I just found your channel last night what a wealth of information we are in the last seconds before the last Jubilee the kingdom of God is at hand Shalom My Friends peace be with you❤❤
Absolutely fascinating interview. Just imagine the uproar from the Evangelical and established churches if a film or TV show actually presented the 'Resurrection' on screen as Paul and the early Jesus movement understood it. No resuscitated corpse walking about in front of a weeping Mary Magdalene, but a dead body still in a tomb appearing as a glorified transformed body to Peter. It would probably be banned.
Peter never wrote anything about seeing Jesus in person after the crucifixion. It's not in the epistles of James, Jude, or John either. The only first person account of "seeing" Jesus after his death is by Paul.
@@ji8044 Peter never wrote anything, period. Paul states quite clearly in 1Corinth 15v5, one of only seven authentic letters of Paul, that the risen Christ appeared first to Peter/Cephas. Either Paul is not aware of an earlier appearance of the risen Christ to Magdalene or it was created by Matthew in his gospel as a much later tradition after Paul's letters. Paul's authentic letters pre-date the gospels. Mark the earliest gospel hints that if the disciples and Peter return to Galilee they will see him there. Which fits in with information found in Paul's letter to Corinth about Peter being the first to see the risen Christ. That's what the authentic information tells us, and is relatively plain to see.
@@GeldardtheGrey I am just going by the traditional attributions of the epistles of course, not vowing for their validity. The indisputable fact remains that there is no book or letter of the NT which is a first person account of seeing the risen Jesus at all except Paul. Every other account would be considered hearsay in a court of law as being from a third party. Thus there are quite literally no contemporaneous accounts of it happening, since even Paul saw Jesus many years later.
@@ji8044 Yeah, I know that!! That wasn't the point I was making in my original comment. Of course there's no first person account of the risen Christ except by Paul. Tabor makes that quite explicit in his video, and I agree, as would every scholar and historian. I'm not talking about if it was true or not, or if it happened or not, I'm just analysing the text as was written. Think you were slightly missing my point about the film and TV show too.
I tried to introduce the idea that Paul had never met Jesus to a Christian recently. She just said, "it's (Paul's letters, Paul's experiences) in the bible, therefore it must be true." It reminded me that this is how I myself thought for 50 years. But the Bible is put together by man, who's heart is "deceitful and desperately wicked" (also in the Bible). I have realised my whole life as a practising Christian was one of resenting Paul, and endless attempts to reconcile the disparate stories and ideas and beings in the Bible.
It hinges on whether you believe him or not. No different than if you believe Ezekiel or Daniel. It’s written and that’s your judgement to make. However remember it’s no more than could have been done, Paul recorded it and couldn’t have used a video camera so this is what you have. There’s no more reason to doubt him anymore than anyone else’s supernatural experience.
All the time people devote to religion, money spent on Christian education and supporting churches and the way people organize their lives around this mythology is so sad. No more real than Osiris, Thor, Zeus or any other mythology. Just think if we spent that time, money and energy serving mankind how different (for the better) the world would be. Really sad how we are indoctrinated and sucked into cult thinking.
Dr. Tabor I would like to know where I can find explicit evidence that is used to argue the date of composition of the gospels. It seems to be difficult to find this information. Important considering you say Paul is earlier. Without answering for myself, I just want to know the evidence of why. Which passages show that they come from a certain date.
Just an idea…just as Jesus raised others from the dead = in their corruptible bodies…they would still die once more, couldn’tJesus himself be raised a similar way in his corruptible body…then after he went into heaven took on his immortal body? He did say to the apostles ‘don’t touch me’ he hadn’t gone to the father yet? There are mysteries to our faith. And yes when you open that door you can throw out logic. But there are things we don’t understand and I thank you for helping me understand them but I still believe, maybe blindingly, in God’s mysteries such as the resurrection….thank you though for your analytical mind…I listen a lot!
I'm a cradle Catholic but I'm also autistic so I literally COULD NOT believe a lot of what I was taught about truth and the early Church. I felt ok though because God gave us free will to work things out for ourselves. I believe we are all fine if our intentions are good, and telling little girls that if they whistle Our Lady will cry ??!! I told my teacher at age 7 that it's impossible to cry in Heaven. I was taken to tea at Cathedral House where the Archbishop told me I was a theologian. 😂😂😂.
I Love how Jesus addresses Saul Paulus, with "It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks" Saying Paul, you are my caged Bull, surrounded by sharp pointed sticks, I have you captured, and there you are injuring yourself, trying to escape. Here's a thought, why don't you let ME put My yolk on you, and make yourself useful by putting your strength, and tenacity to work for me.
According to church tradition it is said that these experiences similar to Paul’s vision of Christ was common among the first few generations. It is said that this is why so many were so ready to be martyrs bc the vision removes all fear of death. In fact following these experiences of being lifted up to stand before the Father that the souls longs to return so death is looked forward to. To experience the living Christ, the Word of God is more of a transformative experience. You don’t see the form of Christ. Some saints describe seeing the form of Christ but I doubt this though it’s possible that Christ will appear form ppl can recognized but this idea of transformation is much More interesting. It can still be experienced today in fact and this has been forgotten outside the Orthodox and some Catholics. Christ becomes you. That is the transformation and Resurection. Anything less is pointless in comparison.
@@tinadavy3990 Irenaeus of Lyons: ‘He became what we are so that we might become what He is.’ Athanasius: 'The Son of God became man so that we might become God.'
Question: why are you so hung up about this issue? I thought that's what the transfiguration was about? Flesh to spiritual. I don't see the big issue. What about Angels bodies in the OT? Wrestling with Jacob? Lot and the angels. These angelic beings all had physical bodies. What's the difference?
So the mount of Transfiguration showed that Moses and Elijah were in an advanced spiritual state in the Kingdom of Heaven and could appear on Earth in physical form - a spirit in temporary physical manifestation- this would be same state Jesus appeared in behind closed doors - a spirit in a temporary physical state. That is not a revived corpse. It is a glorified spirit.
I ❤ James how he is so open and not judging he wants us to question think consider and not jump to conclusions I guess brilliant spirit he has ,he would make a lovely disciple for yeshua
You don't get to 'choose' what you believe. You're either convinced that something is true, or you aren't. If you aren't convinced something is true, and you choose to say you believe it, that's called lying.
@robertstephenson6806 In my opinion they are all wrong, as they tend to use lies (whether they have fallen for it themselves or not) to defend their faith. If their belief was true, they wouldn't have to lie to defend it.
Dear James and Jacob, Thank you for this interesting discussion. -------- James, I am sure you are correct regarding your Paulus interpretation of his Jesus vision. It’s a transformation of consciousness from a physical to a spiritual stage of insight and knowledge. Which also explains others at the time to have had the same and similar vision - but probably understood and referred it a kind differently. (Note: I´ve also responded in a personal mail) Best Wishes
People tell me all the time that I look like somebody they know and I ran into a guy at Home Depot that looked exactly like my cousin Mark and even sounded like he does when he talked but it wasn’t him! This is one other natural possibility of the”sightings”.
People tend to ignore writings or archaeological evidence that does not fit in with their particular theology. Case in point: our friend, Dr. Tabor, ignores the miraculous images of a crucified corpse that are on the Turin Shroud.
@@cathyallen3967no actually it has not the sample that they tested was a repair that was made in the 12th century the have not tested the actual shroud
Interestingly - Elvis P. was a devout Christian. His life became complicated by early fame and fortune. He readily shared his good fortune with family and friends. Wouldn't be surprised to see him with the Disciples .
@@samuelflippin1890 "Elvis was a devout Christian who prayed before shows, reveals stepbrother. While his fans worshipped him as a rock'n'roll deity, Elvis Presley would say a prayer before going on stage, reading the Bible and looking to God for guidance in everything he did, his stepbrother has recalled." That and his 14 gospel albums should be a big clue for the ignorant.
@@Eet_Mia I'll take what his close family members say about him as opposed to what some random commenter on youtube thinks without any reference whatsoever. Were you even alive when he was performing?
@@Eet_Mia Most people who use the term "boomer" are ignorant millennials or gen Z that don't even know who a boomer actually is. Elvis was greatest generation, so what does that make you?
I don't know how Paul is a first-hand witness to the Resurrection, he doesn't claim to have physically met Jesus, just to have had a vision of Jesus. Anyone can have a vision of anyone or anything that their mind is inclined to "see."
Paul says that Jesus "appeared" to him, not that he touched Jesus or that Jesus was then necessarily anything physical. In acts, there is reference to a blinding light, but that is about Paul, not written by Paul, so it's not as authoritative.@@geoattoronto
Where does Paul write of having encountered the risen Jesus of the Gospels? Paul generally speaks of the Christ (1Cor 15) or the Lord (1Thes 4:17), but seldom of any Jesus - much less of having encountered him in the flesh. Where?
No I agree with a lot of what dr. Tabor says, it's important to note that he's simply using the typical attack Paul argument style that scene within the Jewish community. The very mad at Paul because Paul brought Gentiles into the synagogues... they feel betrayed
Correct me if I am wrong but weren't those still the days of multiple tribal gods? In those 3 years where Jesus was working his miracles, how much of them would popularly be ascribed to the one God, how much to all kinds of idols. How many potential scribes and witnesses would have existed in those crowds, how many scribes would have gone near the tomb before and after ascension, how many would have been in the frame of mind of making a written record right there and then? How was anything recorded? Timely, on the heel of events taking place? On the day? Aren't there a lot of social and cultural, as well as demographic aspects that affect what was recorded or not. In other words, what events during those years as well as before and after were in fact NOT recorded (until they were much later) and why not? The history of those moments needs to be closely examined from all possible viewpoints, not just in terms of the texts actually available to us. A bit like Eugenia Scarvelis does so well in The Crucifixion and the Glory of God, where she focuses on the events and circumstances leading up to and from this event. I would like to know more about the literate people in those days, their proportion in the population and access to the writing task (i.e., tools, control & oversight) and how easy/difficult it was for them to record anything at all given the circumstances they found themselves in (incl politically, socially, vis a vis other groups and threats, overall frame of mind and world view), and also where they would have been found in relation to Jesus, and so on. Who can help? Certainly not Bart Ehrman.
Richard Carrier was surprised how little indication there is in Paul's letters for physical existance of Jezus. See his book "the historicity of Jezus". Remember Paul's letters are the oldest biblical documents.
For a long time I puzzled over why Paul never says anything about the ascension. he said Jesus was "raised," then was "seen" by a series of people ending with himself (and that's all he says, "was seen by" no details as to when or where or exactly what). He never says anything about an ascension occurring between appearances. he never gives any indication that what he saw was not the same as what the others before him saw. I used to think Paul was sort of concealing that until it finally dawned on me that a much better explanation is simply that for Paul, the ascension and resurrection were the same thing. Paul did not know anything about earthly appearances. Those are clearly late developing stories and you can see them developing right before your eyes in the Gospels following Mark. The original belief was only that Jesus had gone straight up to Heaven. The physical interludes on Earth were added later, probably to battle Docetic beliefs. Luke even tacks an extra forty days onto the interlude in Acts to give Jesus time to teach the disciples proto-Catholic theology. In Luke's Gospel, Jesus ascends on Easter Sunday. In Acts it's forty days later. I don't even think the perceived apotheosis was particularly important to the disciples. The same had happened with other prophets like Elijah and Moses, not to mention countless Pagan heroes both real and mythical. It was an honor, but didn't make anybody into God. It was Paul who seems to have latched onto the idea that Jesus was the "firstfruit" of the general resurrection of ALL the dead. I don't think the disciples had any such view of Jesus or any view of the Messiah as a redeemer of sins, certainly not for Gentiles. Paul really transformed the definition of "Messiah."
