I wanted to thank Kipp Davis for his useful comments below. I don’t think he and I disagree much on substance here, -and there could be some confusion in any edited video covering many issues in clips. In the future it would be great if he and I could go on together and talk about these fascinating issues, but I can't right now due to things I am involved with in Israel. I don't think this kind of exchange posted as comments on TH-cam is the best forum for such, given the crazy way replies get piled upon replies and everything gets lost in the a cloud of "comment" dust. Here is my overall response to Kipp's input and I do not intend to post anything else in comments on these matters--though I am more than happy to explore in a proper forum: Re: 4Q285, I made it plain that there are other issues than the one letter-and that context would determine it. Also, the syntax issues were discussed in the BAR article…My whole point was that Johnson throwing it out there as proof that only a powerful “messiah" was to be found in “Judaism,” as some monolithic whole, should be questioned. I did not quote Marty as agreeing with the alternative reading of 4Q285 and I plainly said that most scholars interpret it, given the Isa 11 context, as a slaying not slain messiah. I even hold that view myself. The arguments about the Teacher’s suffering and parallels to the Suffering Servant motifs in 1QH have been proposed and discussed by Knohl and Wise-as well as Fishbane. They have nothing to do with 4Q285. My reference to Marty had to do with 4Q491-and it most likely referring to the teacher, and properly included with the the Thanksgiving Hymns-as it is in the latest critical edition. I also did not intend to say that the Psalm 22 reading was found at Qumran, but that it is an example of a copy of Psalms from the period that agrees with the LXX against the MT-showing textual variations of the period are not tied just to the Greek. It is included in the notes to the DSS Bible for that reason, by Abegg, Flint, and Ulrich… Further, the “piercing” and “wounding” motif-awaking the sword against the Shepherd-as found in CD B-based on Zechariah, appears to be discussed in the community, as well as the suffering motif overall-and that “oracle” has the lament over a slain Davidic figure…surely not Jesus. If we had a Pesher on Zechariah, similar to that of Habakkuk, I have little doubt it would have been somehow so applied. And they do make use of the "killing of the Righteous one" text, which the Jesus followers also pick up on. I agree that the Gabriel stone reading is disputed…Knohl has expressed different views, but I think the best evidence does not support forgery-and we well might differ. I also think the Shapira scroll is ancient not modern (with Dershowitz and others) and the James ossuary inscription…and yes, those arguments are ongoing. Again my overall point was that “Judaism” and its “messiahs” or redemptive figures are not a monolithic whole…if the Teacher figure suffers abuse and persecution, but believes he will be exalted to heaven-or his followers celebrated such, and are also thinking they will be included among the elect if they maintain faith and suffer also, then Johnson’s main point is incorrect. He throws out 4Q285 as if that “nails” things-pardon the pun. My main point overall was that when “messiahs” are killed-which they most often are in the texts we were talking about-one should not assume that none of their followers would think they had an apotheosis or heavenly vindication. The loss of a charismatic leader in terms of the social psychology of social groups, is often met with such hopes-rather than rejection of the person as some kind of failed messiah figure. So overall what I was trying to do was to make clear that throwing out this five line fragment-as if THAT proved a messianic figure is always conquering and triumphant, is very misleading and incorrect.
Thank you very much, Dr. Tabor, for your reply. I should like to reiterate that I am in complete agreement on this point: Johnson's entire treatment of the Scrolls and their reflection of "early Judaism" is indeed just totally inadequate, misleading and incorrect. There is so very much that we still don't know, and are simultaneously surprising us as scholars in what the texts continue to reveal.
Hey Kipp, I am sure we are helping Paul's views with our knocking these balls back and forth! I look forward to discussing. And I might add, even though our so-called "mythicists" might think there is some kind of Jewish/Messianic/Apocalyptic matrix out there in late 2nd Temple Judaism--I surely do not think such is the case. One does not need a pattern to find that real people who do exist, identify with texts, either get killed or anticipate getting killed, and their follower then think that somehow they have triumphed or live on--with their "Kingdom" either spiritualized as having come--or put off into the future. As we both know, there is never any problem in pushing any failed expectation down the road a bit @@DrKippDavis
@@theultimatereductionist7592 How about I just study what interests me? And, besides: aliens, bigfoot and poltergeist aren't actual mysteries, are they?
