Hebrew Bible and the Historical Jesus Christ .
Have you listened to Hillman's video describing Jesus as a hermaphrodite who castrated himself to fulfill the prophecy. Because per Hillman the correct Greek translation of the prophecy is that a girl is to be born, not a boy. Hillman ends with Hail Satan! It will give you the creeps. I think Hillman has a political agenda.
How can you critique him when you don't even really read Greek yourself??
Except, that I DO read Greek, and importantly, I am THE ONLY ONE between the two of us who can actually read BOTH Hebrew AND Greek.
But, I can also turn this around, and ask, "How can Hillman critique the Hebrew Bible, when he can't even read Hebrew?"
Also, have you noticed that when he does present the Hebrew text on his streams, he uses an INTERLINEAR (LOL), and a glossary that is the equivalent of Steong's Concordance? Have you noticed that?
Ammon Hillman is an amateur, and he is bad at philology.
@@DrKippDavis Is there a vital difference between ancient Greek and modern Greek? I don't speak either and from the little that I've understood from Hillman I believe he implied there's a major difference, so when you say you read Greek does that mean you can read ancient greek as well?
Jeez guys. These comments are harsh. I enjoy listening to Hillman too, but I think Kipp is laying out his arguments fairly. We shouldnt fall in love only with the ideas we find attractive. I personally am listening because I want to know the truth, but know too little to understand these concepts fully.
Took me 5 min to find other scholars that refute what kipp is saying. It's just insane to me to call out someone's blindspots and not see that you yourself have them as well.
Please feel free to provide sources for all those scholars who supposedly "refute" what I am saying in this video. There is NO ONE in the field who posits that the Torah was originally written in Greek.
@@DrKippDavis how can you say they didn't influence the Jews when the oldest version you have is 2nd century BC? What proof is there that the whole Torah is older than the ancient Greeks? Isn't there references to homer and plato? You can't tell if you're wrong when that's your oldest source right? Why are Plato's laws so similar to the old testament laws? It's crazy to me to think they didn't have any influence when the ideas themselves are so similar.
Gaad barnea for one. Just heard him say there are zero references to the bible from any yahwists during the Persian period. So nothing during the persians but it just magically pops up after Alexander takes over? Seems convenient.
@@mattjenkins2244 Well, let's be clear. I have never suggested that the Torah and other biblical texts were free from Hellenistic influence. On the contrary, I think that many of these texts were informed and shaped at late stages in their development, particularly as a collection.
However, the Hellenistic elements tend to be rather superficial, and not nearly as deeply engrained as the many other contributing traditions-the strongest if which are Semitic: Canaanite and Akkadian.
The argument promoted by Ammon, which is flatly wrong, is that the Hebrew text was TRANSLATED from Greek into Hebrew. This is demonstrably false.
@mattjenkins2244 LOL. A lot of people misunderstand the work that Gad is doing, and until he publishes his findings, it is also not something scholars can engage with. I am sure that there will be challenges to his ideas.
And, no. Gad is NOT supporting Ammon's hilariously bad scholarship. He posits that the Torah was composed IN HEBREW, from earlier HEBREW sources, but which were compiled after the Persian period. What he is doing is moving the timeline forward.
Danny boy really crucified himself when he almost tried refuting dr hillman
Dan McClellan did refute Hillman. As have I. It's not hard for the few of us who have actually taken the time to do so. I have had Graduate students who could do it.
@@DrKippDavis No you didn't (neither did Dan), you just parroted dogma
So, what about the naked child with jesus in the garden ? Answer that? The hebrew was translated from the greek. No mention of moses until the third century.....
The Greek Septuagint was translated from a different recension than that of the Babylonian Jews who created the Masoretic text. Of all the talk from Dr Ammon Hillman I never heard him mention this fact once, that there were multiple recensions, Palestinian, Samaritan, Babylonian etc, one of which became the basis of the Greek Septuagint. I have been reading Albright, Gunkel and Frank Moore Cross, I think from memory it is Cross who points this out.
This is dumbfounding. Classics buddy needs to read literally any LXX introduction and learn the terms positive and negative transfer. The fact that so much semitic linguistic structure pops up over and over again (positive transfer) is a gigantic banner stating that the text comes from a semitic source. Not to mention when the Greek is either incomprehensible or completely unidiomatic (negative transfer). Why would someone compose a Greek text with this features? The text-linguistic makeup of the Septuagint should tell *anyone* versed in Greek--Classical or otherwise--that these are translated texts.
I bet you never imagined that goofball caricatures like Ammon Hillman could exist in this day and age of LXX scholarship, eh Joel?