I find it a little ironic that Christians back in the time used the symbol "fish" as a secret code to signal to each other to know they are disciples of Christ and yet so many people do not go vegan thinking that Jesus ate fish. Would you consider that the secret to the kingdom of heaven is the "fish" a stumbling block to separate people. sorry about the grammar
The "fish" might be reference to Jesus' prediction of the Sign of Jonah, which was misinterpreted by the ancient church fathers to be his resurrection.
My understanding is that when Jesus first rose and the tomb was empty, it was a glorified body. Basically it was noth physical and spiritual at the same time. Why? He could eat with people (physical) Thomas could touch him (physical). He could appear in their midst (spiritual) he could take different forms ( scripture records instances where he wasn't quite recognized so his features were different. This implies something different than just a plain physical body aka spiritual).
Interesting indeed . I have to say with all the references and nuances given , james seems to be into something for sure. I tend to agree with his conclusions
Paul said, be ye transformed by the renewing of your minds. He is talking about having the same mind that was in Christ. God said when I go to prepare my jewels. He also said in John, as the vessels of clay are being broken. What this is referencing here is what will be left in man is what the Spirit has purified, minus the impurities of our motivations, of ourselves, of the things that do not stand up to the tryings of God's fire. (I just made that a word, lol.) What Peter, James, and John saw at the transfiguration, is the same thing that Paul is telling us, as he also saw, was after the sanctification, purification, and perfection of our purging out of the sinful inner man, man of ruin, or son of perdition, or man of sin, Jesus will reveal himself to us in his glory, in his kingdom. We do not have to die to see this or experience it. The Greek Orthodox refers to this as theoria, and Wesley saw it as sanctification, who also was a sort of believer in mysticism. The 12 patriarchs give a layout of the 7 errors given to man that must be overcome, and they are pretty accurate. Each prophet, Adam & Eve, all believed God's prophecy of the seed of the woman who would come to trample the serpent's head. That is how they obtained salvation. That seed is Jesus. This plan has always been a plan of action that God had since before the beginning of man. He knew man was going to fall. He is omniscient. It's the same reason that Abraham, Moses, and all of the other prophets that were being kept in Abraham's bosom were released from there at the 3 days of death in the tomb when Jesus was given the keys to the kingdom, also of death, hell, and the grave. He says in Revelation that he will give us the keys to the kingdom. These keys come from God. He chose to pour himself into a man to fulfill his word. Since the devil usurped the kingdom through man, God restored it back to himself through man. As it stands, until the day of judgement, the devil still has certain control over some of God's creation. He tells us if his spirit is not in us, then we are none of his. This spirit can only be poured out on us through our faith in Christ, because he is the sender of it to us. Since it is filling him and he is full of it, and by it, I mean, God's spirit, it purifies us by coming into us through Christ. The work is left to us to rid ourselves of what the devil put in there. Actually, Jesus sets us free from it when we strive to abolish it by putting the spirit in control over it. It holds on for a while. It is a process. What Paul is saying is, wait for it! Get better! Do your best! Keep it under control, and try not to sin! Don't sin by looking at Jesus' example every second of your life. Love God with your whole heart, strength, and mind. Get there! Paul said we are seated in heavenly places with Christ Jesus. He isn't talking about after we die. He is talking about when you have prepared your heart and you are right in the sight of God, when God says you're ready and you have overcame, then he will welcome you into the throne room where Jesus is. Once you see that, you don't care anything about this world except trying to help others realize the path you took to get there is through Christ. If you want to get to God, you have to go through Jesus, because he is who God chose to reveal himself to us through. You are glorified when you see Jesus in the throne room in his glory and splendor brighter than the shining sun that is exuding from him in his whiter than snow garment wearing a golden crown of righteousness. Paul is trying to explain this in not too hard of words to understand, it is just that we look at it from a fleshly existence rather than a spiritual one. Will Jesus return? Yes he will, with his Saints, but the coming of the Lord can and does also mean that when we purify our hearts and see him in his kingdom when he reveals himself to us, that his coming will be a surprise to us when we find ourselves there so he can complete the work within us to rid us of the last layer of the sinful inner man. He takes us off the throne of our own heart, frees us from the devil's captivity and bondage, and takes his rightful place in his kingdom. We are pillars there, what we inherit is him in his glory forever and ever bestowed with the glory of God. They are one because God has poured himself into him and placed him there to guard us against the devil. Our righteous spirit that is separated and present there is different than the spirit of the sinful inner man. That is something the devil made in us that cannot be present to live within our newly created vessel made by God. I think we are of 2 opposing vessels, and the unrighteous one must be broken and slain. Metaphorically, whatever happens to this fleshly body is of no consequence except that we must do the work for our spirit to get there and we must purge the unrighteous spirit out of us in this fleshly body. That is it's purpose. To decide the destination of where the spirit will go and which one will win rule over the place of our eternal existence. We must decide if we are all in for God or not. Because we're in this thing to win and be victorious. We must overcome to gain the prize. The prize is being with Jesus in his kingdom that God conferred to him where we can be one with God through the righteous work of Christ. It becomes a little clearer in 2 Thessalonians Chapter 2, Hebrews, and Romans using the Greek Interlinear to English translation in logosapostolic. www.logosapostolic.org/bibles/interlinear_nt.htm Jesus prayed to the Father at the last supper and said, Father glorify me. I have kept these that you have given me and not one has been lost except for the son of perdition. Even though, we understand that to be Judas, was it really just Judas? Could it have been the process of the work he was doing in the hearts of his disciples to show them the way to get to him. He said to get there, and the way you know. What is that way? It is through him and what he taught us about getting there.
THINK about it!!! THEY get to HAVE their "treasure" RIGHT NOW, RIGHT HERE ON EARTH YET WE, the "DISCIPLES" have to WAIT until we are DEAD?????????? LIES, LIES,LIES!!!!!!!!!!!
Paul was blinded by a light. Thomas touched the risen master. So I don't what they're talking about. I do think Paul's writings include words spoken by Jesus from an unknown source.
I love Jesus - He is a real person who lived, died and rose again. He is my Lord, Savior ! His Second coming will occur 69 weeks of years AFTER Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent ordered the ruined city walls to be rebuilt in the year 1535 AD. This is Daniel 9:25 being fulfilled a second time. Get ready to see the New City Jerusalem in the sky - and many will drop dead on the spot !
Just a quick question , if Paul is the earliest source of Jesus's resurrection? How do we come to this conclusion? If Paul letters are written before gospels, this does not mean he's the earliest source... my take is you can know something and not record it down ... in written let's say disciplines witnessed resurrection but did not record it then ... and Paul comes later in the picture and record things .. so I will say disciplines are earliest witnesses .. because they were illiterate.. Paul other had literate... so let's consider that ..
What people are not realizing is that the 'gospels' were not written by Christ's disciples, they were written by the Pisos Flavian family, mostly by Calpernius Piso. His name appears seven times in Mark, ten times in Revelation. The scriptures are speaking in METAPHOR and SYMBOL, not literally. This is what scholars and researchers are not understanding, and as long as they continue clinging to incorrect literal reading, the meaning will never be apprehended. Yeshua never "resurrected", since he never died, he had a Near Death experience. He was taken by Joseph and other Essenes to a previously agreed upon place and healed. When the scriptures speak of his (Christ's) 'resurrection', it is speaking of "Jesus Christ", not Yeshua. The two are separate and distinct from one another. Scripture is speaking of "Jesus Christ", the integration of the divine into the carnal mind. The gospels were telling this encoded 'story' of the awakening of the Christ within the individual. They were not a history of Yeshua, and followed an ancient 'messiah' template used in ancient lore for at least sixteen world saviors. Kersey Graves explains this in his book "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors". This was an ancient model which was applied because of the spiritual dynamic surrounding a "christed" figure. Born in a cave of a "virgin" (spiritually clean), rebelling against authority, having 12 disciples, healing the sick and ill, dying on a tree, and rising three days later. This "story" is found in many legends of "god-men" who came to help and inspire mankind. "Greater works than these shall you also do', yet people do not take Yeshua at his word. This will likely never be accepted by the dogmatists, but researchers will find this to be true. I get tired of trying to explain this to dogmatic literalists, it's like they are more interested in the story ABOUT Yeshua than his actual religion. No wonder the churches have no real revelation. www.henryhdavis.com/post/the-gospel-of-mark-why-does-the-name-piso-as-in-calpurnius-piso-appear-within-key-statements Neville Goddard explains the figure of 'Jesus Christ' (not Yeshua): th-cam.com/video/RRzc0rVODog/w-d-xo.htmlsi=-ygybJ4uFXwrt4R3
thank you, Dr. Tabor. I think everything what you have told about the transformation (of a man, Jesus, Paul, anybody reaching that level) would fit if you have a look at this from the point of the life of the very enlightened women of that time who simply won against that "world of restrictions and low soul understandings" of that time. She was the teacher of those "Paul's" ideas that you very well understood. All about Jesus, what had been written and taught, when you take it through the eye lentil of "Mary"= the woman, would be understood finally well as the description of her life, of her way of the transformation and exodus from her suffering. I wish I would be able to explain it more specifically. Just pls, at least for a while, try with your very good eye and senses to have this insight in it and I am sure you will see more.
He has good Information but if Paul was making the resurrection up don't you think the Jerusalem community would have shoot his views down publicly .The humiliation of being crucified the way christos was would have left no reason for his followers to keep his memory alive unless the resurrection happened in some shape or form.
Well, I agree. Paul is speaking of an inward transformation. In fact, all of Scripture is about inward transformation. Circumcise your hearts! I desire compassion, not sacrifice! Love God who is inside of you, which is the foundation for: Love God who is outside of you, your neighbor. This is what Jesus means by saying, Be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect. Love fulfills the law. It is the good tree producing good fruit. In the parable, the ones on the right were righteous and are able to enter into the kingdom of heaven. They were righteous, he explains, because they lived their love toward their neighbor. It proceeded from a transformed heart. It's hypocrisy that is deplored, which is an expression of duality. The speaker touched upon that, no more this and that, all becomes one. This is fundamentally a message to individuals. Only transformed individuals can create transformed societies.
@subcitizen2012 If you don't see the fruits, then there's no ROOT. I told one Christian, you know the words but you lack understanding. The verbiage is the conditioning, it's not true knowledge.
Not only was it (supposedly) a resurrected Jesus, but also a post-ascension Jesus. So Jesus ascended into heaven and decided to return to appear in front of Paul, and only Paul. Supposedly.