It really bothers me how comfortable apologists are with disagreeing with scholarly consensus knowing their target audience will not fact check them. People trust them and the abuse of that trust is such a violation.
Tabor is in no way representative of a “scholarly consensus.” Speaking for myself, as a ThD scholar and an Apologist, I am not the least bit interested in either amassing or fooling any followers, but I am convinced of the truth of Christianity.
@@CCCBeaumont I really don't have a problem with you being convinced. If it's the case the hes not representative of it then I stand corrected, however it's still a thing apologists do and are comfortable doing frequently. WLC does it with his Kalam and the beginning of the universe for example.
@CCCBeaumont I don't have a stance on this particular claim, since I have no point of reference on what the scholarly consensus is on this issue. However, I will agree that OP's general point is a valid one when it comes to apologetics in general. I am much more familar with scientific or philosphical arguments than textual ones, and I see the phenomenon in those fields on a regular basis. A shocking amount of apologetic content relies upon misrepresentation of scholarly consensus and the ideas being discussed. Science and philosophy regarding the "fine tuning" of the universal constants, the second law of thermodynamics, the Big Bang, abiogenesis, natural selection, genetic mutations, the cooling of planetary cores, teleology, the fossil record, the Problem of Evil, the scientific method, methodological naturalism, the mineral content of seawater, the carbon cycle, and radiometric dating are just a few examples of fields that I have seen repeatedly and egregiously misrepresented by apologists. Moreso by young earth creationists, but by the more respectable types as well, particularly those advocating for more abstract concepts like the cosmological or teleological arguments. Even when it comes to textual criticism, I regularly see misrepresentation of topics so well-accepted by scholars that even I, as a layperson, am aware. An especially pervasive (and subtle) misrepresentation is the willingness to obscure the fact that the gospels were almost certainly not written by the traditionally-assigned authors. The martyrdom of the apostles is another, very similar topic. For example, most members of my Evangelical church were under the impression that we knew Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John had written the gospels as personal eye-witness testimony and that we had good reason to believe most, if not all of the original 12 (minus Judas Iscariot) refused to denounce the risen Christ under threat of torture and death. When I spoke to the head pastor at the time about these things, he expressed his awareness that these things were not supported by scholarly evidence and that he did not personally believe either of those claims to be true. He explained that he never pointed out or corrected these misapprehensions because it would unecessarily complicate the issue and confuse people. He shared a number of other, similar beliefs that he was aware did not jibe with scholarly consensus, and that he therefore did not personally hold. He told me that he was still convinced in the overall truth of the Bibical narrative (through his personal experience of his life being changed by the Holy Spirit) and that it was therefore more important to help people reach the right conclusion than to bog them down with things that could cause unnecessary uncertainty. During our meeting, he asked me not to share what we had discussed with the congregation, because they wouldn't understand if they found out that he didn't believe the Bible to be as accurate as he made it out to sound. I see it as a very real and pervasive problem, even if that is not the case here. I struggled tremendously with science and philosophy at my Christian high-school because the topics were so heavily twisted to fit a certain narrative. For a long time I thought that most of secular academics had to be blatant, intentional lies perpetuated by bad actors, otherwise how could people believe such absurd claims? Eventually, I discovered that I had been horribly mislead by my "teachers", who so thoroughly misrepresented the topics as to make them entirely nonsensical. It wasn't easy to dig myself out of that educational pit.
@@CCCBeaumont You have the answer to begin with so everything is made to fit. 25 fan fiction stories which copy from aMoses imitation to miracles of Poseidon, Asklepios and Dionysos are the expression of foreign greeks making up their story and tzrn a dead preacher into a god like figure. Only four of the 25 fan flctiln get accepted into the mist common story collection. It seems like a talking cross seems to much to swallow for the believer in the fan fiction.
@@corvinredacted I meet the same peoole in a different country. A lot of the priests are aware of the false claims or outright lies. They either not inform the congregation or even repeat them. They often know better but they prefer rhe pay check and the easy way.
Paulogia is devoted, using his one time-traveller's message from the dystopian future to fact-check his video instead of calling for help and telling us to NOT make the one decision we're about to make which causes a chain reaction to that Skynet-ruled dystopia. This is why I watch Paulogia, he is super dedicated to accuracy.