@@DrKippDavisI honestly just want to go die. How can this guy exist? Are we wasting our lives, Kipp? Haha.
Oh, BTW, I really appreciated your video, but I have a critique (if you don't mind). I've done tons of work on the infinite absolute. I think it is an overstatement that the translators did not know what to do with it. I think some (especially the translator of Exodus) was pretty judicious in their translation of it. In some cases the translator doesn't render it when it wouldn't work well in Greek. In other cases Greek constructions that fit are utilised. My work in the Covenant Code points this out. My upcoming commentary will also argue this. Others in the field also agree that **sometimes** the infinitive absolute and paronymous finite construction is rendered with adequate or even eloquent Greek.
But this is a nitpick!
@@DrKippDavisI made a response about some of your comments about the infinitive absolute but my phone glitched. I'll just quickly say that I and others in the field would argue that in some cases--especially exodus--the infinitive absolute is understood and translated adequately. If the translator saw no good Greek equivalent, they ignored it. In other cases, there is brilliant adaptation (IMO). My book goes into this when it comes to the death penalty and my commentary will talk about other examples as well. Just a nitpick! Great video!
@JoelKorytko Nice! Thank you.
@@JoelKorytko I mean I can tell you why he exists and why he is doing this... and it involves Hillman being fired from his university position for s*xual misconduct. Which Neal knows about and has actively done apologetics for.
The question for me is..... Where is the evidence there is or was Hebrew text complete to translate from ?? I hear no evidence from anyone that it ever existed. Manuscripts ? From before 300 BC ?
That’s the wrong question. Broadly speaking, what we have as a canonical collection now is a just that, a collection. The various scriptures that came before to be regarded as canonical were not written all at once, and most of the original form of each was not what made it into the canon. To ask “where was the complete collection”, as if that means the Septuagint must then have been composed in Greek, is nonsensical. The best it could show is that those who put the Septuagint together decided that those texts should be considered canonical.
Really doesn’t come across well when you are debating yourself or a video clip .. and I think you make a lot of assumptions about Ammon .. how do you know he ONLY reads Greek I find that unlikely
Ammon says it himself that he doesn't know Hebrew and is not interested in Aramaic!!! You fanboys glaze him beyond belief lol
I've always looked at what Ammon says with skepticism. He says some things that I've heard no other scholar say and he seems to enjoy being controversial and dramatic. He loves to talk about how he was let go because the Catholics accused him of being possessed by the devil. (I gotta admit, that is a good story) I've only seen him with Neil and Derek. I tried to watch Lady Babylon, but I don't know what he is talking about because it is like coming in halfway into a lecture on something I've never heard of.
He has what I call acid head asshole syndrome. The first person who had it was Timothy Leary, who was a sardonic arrogant asshole who thought he was smarter than anyone else because he was tripping all of the time.
I’ve never heard of him before but he sounds like a burned out stoner. Do people actually listen to him?
And what Catholics kicked him out? Like people here in America? I was raised Catholic and knew lots of them back in the day. They were the most intellectual Christians by far and never talked about stuff like that. That sounds like a fake story to me, but maybe I’d think different if I knew more.
@@DoctorBiobrain look at his wiki page. Or do a google search. It was a university he was teaching at and I can't remember. But as for people listening to him, he has a TH-cam channel linked in the title. But as for academics, I don't know. That is what I would like to know. He was on Gnostic Informant a couple of times saying that Jesus was a pedophile and the 12 disciples were boys an the beloved disciple was his child sex toy and that when he was arrested, he was with a naked boy who he was having sex with.
He is definitely tripping when he does his shows. No shade.
I mean thays becuase you probably don't read the Bible first of all. His material isn't even that out there and tbh it has been talked about before. The only difference is that we no longer get burn at the stake for talking about it. Ignorance is a fixable evil. I recommend you do your own research. Start with comparative religion. There have been literally countless cults just like the cult of Jesus and none of them are isolated. Once you learn about everything that's out there you will see it all makes perfect sense and checks out
@@blackreazor You’re posting this on the channel of an Old Testament expert who can read the original; so we obviously know the Bible if we like this channel. And he’s no longer Christian and just discusses this stuff because he finds it interesting. This disagreement isn’t about whether Christianity is real, it’s about whether it all started from the Greeks or not.
Honestly, one of the problems with many atheists is that they’re only good at debating theists because it’s low hanging fruit and they don’t know how to debate other atheists. Calling Christianity a cult ain’t gonna win an argument here.
Ammon has a great show, Lady Babylon is so much fun check it out!!!!