If a subject is too complex to pigeon hole within a simple-minded belief system, like the resurrection of Jesus, then simple-minded fanaticism, like most Christians enjoy, or intelligent open-mindedness, like you prefer, are two ways to deal with it. But the best way to deal with it, is to learn the whole truth. When you said: "That would be my view of it," to disarm fanatical believers, to stop them from arguing with you, you admitted to now knowing the whole truth. So, the truth is this, if you want to know: Our spirits pre-exist their conception, because all information is eternal, including the information, which creates our spirits. The spirits of God's children must be judged, before being re-born. Which is why it is appointed unto man, once to die, before being judged. Although, Satan's children, and spirits who live in harmony with nature, can be re-born without being judged. All living things have eternal spirits, but most plants and animals won't leave the 3rd dimension, by living in harmony with nature. So, there are three types of people on Earth: Firstly, Cain's descendants can be reborn, without being judged, because God promised not to judge them. And, as the Serpent's children, they are destined to pass through an ether singularity, through the Lake of Fire, into the timeless 3rd dimension; Secondly, people who live in harmony with nature, like Yowies, and Bigfoot, won't leave the 3rd dimension, because they are neither righteous, nor evil, like most wild animals; and Thirdly, Adam's descendants can be reborn, after being judged, to become new creations. And, as God's children, they are destined to pass through an ether singularity, through the dark tunnel, which many people experience when having Near Death Experiences, into the timeless 4th dimension. That is simplistic, because the Fractal pattern of Eternity is unlimited. So, dark spirits exist within the 3rd dimension, who belong below the timeless 3rd dimension, and light spirits exist within the 3rd and 4th dimensions, who belong in higher dimensions. For instance, even though God is only 4-dimensional, He belongs within the 10th dimension. These other condemned aspects of God's higher-dimensional awareness create the illusion of God being a Trinity of lower-dimensional spirits. Although, only God our heavenly Father is good, because the other two aspects of God's character are the reason for His condemned state. So, sure, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are also aspects of God's character, but since they're not good, they must never be worshiped. By "Jesus" I don't mean Yeshua, because Yeshua only represented Jesus. After a spirit incarnates on Earth, it will retain the appearance of its last incarnation, even after death, if the living are submitting to its authority. Spirits don't always incarnate within glowing embryos, because they are free to take possession of anyone who harmonizes their thoughts with theirs. For instance, the Baptism in the Holy Spirit refers to an angel incarnating within a repentant sinner, to send his sinful spirit to Hell for purification. Yeshua demonstrated to repentant sinners how to replace their corrupted spirits with angels, by getting Baptized in the Holy Spirit, despite his own spirit not needing to be sent to Hell for purification. That's why he rose again, because his spirit didn't belong in Hell. Eventually, all repentant sinners who replace their corrupted spirits with angels, by getting Baptized in the Holy Spirit, will rise again, as long as they don't sin willfully, after tasting the powers of the age to come. Hebrews 10:26. When Yeshua was two, he transferred his spirit to Thomas, to send his adopted twin's corrupted spirit to Hell, by getting Baptized in Jesus' divine spirit. So, Yeshua became Jesus, when Thomas essentially became Yeshua. Then, by remaining friends with Thomas, Yeshua retained his own influence enough to retain his humility, despite effectively being a member of the Trinity. When he was older, John sent Jesus' spirit to Hell, by baptizing him in the Holy Spirit... which is what started his ministry. This particular Holy Spirit was an angelic spirit from Heaven, who spend her previous three lifetimes representing the real Holy Spirit. Her name was Zipporah, and she married Moses in her second lifetime. Moses represented Jesus, by relying on Zipporah representing the Holy Spirit in her previous lifetime, to manifest enough miracles to save the Hebrews. Zipporah inspired Yeshua to perform miracles too, after effectively incarnating as Yeshua. Then, after living as Yeshua for a few years, she suffered on the Cross, before ascending to God's right-hand. So, even though she retained Yeshua's appearance, she was not Yeshua. Yeshua reclaimed Jesus' spirit from Hell, and physically rose again. Then, after proving his resurrection, he escaped to Kashmir to fulfill Buddha's prophesied return. Yeshua's nail scarred footprints were carved into his tomb in Kashmir, after dying at 120. This explains why there were two Yeshua's, after the resurrection. The one, who told the Arabs, and lost tribes of Israel, that he never suffered during his scourging and crucifixion, and the one who started Christianity, before ascending to God's right-hand. That is the simple version. So, you should quench any objections, by knowing that you don't deserve this simple explanation, let alone the whole truth, unless you are childlike, and teachable enough to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
If you think the bible is great to study now, just wait till, as a believer, you actually get to read it through eyes opened by the Holy Spirit, understanding, for the first time, what you are reading and realizing that it truly is the living word of G'd. I'm praying for the day doctor! #pashat
Every generation of Christians over the last 1990 years has asked that question, often convincing themselves that the answer is yes. But they've all been wrong. What makes you think that yours is the generation for which it will all come true?
What?? You lost me in the first 2 minutes. So Paul is the "only" first person testimony to Jesus resurrection? Seems like Thomas put his hand in Jesus' open wounds but Thomas did not "see" Jesus in the first person? Seems like most of the eleven also saw Jesus eat fish, but according to you this wasn't in the first person? Weird...
What is meant is that Paul's letters are the only pieces of writings dating to that era that give us a personal perspective from the very words of the witness. The Gospels of John and Matthew cannot be attributed with confidence to their namesake, and they are written in a story-like form in the 3rd person.
jesus is getting the only beggotton resurrection But the dead sea scrolls view of messiah incarnate is on par .. Celestial is often a physical stand in.just as ashes to ashes dust to dust your spirit is gone but this Ancient Egypt view is compartmentalized tripartite nature and nurture is there but its more than this with extra
...this hit me on my first listening: 1st Corinthians 15 "He appeared to Peter, and to the twelve, and to all the Apostles..." The "TWELVE" ? At the time(s) of jesus' FIRST appearances--barely a week after crucifiction--Judas was also dead (by his own hand)...the remaining 11 Apostles were in no frame-of-mind to have elected his replacement by then--(something a 'genuine paricipant' would know). And wouldn't the fact that Jesus' brother James was likely JHC's 'most-beloved Disciple' meanhe would Paul was just late-comer to the Parade, who ran to the front in hope of being taken for its LEADER. ...which is what he BECAME...
I returned to Mark 16:6 to check my memory on this issue. When will our academic community do a forensic analysis of the part of the passage that states, '' He is not here. See the place where they laid him! ". Whomever uttered those words upon the arrival of those people knew that they were coming and was waiting for them. Immediate to the quotation; just where would he have been laid after crucification and before internment. The passage could also be an emotive embellishment. The assistance of academics is required on the question.
@mikearchibald744 Really, you really need to know what proof needs to be brought forward. How about evidence that is corroborated by sources outside of and independent of the bible for starters 🤔
AND according to Jesus in one of the gospels, he told the folks that if anyone says they saw him in the desert or secret room they were liars. So Paul is a liar, as he himself confessed to being in his own writings.
Why is it not comparable to an Elvis sighting? Why is it on a different level? If “seeing Jesus” is him seeing a light on the road to wherever the heck he was going, Damascus? I can’t remember-how does this mean a “sighting?” If I see a lightning bolt when my grandma dies, does that mean I’ve seen my grandma? I’ve gone from being a hardcore believer to just thinking the whole thing is just silly. Some of the things the writers of the gospels have Jesus say are beautiful. The stories of Jesus being with the poor and rejected are beautiful. All this hocus pocus stuff though? Distracts from the good stuff.
So Luke, who travelled with Paul (according to Acts) and met both Philip (one of the seven deacons) and James, brother of Jesus, says in Luke Chap. 24:37-43 that the resurrected Jesus was in the flesh, and even ate a piece of broiled fish to prove it. If Paul's ideas about the resurrection (according to Tabor), didn't even convince Luke, who knew him, why should they convince us? The Gospel of Peter was rejected by the early church for being heretical, so we shouldn't rely on it.
@@Theslavedrivers I don't believe people should have the right to pick and choose which parts of the Bible they choose to believe. If Tabor wants to make the argument he does, he needs to explain Luke, because that is as clear a statement for bodily resurrection as you will find. I've come across this before with other professional theologians: they get an idea and then look for the evidence to support it, while ignoring the evidence against it.
@@laurencecox2657 "I don't believe people should have the right to pick and choose which parts of the Bible they choose to believe." - Why not? - What's wrong with that?
Paul's analogy is to Greek speaking Gentiles no? The Greek position was as you have yourself stated on a number of occasions; one of the soul being non physical, and their goal being to escape the physical realm (matter being thought evil); yes? So is it not consistent for him to use this description of clothed and not naked with people who are enmeshed in this Greek view? It's not just what he is expressing but to whom he is expressing it. I can understand your first person historicity points but do you not need to take the audiences present beliefs into consideration? You start where your audience is, and build from there. He was not after all writing to Jews, who would have had a more physical understanding of the soul, nor was he writing to us, who have the ability to see all of this information together at once. I believe 1st Corinthians is one of the books accepted as genuinely written by Paul, if we look at this passage; 1 Corinthians 9:22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. We are at least given to understand that it is Paul's practice to start from where they are and build from there. As to Paul's first hand account; it did not take place until after Jesus had ascended and been glorified. So unlike the women who saw him before he had ascended to the father, Paul's vision is first; a vision that was seen by none of his companions (meaning it was a vision), and second it occurred post ascension, so Jesus was already transformed, which he wasn't when he appeared to the women. So; is Paul giving an account here, or is he witnessing to those who would not comprehend without this these allusions to their beliefs?
Just because someone writes in the third person about an event, does not mean they were not there. This starts off with a false assumption. It gets worse. To discount resurrection because Paul is not specific about what the body looks like is another silly imposed criteria.
Actually you are wrong. The fact that the gospels are written in proper grammatical composition, Mark is a little rough but the other three are exceptional, and they are written in the third person is sufficient evidence that they were NOT eyewitness accounts of the events. In proper grammar an author NEVER writes a first person narrative in the third person viewpoint. If the author is actually a character in the narrative but is not the main subject then the author still writes in the first person. This is called the 'first person peripheral' perspective.
@@ObjectiveEthics I translate in all four gospels. John is not exceptional Greek. No one translating Greek would say John was exceptional. Luke never claims that this was his first-hand account. "just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught." Luke 1:2-4. So does this mean everything he wrote was false? Certainly NOT. Would it mean that it was not from first hand accounts? NO. Having this as criteria would negate most of the things you know as historical facts. But, where do you get this rule that they must have written in first person to be legitimate? To hold this as a rule, you must show from ancient texts of that time that it is required. When did this grammar rule come into existence? Does any violation of that rule ever exist? Can you actually cite this rule outside mythicist?
@@leehughart3160 1.) You might say the author of John does not use exceptional Greek and that's fine but what evidence do you have that proves it was actually written by any characters that are mentioned anywhere in the Bible much less the disciple named John? 2). Luke was written somewhere around 60 years after the life of Jesus at the earliest and many scholars date it into the 2nd century C.E. And if it wasn't an actual eye witness acount from the author than it would be hearsay which has very little authenticity as a stand alone testimony. Given the hearsay and several decades removed from any scenarios within Luke then it can safely be discarded as the authors creative imagination. 3.) There are numerous authors which pre-date the gospels and all of them write first person accounts in the first person perspective as do the authors who wrote during or near the time that that the gospels were written. Heroditus, Josephus and the apostle Paul are just some examples. 4). You are making a positive claim with no evidence to support your claim. If you are truly educated enough to be fluent in at least two languages then you must be smart enough to know that the burden of proof is on you. 5). The authorship of the gospels is what is known as "church tradition" not historical fact. You must know this and yet you need to believe what the church told you without any real evidence must somehow be true. Scholars believe that the church assigned the authorship to the respective gospel between the 3rd and 5th century C.E.
This sounds convincing except it lacks one consideration. Jesus' resurrection was to be unique and special, i.e. a bodily resurrection. Acts 2:29-32, "29 “Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗵𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘁, 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗛𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗹 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗹𝗲𝗳𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗛𝗮𝗱𝗲𝘀, 𝗻𝗼𝗿 𝗱𝗶𝗱 𝗛𝗶𝘀 𝗳𝗹𝗲𝘀𝗵 𝘀𝗲𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗿𝘂𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses."
Jewish prophecy is being fulfilled not Christian prophecy, Deuteronomy 30:5. 5 And the Lord, your God, will bring you to the land which your forefathers possessed, and you [too] will take possession of it, and He will do good to you, and He will make you more numerous than your forefathers. הוֶֽהֱבִֽיאֲךָ֞ יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֶ֗יךָ אֶל־הָאָ֛רֶץ אֲשֶׁר־יָֽרְשׁ֥וּ אֲבֹתֶ֖יךָ וִֽירִשְׁתָּ֑הּ וְהֵיטִֽבְךָ֥ וְהִרְבְּךָ֖ מֵֽאֲבֹתֶֽיךָ: That verse is number 5708 in the Tanakh the Jewish year 5708 is 1948 and on the 14th of May 1948, The State of Israel was established, so that is a prophecy from the Hebrew Scriptures not the Christian New Testament.