Luke 9:8 _Now Herod the tetrarch heard about all that was going on. And he was perplexed because some were saying that John had been raised from the dead, others that Elijah had appeared, and still others that one of the prophets of long ago had arisen._ This establishes the belief in a single dying and rising prophet figure existed prior to the death of Jesus and in the exact same socio-cultural context.
@leoyohansen6811 Of course that's true if the author completely invented it. But apologists believe the gospels are reporting accurate history. If that's the case then they can no longer argue the resurrection of a single individual was "unique" per Lk. 9:8 cf. Mk. 6:14-16.
@leoyohansen6811 we can say the same about any religious text, that it's only a reflection of what the author wrote, but if we are trying to work out some idea about what people believed, sometimes all we can really do is hope it's a half decent reflection of beliefs from the time. With so many cultures lost to time, it's still interesting to look back and wonder about what they thought. All the Maya people with their history destroyed all but a few books.. we'll never know exactly what most of them believed, but hopefully what remains is somewhat similar. Edit: just to be clear, I'm not saying it should be believed as true, only that it's interesting to read and consider the implications if they believed what is written, then go out and see if it can be falsified
@@trybuntWe have at least 25 gospels and many were refuted and lost in the struggle so we are stuck with 4 which were selected by some groups infighting with others. It tells us that they either did not care what haplened or they just made it up to fit their personal needs.
@@TorianTammas I don't really follow your logic here. We have 25 gospels, many refuted or lost, now there is 4 selected by people who had disagreements amongst themselves.. ..Therefore they didn't care about what happened or they made it up? 🤷 how does that follow? I'm not a Christian, I don't believe these are factual accounts, but I feel like I've missed a step in your explanation because people argue and disagree about what has happened all the time, that doesn't really tell me much.
Anyone who has ever formed part of or studied any kind of a resistance movement of _any_ kind is thoroughly familiar with the themes of suffering before ultimate victory, betrayal by trusted people, predictions of splintering into a gazillion of mutually-opposed groups... _Any_ resistance group at that time, whether violent or nonviolent (and that's a major splitting factor), would have experienced the same. The Jesus movement _was_ special, but in only _one_ major point: it became huge.
@19:29 - There is more to discuss here for sure, but if Dr. Tabor is eager to have such a discussion, perhaps Jeremiah J. Johnston won't be keen to respond (god knows, I can't get him to respond to me, but perhaps James will have better luck), but in any event these are things I am also happy about which to have friendly chats. I should say, I am just happy to see more people getting excited about the volumes of amazing information in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
The thing I find striking about these apologetics is how clearly they're arguing to a conclusion, not arguing to the truth. When Jesus matches expectations, he's the Messiah because he's fulfilling prophecy. When he's breaking expectations, he's the Messiah because they couldn't have made it up. Heads I win, tails you lose. Hey apologists, how about this: if Jesus breaks expectations, he's breaking prophecy and so couldn't be the Messiah, and when he meets expectations, it's clearly being made up by people who wanted to claim prophecy fulfilled. Now what?
@Hailfire08 All arguments are arguments "to a conclusion." Whatever the argument demonstrates it demonstrates. The question is the validity and soundness of the arguments. Whatever the motivation is immaterial (no pun intended) and demonstrates nothing. The best Apologists for Christianity (generally) have the winning arguments because we are arguing for something which is apparently true.
Granted I left Christianity/ presbyterian few years back.. but the history of it is still quite intriguing. I still want to read as much of the religious texts as I can... (not just Christianity) Trying to learn Hebrew so I can read the torah. Arabic so I can read Quran. Something I've been wanting to do for YEARS. 💯
I’m a native Arabic speaker and have spoken Hebrew since 4th grade. I tried reading both and it was quite difficult even as a native speaker. Good luck.
@Jin420 - From what I understand from a talk by Dr Ehrman, the tradition of strict copying existed in Islam so that the "Torah" should be MUCH closer today to the original than the "Bible" is. The "Bible has been scrambled all over the place.
You gotta love when a Christian runs with 7 "proofs" and then leads with a speculation propped up by a piece of scroll that's maybe the size of your palm.
Confirmation bias is the main reason I decided, as a scholar, that I could not subscribe to Judaism as I was much inclined to do at one point. In order to be objective, in my opinion, one can’t begin with a ready made conclusion. Christians and Jews believe prima facie scripture is accurate and reliable in relation to their own religions ideology. This is a huge problem for a scholar, or anyone dedicated to objectivity.