I can't understand a single thing but I love the show. He's so entertaining.
Hail Chewy. It's such a good time. If you stop by a live show I'll say hi to you!
Yes unfortunately this man is proving how little education he has as compare to Dr Hillman - you’ll get more real information over lady babylon
Tell me you didn’t watch Kipp’s video without telling me you didn’t watch Kipp’s video.
@@JBL1222 I stopped when the personal attacks started. I commented to prove a point. It's called having standards - Kipzey doesn't meet them.
19min and you haven't convinced me Dr helman is wrong
It's a two-hour stream.
Also, unless you know the languages, you will unsurprisingly not get it.
@@DrKippDavis id advise you get to the points and stay on topic then as it wasn't a enjoyable watch and i was genuinely looking for decent opposition to Ammon .
And your 2nd point , is equivalent to saying if I cant fix a engine i cant understand race driving .
Wow, the fanboys that showed up to this stream to defend Ammon without listening to anything Kipp had to say was pretty crazy. You really tapped into a Rogan-esque figure with this bug-eyed “what they’re trying to sell you is a lie” guy.
Oh we listened alright. Trust me we listened.
You find the same behavior in Christian fundamentalist as in quasi-thelemic occultism. Almost all people basically take the message that they resonate with most and back engineer it, defending those strands of the tapestry that most align with the emotionally invested presuppositions. Tell someone that Aleister Crowley more or less invented the Book Of the Law, and watch the howls of disagreement fly.
What Kipp had to say is easily refuted by using your critical mind. His strongest argument amounts to "because there are pretty puns and wordplay evident in this Hebrew translation that is not in the Greek; therefore: Hebrew is the original!" And that argument is ridiculous because by a far greater standard, an original Greek contextual translation of the material far and away makes way more sense of the literature itself, whereas the Hebrew stumbled like a drunken idiot down it's own stairs and is obviously mistaking the content and bewildered of it. How you can be so willfully ignorant is a simple case of you PREFERRING to retain the fairy tale belief system of the Christian lie over reality. It's sad, really. But simple.
@igortakesabride1139 If only you understood the arguments. Unfortunately, YOU DON'T. I am talking about MUCH more than "pretty puns." My argument focuses on technicalities in the languages which demonstrate the direction if translation. If you don't know the languages, then sit down, and let the grown-ups talk.
@@DrKippDavis I understood the arguments just fine, Kipp. But your arguments aren't at all convincing, they're lacking. You assert that Hebrew is the original based on technicalities in the texts by comparison? Is it not fair to say that Hebrew would be a lesser-capable language than Koine Greek, and that translating from Greek to Hebrew would prove more clunky and difficult and make less sense overall than say, taking a Hebrew text and translating it to Greek? Which would be more likely? Especially as I've already said; the Hebrew mangles the concepts in the original Greek, and transforms them into fairy tale non-sequiturs that only translating the Septuagint in Greek makes absolute sense of. Do you deny this is so? You think the Ammon's translations of the context of antiquity as it was in reality is somehow less convincing than the Hebrew concoction? If this were a painting, for example; and you have two versions of a masterpiece, yet one looks a deranged 7th grader painted it, and the other looks like a professional with skill and ideas and cultural understanding imparted themes and reality to give the artwork a mirror of his reality and thoughts, which one do you say is the original? Do you actually think, for example that the greeks translated the term "Christ" to mean drug in order to DEFAME the Hebrew text? Or was it more likely that a mistranlation occurred from the original Greek word because "Jesus" like all heirophants and gods was using Greek Mystery ritual drugs and was high as a kite throughout the scripture? Which sounds TRUER?
“What you call the Torah or the Old Testament” 21:25
Does Hillman think the “OT” consists only of the Torah?
He may be mixing Torah and Tanach.
@@jennifersilves4195 Yes.
47:44 you keep saying these fragments are older than any extant copies of the Septuagint, but his argument is hinging on quotes and references of the Septuagint, not copies. It seems like the question should be is there evidence for the Hebrew writings preexisting the quotes and references that Ammon claims exist to set the oldest dating of the Septuagint. Or that his claims of those references and quotes aren’t as old as these fragments.
Ammon cites quotes of the LXX in the Greek translations of 1 Enoch, which are also TRANSLATIONS of an original Aramic text that we have copies of from the Dead Sea Scrolls.