Acts 26:15-16 says Jesus APPEARED to Paul: "And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have APPEARED unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;"
The book of Acts seems like a story rather than an honest letter asking for money. Not even all the letters/epistles are considered authentic although the canonical ones are venerated as God's words instead of Paul's also Pual says some of the words/beliefs/thoughts in his letter's are his own and not God's. Odd bibliolatry. But Paul also supposedly says he was stricken blind by (during, after?) the encounter of the "blinding light" in the adventure story described in Acts. Some Christians (as the religion is false beyond measure the people are desperate for any excuse) think that Paul did not see Jesus' visage in the "timeframe" of Acts, but later must have seen Jesus somehow appear to him again, since he claims to know definitive things "from the Lord rather than from myself" as he might say. However it is even further odd, because in some of his letters about the magic of Jesus imminent arrival during the life-time of the people he was taking money from, he describes that God put a thorn on his side and thus he cannot have divine visions to share with his ex-addicts/etc like some other of his subordinates in the pyramid scheme can.
Spirits can take up fleshly bodies like the angels who were at Sodom and Gomorrah. The resurrected Jesus could appear and disappear suddenly among the disciples. And their eyes were opened and they recognised Him. And He disappeared from their sight. And as they were saying this, יהושע Himself stood in the midst of them, and said to them, “Peace to you.” Luqas (Luke) 24:31, 36 When therefore it was evening on that day, day one of the week, and when the doors were shut where the taught ones met, for fear of the Yehuḏim, יהושע came and stood in the midst, and said to them, “Peace to you.” And after eight days His taught ones were again inside, and T’oma with them. יהושע came, the doors having been shut, and He stood in the midst, and said, “Peace to you!” Yoḥanan (John) 20:19, 26
Tabor is out to lunch on this one, his view that the spiritual body cant have anything to do with the physical one is strange and there is no evidence for it. I would say there is some counter evidence in Paul but absolutely no evidence for this view, i wonder why he so badly wants to hold it.
Angels manifested bodies for themselves, pre-flood. A glorified body can take any form required. That maybe flesh, or silver surfer, or invisible. Choose the vessel and manifest it. Like Messiah.
Paul is the only first person account in the entire NT of seeing Jesus. All others are third person accounts by someone else. In fact we have the epistles from Peter, James, John and Jude in which they DON'T mention seeing the risen Jesus. In court, that would be a slam dunk for the side arguing against the risen Jesus.
Can we take into account that what we have written of them are letters or literature that were written for certain occasions or contemporary interests, not treatises on their entire beliefs or teachings on everything about the faith. James doesn't speak about the eucharist. Does that mean he knows nothing about it or doesn't believe in it? Of course not, at worst it's neutral. It's not a slam dunk at all. Now if they were writing letters specifically on what they thought the resurrection was, then yes. What we have is Paul, a few potentially related snippets about resurrection from other New Testament documents, and the gospels/Acts. Secondly, we have the church Fathers, early church writings, and ancient traditions held by our most ancient churches (which may or may not be relevant and accurate) To summarize my point, just because they don't mention it doesn't show or reflect what they believed about it.
@@youngknowledgeseeker 1) EVERYTHING in the NT is a snippet as you call it. It's a tiny set of gospels and epistles. There's a reason for that of course. It's mostly either written by Paul or dictated by Paul through others like Luke. 2) If 4 of the people closest to Jesus failed to mention the greatest event in the history of humanity which they were supposedly privy to and one person who never even met Jesus says they did, which would a court believe?
Wasn't that thing dated to the 14th century? I'm not gonna pretend carbon dating is precise but that's what a cursory search says, maybe it's some edgy antitheist nerd on Wikipedia
@@JeffreyBenzodiazepines The faulty carbon dating was errantly done from a weaved in piece of repair cloth hence the 14 century dating. If this is an important issue for you please do your research.
James Tabor: My previous comment to you was returned as an 'error'. I don't know why and I wasn't given a reason for this. I hope this comment gets through to you here. I believe you are sincere in what you say, but I also believe you are confused. The Lord Jesus was raised from among the dead on the third day. The psalmist makes it clear that His body would not see corruption. He appeared subsequently to many people, individually, in small groups, and at times to larger groups. You continually try to make the case that the resurrection is transformation, and that the body of the risen Lord was what you call 'a reconstituted corpse'. This is an ugly phrase to use. You try to compare it with the raisng of people in the Old Testament. The difference is that these individuals, like Lazarus and others in the New Testament, were raised only to die again. The scriptures refer to Christ being raised from among the dead by the Spirit in the power of an everlasting life. For you to characterise Jesus as a reconstituted corpse is totally bizarre. And, I believe, heretical. We are also told that no man has seen God and lived. This refers obviously to God in His unveiled glory. When Paul was on the Damascus road, he saw a bright light which blinded him. He did not see Christ in His full glory face to face. Neither could the apostles have been able to withstand that sight. Christ always had to veil His glory. At the same time He wanted to show His followers that He had indeed been raised from the dead. In your reply to my earlier comment to you, you said that Christ appeared in flesh and blood to the apostles in Luke's gospel. In fact in Luke 24 when the Lord appeared to the apostles, He said a ghost hath not 'flesh and bones', not 'flesh and blood'. The life of the flesh is in the blood. The life of the resurrected body is spirit. It is frequently the case in Scipture that even a small phrase can illuminate a great truth. Before I continue with this comment I am going to send it as it is now. If it is accepted, then I will continue with another comment headed by the words Part 2.
Beyond the eschatological transformation of human beings is the transfiguration of all creation. The resplendent glory of that universal vision, the redemption off all evil that ever was, the healing of the suffering of every creature, human and otherwise, that ever existed, is what's ultimately at stake in the question of whether God exists, so often reduced to the level of logical argument. Is it not the greatest gift imaginable to be able to believe, against all appearances, against all odds, in Jesus' Abba, the God of love and light, in whom there is no darkness at all? And that, accordingly, ALL shall be well.
Constantine and Paul created Christianity we know that and by knowing that, that means Christianity is not the correct religion too follow you can call him Jesus or Yeshua either way he never said here is the new testament call this Christianity and spread my word
@@JeffreyBenzodiazepines I agree we all going too die, although where we go, heaven or hell that's a conscious choice we share same fate of death, consciousnesses I disagree because of choice
@@Christopherurich33 I would define consciousness as the spirit, the image of god, as opposed to the body, that's what we all share, we don't share the same experience but we all have the divine spark. Ultimately we all end up in reunion after we purge evil from our within.
@@JeffreyBenzodiazepines What you call "consciousness as the spirit" are complex biological processes in us and most other living things. A couple of thousand years ago, that knowledge was not known as we understand it today.
Oh for goodness sakes...what wounds did thomas and the others witness?...PHYSICAL WOUNDS...to dismiss the gospels is silly and contrived in order to satisfy dr. tabor's view of paul's description. neither description need preclude the other. what's the big deal?
@@MikeJJJenkin a lot of people did accept the gospels, changed the world, and are directly linked to the freedoms that allow you to express yourself. not at all silly.
really?...hmmm...perhaps you could read the gospel of john...hint, start in the nineteenth chapter since you are obviously not familiar with the issues of which you erroneously speak
@christopherurich33 Converting could cost salvation, friend (Galatians 5:24). New converts are forced to deny Jesus (Matthew 10:33). Stay according to your birth (1 Corinthians 7:17-18). Jesus is universal to both groups (Romans 9:5, Psalm 2:7-12, Amos 9:11-12, Galatians 3:28). 👍
Trying to remember my heresies from seminary. Isn’t the idea that Jesus resurrected body wasn’t flesh and blood a heresy? Isn’t this why the creed talks about “resurrection of the body” and the life everlasting? The fact that the “resurrection of the body” thing is in there is because they had a fight about it during the councils while they were trying to make all this shit consistent. So, was Paul a heretic? This is sounding super gnostic to me. I don’t care one way or the other, because I think the whole resurrection thing is hooey, but what Dr. Tabor is talking about is not standard issue Christianity.
If we disagree with them can we call them heretics. I don’t trust the councils in the fourth century, in Rome, chaired by the Roman emperor, who has an agenda in the outcome.
This is the best talk I’ve heard by Tabor. Very glad to hear it.
I just found your channel last night what a wealth of information we are in the last seconds before the last Jubilee the kingdom of God is at hand Shalom My Friends peace be with you❤❤
Your lectures are very, very thought-provoking and reinforce some convictions that I have had for years. Thank you, doc!
Leave it to the Evangelicals to get it wrong! Thank you Dr. Tabor for your insight:-) 🧚♀
Absolutely fascinating interview. Just imagine the uproar from the Evangelical and established churches if a film or TV show actually presented the 'Resurrection' on screen as Paul and the early Jesus movement understood it. No resuscitated corpse walking about in front of a weeping Mary Magdalene, but a dead body still in a tomb appearing as a glorified transformed body to Peter. It would probably be banned.
Peter never wrote anything about seeing Jesus in person after the crucifixion. It's not in the epistles of James, Jude, or John either. The only first person account of "seeing" Jesus after his death is by Paul.
@@ji8044
Peter never wrote anything, period. Paul states quite clearly in 1Corinth 15v5, one of only seven authentic letters of Paul, that the risen Christ appeared first to Peter/Cephas. Either Paul is not aware of an earlier appearance of the risen Christ to Magdalene or it was created by Matthew in his gospel as a much later tradition after Paul's letters.
Paul's authentic letters pre-date the gospels. Mark the earliest gospel hints that if the disciples and Peter return to Galilee they will see him there. Which fits in with information found in Paul's letter to Corinth about Peter being the first to see the risen Christ. That's what the authentic information tells us, and is relatively plain to see.
@@GeldardtheGrey I am just going by the traditional attributions of the epistles of course, not vowing for their validity. The indisputable fact remains that there is no book or letter of the NT which is a first person account of seeing the risen Jesus at all except Paul. Every other account would be considered hearsay in a court of law as being from a third party. Thus there are quite literally no contemporaneous accounts of it happening, since even Paul saw Jesus many years later.
@@ji8044
Yeah, I know that!! That wasn't the point I was making in my original comment. Of course there's no first person account of the risen Christ except by Paul. Tabor makes that quite explicit in his video, and I agree, as would every scholar and historian. I'm not talking about if it was true or not, or if it happened or not, I'm just analysing the text as was written. Think you were slightly missing my point about the film and TV show too.
Where's the evidence..zero Evidence that resurrection means anything else than a dead body made alive again?
Your funny
Another exceptional interview with Dr Tabor. This channel does an excellent job and I always enjoy the interviews with Mr Tabor.
Excellent, keep it up Prof. Tabor.
I tried to introduce the idea that Paul had never met Jesus to a Christian recently. She just said, "it's (Paul's letters, Paul's experiences) in the bible, therefore it must be true." It reminded me that this is how I myself thought for 50 years. But the Bible is put together by man, who's heart is "deceitful and desperately wicked" (also in the Bible). I have realised my whole life as a practising Christian was one of resenting Paul, and endless attempts to reconcile the disparate stories and ideas and beings in the Bible.
Nearly the entire NT was either written directly by Paul or reflects his vision in the words of others.
It hinges on whether you believe him or not. No different than if you believe Ezekiel or Daniel. It’s written and that’s your judgement to make. However remember it’s no more than could have been done, Paul recorded it and couldn’t have used a video camera so this is what you have. There’s no more reason to doubt him anymore than anyone else’s supernatural experience.
Are you doing well?
I understand. I was a Christian until I was about 60. As a woman I struggled with Paul’s horrible attitude towards women. I did not like him at all.
All the time people devote to religion, money spent on Christian education and supporting churches and the way people organize their lives around this mythology is so sad. No more real than Osiris, Thor, Zeus or any other mythology. Just think if we spent that time, money and energy serving mankind how different (for the better) the world would be. Really sad how we are indoctrinated and sucked into cult thinking.