Same exact thing with that "Case for Christ" book, He immediately establishes that his "proof" is that he trusts the eye-witness reports. Nothing you say after that has any weight to a skeptic.
@@worshadar150 Actually, the key is why those testimonies are so trustworthy. There are more than a few reasons to trust the story of Jesus as essentially, or substantially historical, and it is primarily non-historian, internet keyboard warriors who have no training or education who subscribe to Jesus mythicism.
Personally I always felt like a lie does not need to serve what the lie says but something very different entirely. If a lie is useful for championing a certain cause OTHER than the lie itself, you can bet that's what people will do. If the lie helped with group cohesion and identity in a time of Roman oppression, corrupt religious authorities and to a certain extent death and persecution anxiety, then you can start to see why some would lie.
Thank you Paul & Dr Tabor! I painstakingly read Vermes & Wise translations over many years and highly recommend "The First Messiah, " to give a GREAT 1st Century perspective on life of these folks prior to 70 CE. I love scholarship has been renewed in this valuable material.
Although true, that fact has no bearing, whatsoever, on whether Christianity (or any religion) is true. At most it just indicates a fortuitous correlation. "How fortunate we are that our fear of death is unfounded," is not the same as claiming all of history was perverted, distorted, and rewritten to assuage those fears. That would be a conspiracy theory of such colossal proportions it would likely collapse within a few years, not last for two millennia. Such a theory does not deal honestly with the historical data, nor the consistently changed lives in the subsequent centuries, nor the strong philosophical case for God, as well as meticulously documented miracles, healings, and other interventions in the name of Jesus. It doesn't deal forthrightly with the changed lives of the Apostles, and hundreds of millions of changed lives in the ensuing years. Scholastically, it's a giant swing and a miss.
@@CCCBeaumontdude what are you babbling about, keep it simple if you want to pull people to christianity, show proof, evidence and facts, and people will believe.
I'm embarrassed to say that I didn't know the Dead Sea Scrolls were only the Old Testament. Dang. The way they are talked about, I always thought they were the whole bible. Learn something new every day.
But, importantly, they are not "only" the Old Testament. In fact, all the Scrolls stem from a time before there ever was such a thing as a "Bible." Only around ¼ or ⅓ of the entire collection is what we would consider "Bible." The majority of the mss are other pieces of literature from rules, to stories, to prophecies, to calendars, to songs and poems, to wisdom teachings and on and on.
@@DrKippDavis Those were my thoughts! Btw, anyway of knowing if the Habakuk commentary, War Scroll, or the Damascus Document could possibly date to the mid 1st Century CE? I wasn't sure if these were Carbon Dated or not. Thanks.
@@Zen_Traveler Neither the War Scroll nor the Habakkuk Pesher has been carbon dated, but two mss of CD were dated to between 168-50 B.C.E. The palaeographical dates for both 1QM and 1QpHab are set in the last half of the first century B.C.E., but importantly, there are also a handful of scrolls from Cave 4Q which contain text-and probably source material-for the War Scroll that all date to the mid first century B.C.E.
I love how you stand at a nexus between faith and those without and explain things. It helps me to not other the believers. Got to be more kind to them than they are to me right? :P
It's interesting that Christian scholars argue both that Jesus' death was obviously prophesied by the texts and that no contemporary scholars would have interpreted it that way at the time.
Religious people are sincere for the most part, but they've been taught that faith is a valid epistemology. The idea that faith gets anyone closer to the truth is a con job.
It's interesting that Dr. Tabor freely admits the point that Richard Carrier makes about a dying messiah in the Scrolls that really sets Dr. Kipp Davis off. Dr. Davis told me the Dead Sea Scrolls don't provide a template for Jesus, that there are only interesting comparisons, but you couldn't invent Jesus from the Scrolls. It sounds here like you actually could.
The interesting thing is that it's vague enough and we have so little concrete evidence that you can get different things out of the subject depending on what you are looking for or how you look for it. That's why it's super important to show your work.
Actually i may have misunderstood you because they don't actually disagree on their being a person who died on the cross. Can you clarify what you meant?
I think that Dr. Davis' point is that Carrier overstated his case and deliberately misinterpreted the Dead Sea Scrolls to make his point. If pressed, I imagine that Dr. Tabor would agree with Dr. Davis far more than he would with Carrier.