@@DrKippDavis i believe you. I believe you are telling the truth about the state of scholarship and the origins of the Hebrew bible. My point is simply that he makes a point about citations of the LXX being older, then you respond by showing manuscripts that are older than any extant LXX manuscripts. Neither of you dated the citations he is referencing and his ultimate point in that clip wasn’t about extant manuscripts but about citations and quotes, so my point is that in that particular instance you did not really respond to his claim. I think your points about translation evidence make it very clear that Hebrew was the original language of the texts. I was just pointing to what might be a weak point in the argumentation of a response.
If we agree that the Hebrew text is older, then the citations of Greek translations cannot predate these. The compositional language of Enoch has never really been a question, even before the discovery of numerous, very old Aramaic copies in the Scrolls.
@@DrKippDavis i KNOW the citations he’s talking about cannot predate the Hebrew texts, because I am already convinced of your position. My point is that you showing fragments that predate physical copies of the LXX does not address his claims about citations, but I am afraid you and I are talking past each other. Overall you did a great job, thank you for your public scholarship, Dr. Kipp.
@@aboynam3dblu3 Yeah, I'm sorry. Thanks for the support. I really appreciate it.
Run! Bad Bad advice.
Since one of the Ammon apologists kept mentioning the Oxyrynchus papyri in the chat, one might ask them whehter we have a single fragment of a Biblical text among those fragments that date as far back, if not farther, as the DSS. If we don't, then that is evidence that the idea of an original OT in Greek is wrong.
There are fragments of the biblical text. The oldest biblical text fragment is P.Oxy 3522 which is a fragment of Job. It also dates to around 50-100 CE, which makes it later than the majority (if not all) of the DSS and useless as a source of an "original" Greek.
@@chrish4309Not true. In this stream Kipp goes over multiple Hebrew manuscripts that end up in the Hebrew Bible that date to the 2nd or 3rd century BCE, before anything from the Septuagint or in Greek.
@@bensalemi7783 In this stream Kipp goes over the Dead See scrolls, not the Oxyrhynchus papyri. My question was about the Oxyrhynchus papyri.
@revilo178 I think I actually misread the reply to your comment from @chrish4309. Basically I'm agreeing with you, but I'd also say it doesn't really matter that we don't have older fragments in Greek. That would be an argument from silence. If there were hallmarks of the text being an original Greek text, we could conclude that without needing so actually have examples.
But the fact that we have Hebrew texts which become part of what becomes the canon that date to much earlier than the 1st century CE definitively shows that they weren't originally composed afterwards. That's all I was saying.
@@bensalemi7783 "I'd also say it doesn't really matter that we don't have older fragments in Greek. That would be an argument from silence."
An argument from silence isn't automatically fallacious. If the Greek OT were older than the Hebrew, we'd expect to have fragments of it from an erlier time, too. Of course, their absence doesn't PROVE it isn't older, but in historical matters there's no such thing as "proof" anyway, just probabilities. The absence of older Greek fragments lowers the probability that the OT was first written in Greek.
Russel Gmerkin proposes that the Jewish Torah was written by Hellenistic Jews in Alexandria, but I don’t know if he thinks it was written originally in a Greek.
Is the contention exclusively about the language or is Gmerkin crazy as well?
Basically no one thinks Gmirkin is right and he was pretty widely criticized by academics.
@@chrish4309 Popularity does not decide truth
Translating a primitive language into much more detailed, technical translation is called "embellishment / interpolation." There should never me MORE content than the original conveyed
All translation involves layers of interpretation; and yes that can include embellishment.
What @helenr4300 said. More importantly, just because someone embellishes doesn’t mean that they weren’t working from a source text that they translated. Being willing to embellish or even simply change the original source text doesn’t somehow mean there wasn’t an original source text.
36:55 That makes zero sense and Kipp gives no examples as to how what he says is true. He just says Hillman is wrong. I fail to see how you can translate a language with 100k words (Ancient Greek) to 8k words (Hebrew). And have the meaning be even remotely close.
Even if I agreed (I don't) that's not what happened. The one with the smaller lexical count (Hebrew) was translated into one with more lexemes (Greek), and it certainly did affect its meaning in a great number of instances. I don't know what to tell you, except that this happens all the time.
Way to embarrass yourself trying to ride Ammons coattails
I'll bet this is your most popular video
You should thank him, then learn ancient Greek with us
I know ancient Greek, thanks. And, there is nothing embarrassing about the truth. Perhaps you should watch it again. You clearly failed to understand the first time.
Do we have ANY "original, original, original" sources for any religious texts? Maybe for Mormonism and some other more recent movements. We have some pretty old copies but for the most part we have later revisions, collections and translations of older writings. It would be difficult to pin down ancient texts as "this is the first time anyone wrote this down" but most surviving examples are reasonably dated later than the clues within the text would indicate they were first constructed.