Dr. Tabor I would like to know where I can find explicit evidence that is used to argue the date of composition of the gospels. It seems to be difficult to find this information. Important considering you say Paul is earlier. Without answering for myself, I just want to know the evidence of why. Which passages show that they come from a certain date.
Thank you Dr. Tabor. This was excellent. The historical origins of Paul’s idea of an incorruptible body would be interesting to learn about.
Paul didn’t know how Jesus looked like given the fact that he never met him
Just an idea…just as Jesus raised others from the dead = in their corruptible bodies…they would still die once more, couldn’tJesus himself be raised a similar way in his corruptible body…then after he went into heaven took on his immortal body? He did say to the apostles ‘don’t touch me’ he hadn’t gone to the father yet? There are mysteries to our faith. And yes when you open that door you can throw out logic. But there are things we don’t understand and I thank you for helping me understand them but I still believe, maybe blindingly, in God’s mysteries such as the resurrection….thank you though for your analytical mind…I listen a lot!
I'm a cradle Catholic but I'm also autistic so I literally COULD NOT believe a lot of what I was taught about truth and the early Church. I felt ok though because God gave us free will to work things out for ourselves. I believe we are all fine if our intentions are good, and telling little girls that if they whistle Our Lady will cry ??!! I told my teacher at age 7 that it's impossible to cry in Heaven. I was taken to tea at Cathedral House where the Archbishop told me I was a theologian. 😂😂😂.
Leave it to the Evangelicals to get it wrong! Thank you Dr. Tabor for you insight:-) 🧚♀
I Love how Jesus addresses Saul Paulus, with "It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks" Saying Paul, you are my caged Bull, surrounded by sharp pointed sticks, I have you captured,
and there you are injuring yourself, trying to escape. Here's a thought, why don't you let ME put My yolk on you, and make yourself useful by putting your strength, and tenacity to work for me.
❤️🔥
According to church tradition it is said that these experiences similar to Paul’s vision of Christ was common among the first few generations. It is said that this is why so many were so ready to be martyrs bc the vision removes all fear of death. In fact following these experiences of being lifted up to stand before the Father that the souls longs to return so death is looked forward to. To experience the living Christ, the Word of God is more of a transformative experience. You don’t see the form of Christ. Some saints describe seeing the form of Christ but I doubt this though it’s possible that Christ will appear form ppl can recognized but this idea of transformation is much
More interesting. It can still be experienced today in fact and this has been forgotten outside the Orthodox and some Catholics.
Christ becomes you. That is the transformation and Resurection. Anything less is pointless in comparison.
Christ is God . Christ never becomes a person . Christ supplies us GRACE ...
NO ONE BECOMES GOD...LEAVE THAT TO THE TRINITY ALONE .
@@tinadavy3990 Irenaeus of Lyons: ‘He became what we are so that we might become what He is.’
Athanasius: 'The Son of God became man so that we might become God.'
Question: why are you so hung up about this issue? I thought that's what the transfiguration was about? Flesh to spiritual. I don't see the big issue.
What about Angels bodies in the OT? Wrestling with Jacob? Lot and the angels. These angelic beings all had physical bodies. What's the difference?
Agreed, made the same comment. Not sure what the big deal is...
The issue is kind of in the title.
So the mount of Transfiguration showed that Moses and Elijah were in an advanced spiritual state in the Kingdom of Heaven and could appear on Earth in physical form - a spirit in temporary physical manifestation- this would be same state Jesus appeared in behind closed doors - a spirit in a temporary physical state. That is not a revived corpse. It is a glorified spirit.
@@geoattoronto A zombie by any other name is still a zombie.
@geoattoronto but neither of them have a known corpse... so they make really bad examples.
Thank you. 🙂 Very interesting information and perspective to digest and
consider ❤.
I ❤ James how he is so open and not judging he wants us to question think consider and not jump to conclusions I guess brilliant spirit he has ,he would make a lovely disciple for yeshua
Comes down to what you choose to believe. Currently seems we are re-defining words and traditions again to suit our desires.
Apologetics in a nutshell
You don't get to 'choose' what you believe.
You're either convinced that something is true, or you aren't.
If you aren't convinced something is true, and you choose to say you believe it, that's called lying.
@robertstephenson6806 In my opinion they are all wrong, as they tend to use lies (whether they have fallen for it themselves or not) to defend their faith. If their belief was true, they wouldn't have to lie to defend it.
Dear James and Jacob,
Thank you for this interesting discussion.
--------
James, I am sure you are correct regarding your Paulus interpretation of his Jesus vision. It’s a transformation of consciousness from a physical to a spiritual stage of insight and knowledge.
Which also explains others at the time to have had the same and similar vision - but probably understood and referred it a kind differently.
(Note: I´ve also responded in a personal mail)
Best Wishes
People tell me all the time that I look like somebody they know and I ran into a guy at Home Depot that looked exactly like my cousin Mark and even sounded like he does when he talked but it wasn’t him! This is one other natural possibility of the”sightings”.
I think that is a very interesting theory!
Do you have an opinion concerning Diotrephes?
People tend to ignore writings or archaeological evidence that does not fit in with their particular theology. Case in point: our friend, Dr. Tabor, ignores the miraculous images of a crucified corpse that are on the Turin Shroud.
The Turin shroud has been proven to date from the 13th century when plenty of forgeries were sold to the public.
@@cathyallen3967no actually it has not the sample that they tested was a repair that was made in the 12th century the have not tested the actual shroud
Mormonism was started in the 19th century by a dozen guys who swore they saw some stuff.
Yikes, right?
Excellent discourse. I never heard it explained this way. Makes a lot of sense.🙂
Thank you.
And, yet, Mark says that Mary Magdalene was the 1st to see Jesus after He rose from the dead.
Mark's story is what the others are all based on. And it as well is a lie, Mary a devout Jewish woman wouldn't go to a man's tomb, not even her son.
“Mark says.” Mark wasn’t there. Hearsay.
Yeah keep praising this guy👌🏼
Here is a humorous side note. Play this at 1.75 speed and Dr James talks as fast as Dr Richard Carrier does normally.
Interestingly - Elvis P. was a devout Christian. His life became complicated by early fame and fortune. He readily shared his good fortune with family and friends. Wouldn't be surprised to see him with the Disciples .
WHAT?
No he wasn't lol
@@samuelflippin1890 "Elvis was a devout Christian who prayed before shows, reveals stepbrother. While his fans worshipped him as a rock'n'roll deity, Elvis Presley would say a prayer before going on stage, reading the Bible and looking to God for guidance in everything he did, his stepbrother has recalled."
That and his 14 gospel albums should be a big clue for the ignorant.
@@Eet_Mia I'll take what his close family members say about him as opposed to what some random commenter on youtube thinks without any reference whatsoever. Were you even alive when he was performing?
@@Eet_Mia Most people who use the term "boomer" are ignorant millennials or gen Z that don't even know who a boomer actually is. Elvis was greatest generation, so what does that make you?
I don't know how Paul is a first-hand witness to the Resurrection, he doesn't claim to have physically met Jesus, just to have had a vision of Jesus. Anyone can have a vision of anyone or anything that their mind is inclined to "see."
I see that Dr. Tabor says that others made that point way back then (see from about 27:30).
Does Paul state that?
Paul says that Jesus "appeared" to him, not that he touched Jesus or that Jesus was then necessarily anything physical. In acts, there is reference to a blinding light, but that is about Paul, not written by Paul, so it's not as authoritative.@@geoattoronto
We will all die. We rise in soul again for the umpteenth time. No body needed.
Why so serious Jacob? Gotta smile my friend.
Wonderful video! Paul was "onto it".
Where does Paul write of having encountered the risen Jesus of the Gospels? Paul generally speaks of the Christ (1Cor 15) or the Lord (1Thes 4:17), but seldom of any Jesus - much less of having encountered him in the flesh. Where?
That's highly inaccurate.
1 Corinthians 15:31
But dud Paul actually SEE Jesus resurrect? I don’t think so.
But I get the point. Nobody saw him resurrect.
And the Bible never said anyone did. They saw him after He resurrected. Sometimes these attackers, attack things that the Bible never claimed.
Did Paul ever say clearl how he got all his theology and why he is so confident?
positively riveting
No I agree with a lot of what dr. Tabor says, it's important to note that he's simply using the typical attack Paul argument style that scene within the Jewish community. The very mad at Paul because Paul brought Gentiles into the synagogues... they feel betrayed
It's not an attack of it was a Jewish heresy. It was legitimate criticism. Hey dude you're messing up our religion!
@@subcitizen2012 said which sect of Judaism...
Correct me if I am wrong but weren't those still the days of multiple tribal gods? In those 3 years where Jesus was working his miracles, how much of them would popularly be ascribed to the one God, how much to all kinds of idols. How many potential scribes and witnesses would have existed in those crowds, how many scribes would have gone near the tomb before and after ascension, how many would have been in the frame of mind of making a written record right there and then? How was anything recorded? Timely, on the heel of events taking place? On the day? Aren't there a lot of social and cultural, as well as demographic aspects that affect what was recorded or not. In other words, what events during those years as well as before and after were in fact NOT recorded (until they were much later) and why not? The history of those moments needs to be closely examined from all possible viewpoints, not just in terms of the texts actually available to us. A bit like Eugenia Scarvelis does so well in The Crucifixion and the Glory of God, where she focuses on the events and circumstances leading up to and from this event. I would like to know more about the literate people in those days, their proportion in the population and access to the writing task (i.e., tools, control & oversight) and how easy/difficult it was for them to record anything at all given the circumstances they found themselves in (incl politically, socially, vis a vis other groups and threats, overall frame of mind and world view), and also where they would have been found in relation to Jesus, and so on. Who can help? Certainly not Bart Ehrman.
Is Paul saying "second" Adam or "last" Adam?
awesome awesome thanks!
Richard Carrier was surprised how little indication there is in Paul's letters for physical existance of Jezus. See his book "the historicity of Jezus". Remember Paul's letters are the oldest biblical documents.
For a long time I puzzled over why Paul never says anything about the ascension. he said Jesus was "raised," then was "seen" by a series of people ending with himself (and that's all he says, "was seen by" no details as to when or where or exactly what). He never says anything about an ascension occurring between appearances. he never gives any indication that what he saw was not the same as what the others before him saw. I used to think Paul was sort of concealing that until it finally dawned on me that a much better explanation is simply that for Paul, the ascension and resurrection were the same thing. Paul did not know anything about earthly appearances. Those are clearly late developing stories and you can see them developing right before your eyes in the Gospels following Mark. The original belief was only that Jesus had gone straight up to Heaven. The physical interludes on Earth were added later, probably to battle Docetic beliefs. Luke even tacks an extra forty days onto the interlude in Acts to give Jesus time to teach the disciples proto-Catholic theology. In Luke's Gospel, Jesus ascends on Easter Sunday. In Acts it's forty days later.
I don't even think the perceived apotheosis was particularly important to the disciples. The same had happened with other prophets like Elijah and Moses, not to mention countless Pagan heroes both real and mythical. It was an honor, but didn't make anybody into God. It was Paul who seems to have latched onto the idea that Jesus was the "firstfruit" of the general resurrection of ALL the dead. I don't think the disciples had any such view of Jesus or any view of the Messiah as a redeemer of sins, certainly not for Gentiles. Paul really transformed the definition of "Messiah."
I find it a little ironic that Christians back in the time used the symbol "fish" as a secret code to signal to each other to know they are disciples of Christ and yet so many people do not go vegan thinking that Jesus ate fish. Would you consider that the secret to the kingdom of heaven is the "fish" a stumbling block to separate people. sorry about the grammar
The "fish" might be reference to Jesus' prediction of the Sign of Jonah, which was misinterpreted by the ancient church fathers to be his resurrection.