Yes this is a result of Davis simply hating Carrier and then doing spurious, non-academic rants to show that Carrier is wrong. What people miss on this subject is that all Carrier has to do is demonstrate plausibility, not show that the intent of any writing was the suffering and dying messiah, only that it was a plausible interpretation at the time.
@@J_Z913it doesn't really matter who he would agree more with across the board. The only thing that matters is validation of Carrier's point that it was a plausible pre-christian interpretation among messianic Jews. That's literally Carrier's whole point, and he cites scholars going way back who believe this was a plausible interpretation some Jews would have made. This is a argument that some pre-Christian Jews DID interpret it that way.
The Pagan Christ by Tom Harpur investigates how Jesus was a composite character, not a living person. Great book, highly recommend it. It increases one’s spiritual understanding of the religion.
Its really disheartening when i hear an apologist say things like 'the ancient jews had no reason to lie!' Like, sure they did. They wa ted to start their religion. Or maybe they didn’t lie but had wrong beliefs. Either way, didnt happen.
I've been saying this for awhile now: We could find the bones of Jesus tomorrow and Christianity would probably go on just fine. The same was even more true in the first century. Believers would just reinterpret the resurrection to be a spiritual one instead of a physical one and nothing much else would change. Maybe some people would lose their faith, but enough would stay that the religion would live on. It's nice to hear a proper scholar validate this view.
It is even worse as it is most likely that a spiritual resurrection was the original belief. We have people wuth visiins in a story which where all male and the followers. The woman and tomb story is a latee invention.
very true, there are no miracles required to have faith in the miracles of life, the coincidences of blessings, the challenges, a belief in eternity and God...none required.
Not going to start a fight, but from a Christian perspective, aren't Atheists going to be just fine if the resurrected Jesus shows Himself to the world tomorrow? Don't you feel they would also give all sorts of reasons not to believe as well? Don't just give a "no, He won't" thoughtless response. What if He does? Would you? I am okay with people not believing in Jesus because religion is a personal matter and different people have different experiences, perspectives and opinions. But many people here seem upset because people don't believe as they do (atheism). I must admit we Christians sometimes make that mistake too. I guess the world is a better place if everyone let people believe what they believe and always be kind.
whenever you see a puzzle or riddle, its usually due to context connotation and denotation. words can mean many things especially words like "believe". Context connotation and denotation indicate things like the "intent" of the heart and growth level. @@chihangbenjaminting647
I’m very thankful for Pauologia, De Tabor and the likes for being honest!! I really can’t stand apologists, they are very deceptive with what the actual information says. Talking their base from jumping off the Christian ledge. Knowing most in the camp won’t fact check if what they are saying is true. That is very deceptive on apologists part.
Someone who says that they can be _certain_ that _nobody_ believed the Messiah would die should not be trusted as a scholar just for using such unjustifiably strong language. That is an absurd claim on its face.
It's always seemed to me that the Jesus of Mark and the other Gospels is a combination of a real person Jesus, a number of other messianic figures from the period, and an extrapolation of 'biblical' texts. That is not to say that anyone is creating a fiction, but rather, that authors, many years after the actual events, are attempting to assemble their versions of the truth. Separating all of those components into actual historical bits is complicated.
Or maybe it is all fiction, but that does not mean that the people writing it thought about that the same way we do these days. Fiction was not a bad thing, the forming of the Roman empire was written about a lot, all if it fiction, yet what they believed.
We have copied miracles - Poseidon (god of water) miracle (walk over water, calming the sea), Asklepios (god of healing) miracle, Dionysos (god of wine) turn water into wine. So the author imitated miracles well kniwn and performed by gods and not preaching peasant. Then we have the author who tzrned Jesus into a second Moses including return from Egypt and the murdering of babies. ( Just to mention the Moses nevef exksted and the story us from Sargon of Akkad) So Jesus is in gokd fan fiction company.
The gospel authors are doing synthesis, as you noted, from many stories and the events of the late 2nd Temple era. That's why the gospels are not biographies and are not chronicles. They are constructed from many streams of events and people.