My understanding is that when Jesus first rose and the tomb was empty, it was a glorified body. Basically it was noth physical and spiritual at the same time. Why? He could eat with people (physical) Thomas could touch him (physical). He could appear in their midst (spiritual) he could take different forms ( scripture records instances where he wasn't quite recognized so his features were different. This implies something different than just a plain physical body aka spiritual).
Interesting indeed . I have to say with all the references and nuances given , james seems to be into something for sure. I tend to agree with his conclusions
Paul said, be ye transformed by the renewing of your minds. He is talking about having the same mind that was in Christ. God said when I go to prepare my jewels. He also said in John, as the vessels of clay are being broken. What this is referencing here is what will be left in man is what the Spirit has purified, minus the impurities of our motivations, of ourselves, of the things that do not stand up to the tryings of God's fire. (I just made that a word, lol.) What Peter, James, and John saw at the transfiguration, is the same thing that Paul is telling us, as he also saw, was after the sanctification, purification, and perfection of our purging out of the sinful inner man, man of ruin, or son of perdition, or man of sin, Jesus will reveal himself to us in his glory, in his kingdom. We do not have to die to see this or experience it. The Greek Orthodox refers to this as theoria, and Wesley saw it as sanctification, who also was a sort of believer in mysticism. The 12 patriarchs give a layout of the 7 errors given to man that must be overcome, and they are pretty accurate. Each prophet, Adam & Eve, all believed God's prophecy of the seed of the woman who would come to trample the serpent's head. That is how they obtained salvation. That seed is Jesus. This plan has always been a plan of action that God had since before the beginning of man. He knew man was going to fall. He is omniscient. It's the same reason that Abraham, Moses, and all of the other prophets that were being kept in Abraham's bosom were released from there at the 3 days of death in the tomb when Jesus was given the keys to the kingdom, also of death, hell, and the grave. He says in Revelation that he will give us the keys to the kingdom. These keys come from God. He chose to pour himself into a man to fulfill his word. Since the devil usurped the kingdom through man, God restored it back to himself through man. As it stands, until the day of judgement, the devil still has certain control over some of God's creation. He tells us if his spirit is not in us, then we are none of his. This spirit can only be poured out on us through our faith in Christ, because he is the sender of it to us. Since it is filling him and he is full of it, and by it, I mean, God's spirit, it purifies us by coming into us through Christ. The work is left to us to rid ourselves of what the devil put in there. Actually, Jesus sets us free from it when we strive to abolish it by putting the spirit in control over it. It holds on for a while. It is a process. What Paul is saying is, wait for it! Get better! Do your best! Keep it under control, and try not to sin! Don't sin by looking at Jesus' example every second of your life. Love God with your whole heart, strength, and mind. Get there! Paul said we are seated in heavenly places with Christ Jesus. He isn't talking about after we die. He is talking about when you have prepared your heart and you are right in the sight of God, when God says you're ready and you have overcame, then he will welcome you into the throne room where Jesus is. Once you see that, you don't care anything about this world except trying to help others realize the path you took to get there is through Christ. If you want to get to God, you have to go through Jesus, because he is who God chose to reveal himself to us through. You are glorified when you see Jesus in the throne room in his glory and splendor brighter than the shining sun that is exuding from him in his whiter than snow garment wearing a golden crown of righteousness. Paul is trying to explain this in not too hard of words to understand, it is just that we look at it from a fleshly existence rather than a spiritual one. Will Jesus return? Yes he will, with his Saints, but the coming of the Lord can and does also mean that when we purify our hearts and see him in his kingdom when he reveals himself to us, that his coming will be a surprise to us when we find ourselves there so he can complete the work within us to rid us of the last layer of the sinful inner man. He takes us off the throne of our own heart, frees us from the devil's captivity and bondage, and takes his rightful place in his kingdom. We are pillars there, what we inherit is him in his glory forever and ever bestowed with the glory of God. They are one because God has poured himself into him and placed him there to guard us against the devil. Our righteous spirit that is separated and present there is different than the spirit of the sinful inner man. That is something the devil made in us that cannot be present to live within our newly created vessel made by God. I think we are of 2 opposing vessels, and the unrighteous one must be broken and slain. Metaphorically, whatever happens to this fleshly body is of no consequence except that we must do the work for our spirit to get there and we must purge the unrighteous spirit out of us in this fleshly body. That is it's purpose. To decide the destination of where the spirit will go and which one will win rule over the place of our eternal existence. We must decide if we are all in for God or not. Because we're in this thing to win and be victorious. We must overcome to gain the prize. The prize is being with Jesus in his kingdom that God conferred to him where we can be one with God through the righteous work of Christ. It becomes a little clearer in 2 Thessalonians Chapter 2, Hebrews, and Romans using the Greek Interlinear to English translation in logosapostolic. www.logosapostolic.org/bibles/interlinear_nt.htm Jesus prayed to the Father at the last supper and said, Father glorify me. I have kept these that you have given me and not one has been lost except for the son of perdition. Even though, we understand that to be Judas, was it really just Judas? Could it have been the process of the work he was doing in the hearts of his disciples to show them the way to get to him. He said to get there, and the way you know. What is that way? It is through him and what he taught us about getting there.
Remarkable talk!!!
Did Mary Magdalene see him also ? Or no ? Thanks
only paul wrote it tho
Quagmire
Smoke and mirrors
Were almost home
Home is simply what really is
Honestly ❤️💜🙏
THINK about it!!! THEY get to HAVE their "treasure" RIGHT NOW, RIGHT HERE ON EARTH YET WE, the "DISCIPLES" have to WAIT until we are DEAD?????????? LIES, LIES,LIES!!!!!!!!!!!
Paul was blinded by a light. Thomas touched the risen master. So I don't what they're talking about. I do think Paul's writings include words spoken by Jesus from an unknown source.
I love Jesus - He is a real person who lived, died and rose again. He is my Lord, Savior ! His Second coming will occur 69 weeks of years AFTER Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent ordered the ruined city walls to be rebuilt in the year 1535 AD. This is Daniel 9:25 being fulfilled a second time. Get ready to see the New City Jerusalem in the sky - and many will drop dead on the spot !
Just a quick question , if Paul is the earliest source of Jesus's resurrection? How do we come to this conclusion? If Paul letters are written before gospels, this does not mean he's the earliest source... my take is you can know something and not record it down ... in written let's say disciplines witnessed resurrection but did not record it then ... and Paul comes later in the picture and record things .. so I will say disciplines are earliest witnesses .. because they were illiterate.. Paul other had literate... so let's consider that ..
read yr testament, reallllly.
Good point.
@tinadavy3990 reading new testament does not help as the order is questionable... you miss my point Paul's letter are earlier source..
What people are not realizing is that the 'gospels' were not written by Christ's disciples, they were written by the Pisos Flavian family, mostly by Calpernius Piso. His name appears seven times in Mark, ten times in Revelation. The scriptures are speaking in METAPHOR and SYMBOL, not literally. This is what scholars and researchers are not understanding, and as long as they continue clinging to incorrect literal reading, the meaning will never be apprehended. Yeshua never "resurrected", since he never died, he had a Near Death experience. He was taken by Joseph and other Essenes to a previously agreed upon place and healed. When the scriptures speak of his (Christ's) 'resurrection', it is speaking of "Jesus Christ", not Yeshua. The two are separate and distinct from one another. Scripture is speaking of "Jesus Christ", the integration of the divine into the carnal mind. The gospels were telling this encoded 'story' of the awakening of the Christ within the individual. They were not a history of Yeshua, and followed an ancient 'messiah' template used in ancient lore for at least sixteen world saviors. Kersey Graves explains this in his book "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors". This was an ancient model which was applied because of the spiritual dynamic surrounding a "christed" figure. Born in a cave of a "virgin" (spiritually clean), rebelling against authority, having 12 disciples, healing the sick and ill, dying on a tree, and rising three days later. This "story" is found in many legends of "god-men" who came to help and inspire mankind. "Greater works than these shall you also do', yet people do not take Yeshua at his word. This will likely never be accepted by the dogmatists, but researchers will find this to be true. I get tired of trying to explain this to dogmatic literalists, it's like they are more interested in the story ABOUT Yeshua than his actual religion. No wonder the churches have no real revelation. www.henryhdavis.com/post/the-gospel-of-mark-why-does-the-name-piso-as-in-calpurnius-piso-appear-within-key-statements Neville Goddard explains the figure of 'Jesus Christ' (not Yeshua): th-cam.com/video/RRzc0rVODog/w-d-xo.htmlsi=-ygybJ4uFXwrt4R3
Wow you are really confused
thank you, Dr. Tabor. I think everything what you have told about the transformation (of a man, Jesus, Paul, anybody reaching that level) would fit if you have a look at this from the point of the life of the very enlightened women of that time who simply won against that "world of restrictions and low soul understandings" of that time. She was the teacher of those "Paul's" ideas that you very well understood. All about Jesus, what had been written and taught, when you take it through the eye lentil of "Mary"= the woman, would be understood finally well as the description of her life, of her way of the transformation and exodus from her suffering. I wish I would be able to explain it more specifically. Just pls, at least for a while, try with your very good eye and senses to have this insight in it and I am sure you will see more.
The great angel: Exodus 23:21. "MY NAME IS IN HIM"
Who is this?
Okay, not Jesus.
But _who_ is it?
He has good Information but if Paul was making the resurrection up don't you think the Jerusalem community would have shoot his views down publicly .The humiliation of being crucified the way christos was would have left no reason for his followers to keep his memory alive unless the resurrection happened in some shape or form.
Well, I agree. Paul is speaking of an inward transformation. In fact, all of Scripture is about inward transformation.
Circumcise your hearts!
I desire compassion, not sacrifice!
Love God who is inside of you, which is the foundation for: Love God who is outside of you, your neighbor. This is what Jesus means by saying, Be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect. Love fulfills the law. It is the good tree producing good fruit.
In the parable, the ones on the right were righteous and are able to enter into the kingdom of heaven. They were righteous, he explains, because they lived their love toward their neighbor. It proceeded from a transformed heart. It's hypocrisy that is deplored, which is an expression of duality. The speaker touched upon that, no more this and that, all becomes one.
This is fundamentally a message to individuals. Only transformed individuals can create transformed societies.
It's really unfortunate what too many Christians transform into. Circumcised hearts and minds indeed.
@subcitizen2012
If you don't see the fruits, then there's no ROOT.
I told one Christian, you know the words but you lack understanding. The verbiage is the conditioning, it's not true knowledge.
Spiritual body is the etheric body, imo and studies. Christ is in etheric, now close to us, truthful discussion, thank you.
Glory glory.. glory.....
Why?
It's a cohon (sp)
Success isn't glorious in the physical realm. IMO
It's inverted geometrically
Not only was it (supposedly) a resurrected Jesus, but also a post-ascension Jesus. So Jesus ascended into heaven and decided to return to appear in front of Paul, and only Paul. Supposedly.
If a subject is too complex to pigeon hole within a simple-minded belief system, like the resurrection of Jesus, then simple-minded fanaticism, like most Christians enjoy, or intelligent open-mindedness, like you prefer, are two ways to deal with it. But the best way to deal with it, is to learn the whole truth. When you said: "That would be my view of it," to disarm fanatical believers, to stop them from arguing with you, you admitted to now knowing the whole truth.