The point of the gospels is not to convey history but to convey the rhetorical goals of the cult leaders. Paul gives the game away. People know Jesus from scripture and visions. There are no historical bits evidenced anywhere. All of the historical bits that the authors of the gospels used were thrown in for verisimilitude by copying from historians. These authors were creating fiction with historical background flavor, not history with fictionalized elements.
I just enjoy seeing the apologists capitulate in the comments trying to explain why the expert is wromg and why their side is right while not using any actual evidence.
Rhetoric and Polemics are FAR easier to master than actual history or anthropology with the math required for the empirical techniques to pin down DATA, not bald assertions and opinions based on those bald assertions.
Paulogia , you're videos can be so varied, one of the bestest channels on these 'tube of you'! I'm still trying hard to get to where I can support! And I like how calmly Dr. Tabor shows his expertise!👍🎃💙🐈⬛💙🥰✌
@@Paulogia❤ Jesus power Level 1 portion of youth longevity digestion an self beauty Jesus energy wash. Negative energy will creep out yr feet tell it's time.
@@CCCBeaumont it is a matter of your faith that Yahweh can never err therefore the prospect of a religious person admitting possible error is far lower.
Oh, dear. One more thing, and then I promise I will shut up ... @25:46 - the so-called "Ḥazon Garbiel Stone" is a non-provenanced artefact belonging to David Jeselsohn, and its authenticity is hotly disputed. Most of the text reads like a weird stream of consciousness, which appears to have been constructed on the basis of a string of Christianised Jewish messianic tropes. If it is authentic-which at present remains a very conjectural "IF"-it is also highly unclear what this text even is, or what it means. In situations like this scholars are usually better off to avoid depending upon disputed, non-provenanced possible forgeries in making what are already also conjectural claims for early Jewish religion.
Interesting that the Dead Sea Scrolls depict a teacher, a priestly messiah and a kingly messiah. To my mind, Mark depicts Jesus as a man, Luke as a Priest, and Matthew as a king. This seems to correlate with the scrolls thematically. Could the Q source have been involved here?
Why does no one ever question why no one absolutely no one has seen or heard from someone who supposedly rose from the dead for thousands of years. ridiculous. Wake up
@@grapeshot Yet remarkably powerful in the lives of those who follow them. Excellent guides for archaeologists, historically reliable, especially when compared to other documents of antiquity, and they appear to provide the truest information about how one can relate to God.
Seems like this is kind of a Catch-22. Either the prophecies were clear and the disciples had little reason to be confused, or they were not clear, and thus not very useful as prophecies.
This is excellent info for a response I'm putting together for an article by N.T. Wright on second-temple Judaism and their beliefs in slain and resurrected Messiahs. Thank you both!
No reason to invent resurrection story? If they didn't expect Jesus to die, when he died that was the end of story. They wanted to continue the story so they had to come up with something. That something is resurrection.
His disciples had to justify why their messiah had to die in such an embarassing way, thus the need for a ressurection story. And that narrative is powerful for the modern audience who wouldnt know better Lol sorry i just reworded what you said
(44:22) "I don't take labels like that, I think the cosmos is much more complicated than anybody's label." This is exactly why I invented the term and refer to myself as an Ecumenical Deist - two words that have never (to my knowledge) been used together. It is both a label and not a label. The breadth of different beliefs - and respect of beliefs of others, that these two terms can encompass is compounded when placed together. It is my way of saying, "I respect the faiths of others without affirming them to be true. I acknowledge the value of your religion without excluding the value to be found in the beliefs or nonbelief of others. I reject the dogma of religion without discrediting the good that it has drawn out of people. And I am willing to seek shared meaning and 'truth' in the religious traditions and beliefs of all without forgetting that the cosmos is too vast for anyone to claim a monopoly on truth, and humanity is too diverse and complex for anyone to claim a monopoly on meaning." "Ecumenical Deism" is, in my opinion, the ultimate no-labels label. #ShamelessPlug
On an unrelated note: The new US Speaker of the House (3rd in line for POTUS) is a Ken Ham follower and a major contributor to AIG and the ARK Encounter. Have seen at least one interview with him where they also included Ken Ham.
The problem with “they pierced “in psalm 22. Even if you use the Dead Sea Scrolls or variants in the LXX is that the word Karu does not mean “to pierce” it means “to dig.” as in dig a hole. Homiletically you can get to the notion of animals piercing flesh from the verses, kind of like Rashi would, but it does not say pierced, even if you use the variant readings. Zachariah, 12 verse 10 is the clearest reference to a dying figure.
jesus story is reflected in fantasy like, king Arthur, Merlin, the black knight, Robbin hood, stood against some thing bad, prevailed but lost in the end, hail the legend.
As another guy named Paul, my endorsement of Paul on his take about Paul is two thumbs up. PS - in the bible that would be considered four independent sources that James has two thumbs.
Had to attend a funeral recently, Minister took over the eulogy to talk about how Jesus invented compassion - apparently before Jesus the Romans were all Libertines and believed in only “tit for tat,” there was no unconditional compassion (for woman, old, the enfeebled)-unless there was the chance for some gain or repayment. Apparently, if you accepted the Emperor’s coin in charity you would be obligated to pay Rome back (apparently this is why the Emperor’s face was on the coin…) So the Minister said.
Someone famous must have said this recently, because I saw a comment on TH-cam making the same claim, his evidence being that the word “charity” didn’t even exist until the rise of Christianity. I’m don’t know whether that’s true or not, but claiming that the lack of a specific word shows that even the concept compassion/charity didn’t exist is silly
@@DeruwynArchmage It's a model of controlling behaviors exhibited by cults. BITE is an acronym that stands for Behavior/Information/Thought/Emotion, four areas of control that are very common in cult behavior.
John 10:27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 | give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.🤔
Yet he says in the earlier text of Matthew, "You will all fall away because of me this night...strike down the shepard, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered." The writer of John didn't like that part. It's comedy gold. 😂
I agree that 1 Cor 15 is the earliest reference we have to the resurrection. But I'm wondering if it accurately represents the _earliest Christian view_ of Jesus' resurrection. Paul is speaking to a Greek audience there and using terminology we find in texts about Stoic metaphysics. So it seems he's catering to his audience with terms they understood. But would Peter and James actually agree with all the "spiritual body" talk? Unfortunately, we don't really know because we don't have any firsthand writings from them explaining what they actually believed.
We don't know. Though, if 1 Peter is authentic, then Peter agreed with Paul that Christ's body was spiritual (see 1 Peter 3:18, "He was put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit").
The more I learn, the more I’m convinced that these were literary works. The repetition of the stories, changing a bit every time but hitting all the same notes just sounds like people retelling a known story with their own twists. The intentional parallels drawn to earlier figures. Everything tells me it’s a character. A story. It fits so much better with the data. I feel like Paul had a seizure, said he saw things, and kicked off a new Jewish cult that we call Christianity. One thing led to another; people expanded on the story, filled in the gaps, and over the decades the story grew and you get the New Testament.
A lot of apologists in here who missed the point that Jesus is not unique, and want to nitpick the doctors statements to find a way to justify their belief.
Cameron Bertuzzi should read Francesca Stavrakopoulou's "God: An Anatomy". It's a much more interesting dive into what the ancients believed about the body of God/gods, and it's based in...facts!!
Of course they didn’t expect him to die. Scripturally, the messiah was supposed to usher in an age of peace and end war in Jerusalem. Jesus died and war and violence increased. The end
He also wasn't related to david unless Mary and Joseph are siblings. Look it up they just reused Josephs genealogy on Mary who was the only biological parent out of the two. Joseph was the one who was distantly related to david and he straight up didn't even contribute genetically to Jesus.
Leaving aside the question of whether the Messiah might have suffered versus triumphed in the pre-Christian Jewish conversation, neither interpretation eliminates the possibility that the disciples invented the resurrection. There is plenty of evidence that followers of cult leaders improvise and adapt when unexpected things happen - we see this in modern-day cults all the time. So perhaps: His followers thought he was bound for greatness, but instead he was arrested and executed. They improvised and adapted. They retrieved the body (it implies so in the book of Matthew) and then circulated stories claiming that he came back to life and will return to finish the job later. It's exactly what cults do. . .
The cult members who left their job and families ruined their lives. After their cult leader was executed as a crimal that rebelled against Rome they had to run for their life. The Romans would have executed everyone for insurection against Rome rule. So either they went back home trued to get their old jobs and mend cut ties with family or they believed he wasn't dead. As we have Today people who see people after their death. This can be Elvis or Grandma but few make a religion out of it.