So, the truth is this, if you want to know: Our spirits pre-exist their conception, because all information is eternal, including the information, which creates our spirits. The spirits of God's children must be judged, before being re-born. Which is why it is appointed unto man, once to die, before being judged. Although, Satan's children, and spirits who live in harmony with nature, can be re-born without being judged. All living things have eternal spirits, but most plants and animals won't leave the 3rd dimension, by living in harmony with nature. So, there are three types of people on Earth: Firstly, Cain's descendants can be reborn, without being judged, because God promised not to judge them. And, as the Serpent's children, they are destined to pass through an ether singularity, through the Lake of Fire, into the timeless 3rd dimension; Secondly, people who live in harmony with nature, like Yowies, and Bigfoot, won't leave the 3rd dimension, because they are neither righteous, nor evil, like most wild animals; and Thirdly, Adam's descendants can be reborn, after being judged, to become new creations. And, as God's children, they are destined to pass through an ether singularity, through the dark tunnel, which many people experience when having Near Death Experiences, into the timeless 4th dimension. That is simplistic, because the Fractal pattern of Eternity is unlimited. So, dark spirits exist within the 3rd dimension, who belong below the timeless 3rd dimension, and light spirits exist within the 3rd and 4th dimensions, who belong in higher dimensions. For instance, even though God is only 4-dimensional, He belongs within the 10th dimension. These other condemned aspects of God's higher-dimensional awareness create the illusion of God being a Trinity of lower-dimensional spirits. Although, only God our heavenly Father is good, because the other two aspects of God's character are the reason for His condemned state. So, sure, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are also aspects of God's character, but since they're not good, they must never be worshiped. By "Jesus" I don't mean Yeshua, because Yeshua only represented Jesus.
After a spirit incarnates on Earth, it will retain the appearance of its last incarnation, even after death, if the living are submitting to its authority. Spirits don't always incarnate within glowing embryos, because they are free to take possession of anyone who harmonizes their thoughts with theirs. For instance, the Baptism in the Holy Spirit refers to an angel incarnating within a repentant sinner, to send his sinful spirit to Hell for purification. Yeshua demonstrated to repentant sinners how to replace their corrupted spirits with angels, by getting Baptized in the Holy Spirit, despite his own spirit not needing to be sent to Hell for purification. That's why he rose again, because his spirit didn't belong in Hell. Eventually, all repentant sinners who replace their corrupted spirits with angels, by getting Baptized in the Holy Spirit, will rise again, as long as they don't sin willfully, after tasting the powers of the age to come. Hebrews 10:26.
When Yeshua was two, he transferred his spirit to Thomas, to send his adopted twin's corrupted spirit to Hell, by getting Baptized in Jesus' divine spirit. So, Yeshua became Jesus, when Thomas essentially became Yeshua. Then, by remaining friends with Thomas, Yeshua retained his own influence enough to retain his humility, despite effectively being a member of the Trinity. When he was older, John sent Jesus' spirit to Hell, by baptizing him in the Holy Spirit... which is what started his ministry. This particular Holy Spirit was an angelic spirit from Heaven, who spend her previous three lifetimes representing the real Holy Spirit. Her name was Zipporah, and she married Moses in her second lifetime. Moses represented Jesus, by relying on Zipporah representing the Holy Spirit in her previous lifetime, to manifest enough miracles to save the Hebrews. Zipporah inspired Yeshua to perform miracles too, after effectively incarnating as Yeshua. Then, after living as Yeshua for a few years, she suffered on the Cross, before ascending to God's right-hand. So, even though she retained Yeshua's appearance, she was not Yeshua. Yeshua reclaimed Jesus' spirit from Hell, and physically rose again. Then, after proving his resurrection, he escaped to Kashmir to fulfill Buddha's prophesied return. Yeshua's nail scarred footprints were carved into his tomb in Kashmir, after dying at 120. This explains why there were two Yeshua's, after the resurrection. The one, who told the Arabs, and lost tribes of Israel, that he never suffered during his scourging and crucifixion, and the one who started Christianity, before ascending to God's right-hand. That is the simple version. So, you should quench any objections, by knowing that you don't deserve this simple explanation, let alone the whole truth, unless you are childlike, and teachable enough to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
Resurrection as a sort of ghost is what we were taught as protestants. So nothing new here. I'm still an atheist these days
Never die.
If you think the bible is great to study now, just wait till, as a believer, you actually get to read it through eyes opened by the Holy Spirit, understanding, for the first time, what you are reading and realizing that it truly is the living word of G'd.
I'm praying for the day doctor!
#pashat
Jesus says
The True worshippers
worship the Father
John 4:23
By this account, all Christians are heretics.
Plus "shall have no other gods before me"
Could the transformend age to come be the age we're living in now ?
Every generation of Christians over the last 1990 years has asked that question, often convincing themselves that the answer is yes. But they've all been wrong. What makes you think that yours is the generation for which it will all come true?
Maybe Paul based his remarks in his near death experience.
What?? You lost me in the first 2 minutes. So Paul is the "only" first person testimony to Jesus resurrection? Seems like Thomas put his hand in Jesus' open wounds but Thomas did not "see" Jesus in the first person? Seems like most of the eleven also saw Jesus eat fish, but according to you this wasn't in the first person? Weird...
What is meant is that Paul's letters are the only pieces of writings dating to that era that give us a personal perspective from the very words of the witness. The Gospels of John and Matthew cannot be attributed with confidence to their namesake, and they are written in a story-like form in the 3rd person.
jesus is getting the only beggotton resurrection
But the dead sea scrolls view of messiah incarnate is on par ..
Celestial is often a physical stand in.just as ashes to ashes dust to dust your spirit is gone but this
Ancient Egypt view is compartmentalized tripartite nature and nurture is there but its more than this with extra
Proofs exists about an earlier alternative ending of Mark?
...this hit me on my first listening:
1st Corinthians 15
"He appeared to Peter, and to the twelve, and to all the Apostles..."
The "TWELVE" ? At the time(s) of jesus' FIRST appearances--barely a week after crucifiction--Judas was also dead (by his own hand)...the remaining 11 Apostles were in no frame-of-mind to have elected his replacement by then--(something a 'genuine paricipant' would know).
And wouldn't the fact that Jesus' brother James was likely JHC's 'most-beloved Disciple' meanhe would
Paul was just late-comer to the Parade, who ran to the front in hope of being taken for its LEADER.
...which is what he BECAME...
I returned to Mark 16:6 to check my memory on this issue. When will our academic community do a forensic analysis of the part of the passage that states, '' He is not here. See the place where they laid him! ". Whomever uttered those words upon the arrival of those people knew that they were coming and was waiting for them. Immediate to the quotation; just where would he have been laid after crucification and before internment. The passage could also be an emotive embellishment. The assistance of academics is required on the question.
Because the Bible told me so.......is not evidence 🙄
What is an academic supposed to offer on that? THere are lots of religious studies academics.
were the words forensic analysis in the original comment?@@mikearchibald744
@mikearchibald744
Really, you really need to know what proof needs to be brought forward.
How about evidence that is corroborated by sources outside of and independent of the bible for starters 🤔
Thomas, I do get into this in my video on the empty tomb in the Death and Afterlife series. Check it out and see what you think.
AND according to Jesus in one of the gospels, he told the folks that if anyone says they saw him in the desert or secret room they were liars. So Paul is a liar, as he himself confessed to being in his own writings.
Why is it not comparable to an Elvis sighting? Why is it on a different level? If “seeing Jesus” is him seeing a light on the road to wherever the heck he was going, Damascus? I can’t remember-how does this mean a “sighting?” If I see a lightning bolt when my grandma dies, does that mean I’ve seen my grandma? I’ve gone from being a hardcore believer to just thinking the whole thing is just silly. Some of the things the writers of the gospels have Jesus say are beautiful. The stories of Jesus being with the poor and rejected are beautiful. All this hocus pocus stuff though? Distracts from the good stuff.
Jesus and Elvis... realllllly?
Never the twain shall meet. LOL
So Luke, who travelled with Paul (according to Acts) and met both Philip (one of the seven deacons) and James, brother of Jesus, says in Luke Chap. 24:37-43 that the resurrected Jesus was in the flesh, and even ate a piece of broiled fish to prove it. If Paul's ideas about the resurrection (according to Tabor), didn't even convince Luke, who knew him, why should they convince us? The Gospel of Peter was rejected by the early church for being heretical, so we shouldn't rely on it.
Root of 'heretical' just means 'able to choose' - You don't want people to have this ability??
@@Theslavedrivers I don't believe people should have the right to pick and choose which parts of the Bible they choose to believe. If Tabor wants to make the argument he does, he needs to explain Luke, because that is as clear a statement for bodily resurrection as you will find. I've come across this before with other professional theologians: they get an idea and then look for the evidence to support it, while ignoring the evidence against it.
@@laurencecox2657 "I don't believe people should have the right to pick and choose which parts of the Bible they choose to believe." - Why not? - What's wrong with that?
Revived corpse is NOT the resurrection.
@@geoattoronto I am talking about Jesus' resurrection not Lazarus.
Paul's analogy is to Greek speaking Gentiles no? The Greek position was as you have yourself stated on a number of occasions; one of the soul being non physical, and their goal being to escape the physical realm (matter being thought evil); yes? So is it not consistent for him to use this description of clothed and not naked with people who are enmeshed in this Greek view?
It's not just what he is expressing but to whom he is expressing it. I can understand your first person historicity points but do you not need to take the audiences present beliefs into consideration? You start where your audience is, and build from there. He was not after all writing to Jews, who would have had a more physical understanding of the soul, nor was he writing to us, who have the ability to see all of this information together at once.
I believe 1st Corinthians is one of the books accepted as genuinely written by Paul, if we look at this passage; 1 Corinthians 9:22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.
We are at least given to understand that it is Paul's practice to start from where they are and build from there.
As to Paul's first hand account; it did not take place until after Jesus had ascended and been glorified. So unlike the women who saw him before he had ascended to the father, Paul's vision is first; a vision that was seen by none of his companions (meaning it was a vision), and second it occurred post ascension, so Jesus was already transformed, which he wasn't when he appeared to the women.
So; is Paul giving an account here, or is he witnessing to those who would not comprehend without this these allusions to their beliefs?
Just because someone writes in the third person about an event, does not mean they were not there. This starts off with a false assumption. It gets worse. To discount resurrection because Paul is not specific about what the body looks like is another silly imposed criteria.
Actually you are wrong. The fact that the gospels are written in proper grammatical composition, Mark is a little rough but the other three are exceptional, and they are written in the third person is sufficient evidence that they were NOT eyewitness accounts of the events.
In proper grammar an author NEVER writes a first person narrative in the third person viewpoint. If the author is actually a character in the narrative but is not the main subject then the author still writes in the first person. This is called the 'first person peripheral' perspective.
@@ObjectiveEthics I translate in all four gospels. John is not exceptional Greek. No one translating Greek would say John was exceptional.
Luke never claims that this was his first-hand account. "just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word,
it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus;
so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught." Luke 1:2-4. So does this mean everything he wrote was false? Certainly NOT. Would it mean that it was not from first hand accounts? NO. Having this as criteria would negate most of the things you know as historical facts.
But, where do you get this rule that they must have written in first person to be legitimate? To hold this as a rule, you must show from ancient texts of that time that it is required.
When did this grammar rule come into existence? Does any violation of that rule ever exist? Can you actually cite this rule outside mythicist?
@@leehughart3160 1.) You might say the author of John does not use exceptional Greek and that's fine but what evidence do you have that proves it was actually written by any characters that are mentioned anywhere in the Bible much less the disciple named John?
2). Luke was written somewhere around 60 years after the life of Jesus at the earliest and many scholars date it into the 2nd century C.E. And if it wasn't an actual eye witness acount from the author than it would be hearsay which has very little authenticity as a stand alone testimony. Given the hearsay and several decades removed from any scenarios within Luke then it can safely be discarded as the authors creative imagination.
3.) There are numerous authors which pre-date the gospels and all of them write first person accounts in the first person perspective as do the authors who wrote during or near the time that that the gospels were written. Heroditus, Josephus and the apostle Paul are just some examples.
4). You are making a positive claim with no evidence to support your claim. If you are truly educated enough to be fluent in at least two languages then you must be smart enough to know that the burden of proof is on you.
5). The authorship of the gospels is what is known as "church tradition" not historical fact. You must know this and yet you need to believe what the church told you without any real evidence must somehow be true. Scholars believe that the church assigned the authorship to the respective gospel between the 3rd and 5th century C.E.
This sounds convincing except it lacks one consideration. Jesus' resurrection was to be unique and special, i.e. a bodily resurrection. Acts 2:29-32, "29 “Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗵𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘁, 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗛𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗹 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗹𝗲𝗳𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗛𝗮𝗱𝗲𝘀, 𝗻𝗼𝗿 𝗱𝗶𝗱 𝗛𝗶𝘀 𝗳𝗹𝗲𝘀𝗵 𝘀𝗲𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗿𝘂𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses."
My mind: 🤯
Meanwhile Judeo-Christian prophesies are being fulfilled.
Jewish prophecy is being fulfilled not Christian prophecy, Deuteronomy 30:5. 5 And the Lord, your God, will bring you to the land which your forefathers possessed, and you [too] will take possession of it, and He will do good to you, and He will make you more numerous than your forefathers. הוֶֽהֱבִֽיאֲךָ֞ יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֶ֗יךָ אֶל־הָאָ֛רֶץ אֲשֶׁר־יָֽרְשׁ֥וּ אֲבֹתֶ֖יךָ וִֽירִשְׁתָּ֑הּ וְהֵיטִֽבְךָ֥ וְהִרְבְּךָ֖ מֵֽאֲבֹתֶֽיךָ: That verse is number 5708 in the Tanakh the Jewish year 5708 is 1948 and on the 14th of May 1948, The State of Israel was established, so that is a prophecy from the Hebrew Scriptures not the Christian New Testament.
😂😂😂😂😂
"Judeo christian"...😂 do you mean 2 contradicting religions? Judaism does not agree on any of that😂
Leys lets have a clothing down Sales Sails away. The golden Hinde. X
What?
Acts 26:15-16 says Jesus APPEARED to Paul:
"And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have APPEARED unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;"
The book of Acts seems like a story rather than an honest letter asking for money. Not even all the letters/epistles are considered authentic although the canonical ones are venerated as God's words instead of Paul's also Pual says some of the words/beliefs/thoughts in his letter's are his own and not God's. Odd bibliolatry. But Paul also supposedly says he was stricken blind by (during, after?) the encounter of the "blinding light" in the adventure story described in Acts. Some Christians (as the religion is false beyond measure the people are desperate for any excuse) think that Paul did not see Jesus' visage in the "timeframe" of Acts, but later must have seen Jesus somehow appear to him again, since he claims to know definitive things "from the Lord rather than from myself" as he might say. However it is even further odd, because in some of his letters about the magic of Jesus imminent arrival during the life-time of the people he was taking money from, he describes that God put a thorn on his side and thus he cannot have divine visions to share with his ex-addicts/etc like some other of his subordinates in the pyramid scheme can.
Spirits can take up fleshly bodies like the angels who were at Sodom and Gomorrah.
The resurrected Jesus could appear and disappear suddenly among the disciples.
And their eyes were opened and they recognised Him. And He disappeared from their sight. And as they were saying this, יהושע Himself stood in the midst of them, and said to them, “Peace to you.”
Luqas (Luke) 24:31, 36
When therefore it was evening on that day, day one of the week, and when the doors were shut where the taught ones met, for fear of the Yehuḏim, יהושע came and stood in the midst, and said to them, “Peace to you.” And after eight days His taught ones were again inside, and T’oma with them. יהושע came, the doors having been shut, and He stood in the midst, and said, “Peace to you!”
Yoḥanan (John) 20:19, 26
Good call!
Verifiable sources? If it were true it would be undeniable brother. It's okay, you don't have to believe in the magical past, and neither do we.
Tabor is out to lunch on this one, his view that the spiritual body cant have anything to do with the physical one is strange and there is no evidence for it. I would say there is some counter evidence in Paul but absolutely no evidence for this view, i wonder why he so badly wants to hold it.
In Revelations, John reports seeing him.
Every religious belief in the world. Was written by men that had an agenda to bring into its final form.
Yes, but ... so what?
Angels manifested bodies for themselves, pre-flood. A glorified body can take any form required. That maybe flesh, or silver surfer, or invisible. Choose the vessel and manifest it. Like Messiah.
Paul is the only first person account in the entire NT of seeing Jesus. All others are third person accounts by someone else. In fact we have the epistles from Peter, James, John and Jude in which they DON'T mention seeing the risen Jesus. In court, that would be a slam dunk for the side arguing against the risen Jesus.
Can we take into account that what we have written of them are letters or literature that were written for certain occasions or contemporary interests, not treatises on their entire beliefs or teachings on everything about the faith. James doesn't speak about the eucharist. Does that mean he knows nothing about it or doesn't believe in it? Of course not, at worst it's neutral.
It's not a slam dunk at all. Now if they were writing letters specifically on what they thought the resurrection was, then yes. What we have is Paul, a few potentially related snippets about resurrection from other New Testament documents, and the gospels/Acts. Secondly, we have the church Fathers, early church writings, and ancient traditions held by our most ancient churches (which may or may not be relevant and accurate)
To summarize my point, just because they don't mention it doesn't show or reflect what they believed about it.
@@youngknowledgeseeker 1) EVERYTHING in the NT is a snippet as you call it. It's a tiny set of gospels and epistles. There's a reason for that of course. It's mostly either written by Paul or dictated by Paul through others like Luke. 2) If 4 of the people closest to Jesus failed to mention the greatest event in the history of humanity which they were supposedly privy to and one person who never even met Jesus says they did, which would a court believe?
@@youngknowledgeseeker I love reading your comments man, you make a lot of sense
@@youngknowledgeseeker That wasn't me who complimented you, I corrected you.
@@JeffreyBenzodiazepines Thank you, I try to be as honest, informed and objective as I can be.
Shroud of Turin is our receipt. The carbon dating was taken on the area of repair.
Wasn't that thing dated to the 14th century? I'm not gonna pretend carbon dating is precise but that's what a cursory search says, maybe it's some edgy antitheist nerd on Wikipedia
The true Jesus would do better than an alleged burial shroud.
Could be it's the shroud of J.C.
Julius Caesar.
Lol sounds funny but it's possible.
The gospel of John describes the shroud. Strips of linen with a separate head cloth. So try consolidate that with a single piece burial shroud.
@@JeffreyBenzodiazepines
The faulty carbon dating was errantly done from a weaved in piece of repair cloth hence the 14 century dating. If this is an important issue for you please do your research.
Thomas saw Him resurrected !!!
James Tabor: My previous comment to you was returned as an 'error'. I don't know why and I wasn't given a reason for this. I hope this comment gets through to you here.
I believe you are sincere in what you say, but I also believe you are confused. The Lord Jesus was raised from among the dead on the third day. The psalmist makes it clear that His body would not see corruption. He appeared subsequently to many people, individually, in small groups, and at times to larger groups. You continually try to make the case that the resurrection is transformation, and that the body of the risen Lord was what you call 'a reconstituted corpse'. This is an ugly phrase to use. You try to compare it with the raisng of people in the Old Testament. The difference is that these individuals, like Lazarus and others in the New Testament, were raised only to die again. The scriptures refer to Christ being raised from among the dead by the Spirit in the power of an everlasting life. For you to characterise Jesus as a reconstituted corpse is totally bizarre. And, I believe, heretical.
We are also told that no man has seen God and lived. This refers obviously to God in His unveiled glory. When Paul was on the Damascus road, he saw a bright light which blinded him. He did not see Christ in His full glory face to face. Neither could the apostles have been able to withstand that sight. Christ always had to veil His glory. At the same time He wanted to show His followers that He had indeed been raised from the dead. In your reply to my earlier comment to you, you said that Christ appeared in flesh and blood to the apostles in Luke's gospel. In fact in Luke 24 when the Lord appeared to the apostles, He said a ghost hath not 'flesh and bones', not 'flesh and blood'. The life of the flesh is in the blood. The life of the resurrected body is spirit. It is frequently the case in Scipture that even a small phrase can illuminate a great truth.
Before I continue with this comment I am going to send it as it is now. If it is accepted, then I will continue with another comment headed by the words Part 2.
The gospel of Peter? That's accredited authoritative?
Beyond the eschatological transformation of human beings is the transfiguration of all creation. The resplendent glory of that universal vision, the redemption off all evil that ever was, the healing of the suffering of every creature, human and otherwise, that ever existed, is what's ultimately at stake in the question of whether God exists, so often reduced to the level of logical argument. Is it not the greatest gift imaginable to be able to believe, against all appearances, against all odds, in Jesus' Abba, the God of love and light, in whom there is no darkness at all? And that, accordingly, ALL shall be well.
Searching for the real Jesus is like recovering a millstone from the bottom of the sea of galilee: It's too tedious to even entertain the idea.
@@stevhen42As long as you do not believe in millstones, there will be no transformation or resurrection for you.😢
I thought it was He that sought us.
But my Millstone book says the Millstone is true.
😀
Constantine and Paul created Christianity we know that and by knowing that, that means Christianity is not the correct religion too follow you can call him Jesus or Yeshua either way he never said here is the new testament call this Christianity and spread my word
We're all born in the right nature and with the ability to know and worship god and we're all share the same consciousness and ultimate fate
@@JeffreyBenzodiazepines I agree we all going too die, although where we go, heaven or hell that's a conscious choice we share same fate of death, consciousnesses I disagree because of choice
@@Christopherurich33 I would define consciousness as the spirit, the image of god, as opposed to the body, that's what we all share, we don't share the same experience but we all have the divine spark. Ultimately we all end up in reunion after we purge evil from our within.
@@JeffreyBenzodiazepines What you call "consciousness as the spirit" are complex biological processes in us and most other living things.
A couple of thousand years ago, that knowledge was not known as we understand it today.
@@cabot100 that doesn't really matter
Oh for goodness sakes...what wounds did thomas and the others witness?...PHYSICAL WOUNDS...to dismiss the gospels is silly and contrived in order to satisfy dr. tabor's view of paul's description. neither description need preclude the other. what's the big deal?
magic is not real
@@MikeJJJenkin a lot of people did accept the gospels, changed the world, and are directly linked to the freedoms that allow you to express yourself. not at all silly.
No one witnessed anything. Only Paul and Luke said that later.
really?...hmmm...perhaps you could read the gospel of john...hint, start in the nineteenth chapter since you are obviously not familiar with the issues of which you erroneously speak
@@will-bi4pj John's not an eyewitness to anything.
Either way I'm converting too Judaism
@christopherurich33
Converting could cost salvation, friend (Galatians 5:24). New converts are forced to deny Jesus (Matthew 10:33).
Stay according to your birth (1 Corinthians 7:17-18). Jesus is universal to both groups (Romans 9:5, Psalm 2:7-12, Amos 9:11-12, Galatians 3:28). 👍
@@johnmann8659 I was the stone the builders rejected
@@Christopherurich33 You are the troll the commentators have rejected. 😁
@@Christopherurich33 Jesus had to be rejected (Luke 9:22) to provide the atonement needed to begin the New Covenant (Ezekiel 16:59-63).
@@charlesperkins941 astro projection, look again your the one trolling too comment on my comment we are both trolls then 😂
Trying to remember my heresies from seminary. Isn’t the idea that Jesus resurrected body wasn’t flesh and blood a heresy? Isn’t this why the creed talks about “resurrection of the body” and the life everlasting? The fact that the “resurrection of the body” thing is in there is because they had a fight about it during the councils while they were trying to make all this shit consistent. So, was Paul a heretic? This is sounding super gnostic to me. I don’t care one way or the other, because I think the whole resurrection thing is hooey, but what Dr. Tabor is talking about is not standard issue Christianity.
Yes, see Part 12 of the Death and Afterlife series I did.
If we disagree with them can we call them heretics. I don’t trust the councils in the fourth century, in Rome, chaired by the Roman emperor, who has an agenda in the outcome.