Dr James thank you for mentioning Paul. The endless back and forth discussions about the resurrection only referencing the Gospels when they are not the earliest texts mentioning Jesus’s post death appearances ( or Jesus for that matter) were wearing me down.
Johnston's argument seems exactly backwards to me. I can't imagine anyone who would be MORE psychologically motivated to deny their Messiah's actual, irrevocable death than someone who deeply and unshakably believed that God guaranteed their Messiah's victory. A resurrection story is just a denial that your Messiah is really and irrevocably gone.
3:48 love that. Has anyone ever used AI to scan for all multiple deffiniton words in the texts and for it to determine the definition to use for the story?
I’m not an expert and have no background in Hebrew but I think trying to run an AI on the DSS could be complicated if the characters are not standardized
*_I'll tell you what Jesus said_** ;* (It's all hearsay) As all we have are others telling us _"what Jesus said & did"_ the "faith" that Christians have, is in the words of men that _claim to speak for Jesus._
If I were God-Emperor of Mankind and could decree all AI art be outlawed, I'd do it. But Paulogia would still be allowed to use it. He should be able to benefit from these cheap and effective thumbnails. Is that special treatment? Goddamn right, because Paulogia is just that special. ❤
How does he feel about Jesus being completely made up from an amalgam of people? As someone raised jewish and read the new testament, from interest and from watching The Bible Reloaded, I've noticed that the writers (as they get farther from the date) know less and less about jewish customs and try to interpret things as a christian not as a jew. For instance, the Nazarite, the writers assumed it was someone from Nazareth when instead it was someone of priestly origins (which means, Levi, Cohen or someone who became a rabbi)
I'm not Jewish but married into it & was raised Christian. The idea that Jesus was entirely constructed out of older stories and legends has always seemed like the most likely scenario to me, since my deconversion. It seemed the most likely while I was believing too but I refused to face it, out of insecure pride - that most recognizable feature of Evangelicals.
Given that the community had ideas about a suffering messiah I think the followers of Jesus were more in-line with a non-suffering messiah and were confused by John the baptist and Jesus' teachings. Only after his death and their ( a few maybe 3) experienced him being raised did they encounter ideas and texts from the Qumran community - and the rest is history. Jesus, as Tabor said, was a quasi figure of the Qumran community but not so militant but definitely thought of himself as the chosen of god to lead his followers to glory through suffering to be exalted and then conquer their enemies!
one question I was under the impression that at Jesus' time the Jews had no concept of a soul. That resurrection and death wasabout the body and the "breath of life". Dr. Tabor made it sound like the messiah of the Dead Sea Scrolls believed in turing into a spirit after his death (if I understood correctly). Was that already a belief in a soul that is basically freed from its mortal coil or should I see that as an ascension to something like a jinn?
![[#2024MAMA] BIGBANG (빅뱅) - 뱅뱅뱅 (BANG BANG BANG) + FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EQsYfiPR9uM/mqdefault.jpg)
I wanted to thank Kipp Davis for his useful comments below. I don’t think he and I disagree much on substance here, -and there could be some confusion in any edited video covering many issues in clips. In the future it would be great if he and I could go on together and talk about these fascinating issues, but I can't right now due to things I am involved with in Israel. I don't think this kind of exchange posted as comments on TH-cam is the best forum for such, given the crazy way replies get piled upon replies and everything gets lost in the a cloud of "comment" dust. Here is my overall response to Kipp's input and I do not intend to post anything else in comments on these matters--though I am more than happy to explore in a proper forum:
Re: 4Q285, I made it plain that there are other issues than the one letter-and that context would determine it. Also, the syntax issues were discussed in the BAR article…My whole point was that Johnson throwing it out there as proof that only a powerful “messiah" was to be found in “Judaism,” as some monolithic whole, should be questioned.
I did not quote Marty as agreeing with the alternative reading of 4Q285 and I plainly said that most scholars interpret it, given the Isa 11 context, as a slaying not slain messiah. I even hold that view myself. The arguments about the Teacher’s suffering and parallels to the Suffering Servant motifs in 1QH have been proposed and discussed by Knohl and Wise-as well as Fishbane. They have nothing to do with 4Q285.
My reference to Marty had to do with 4Q491-and it most likely referring to the teacher, and properly included with the the Thanksgiving Hymns-as it is in the latest critical edition.
I also did not intend to say that the Psalm 22 reading was found at Qumran, but that it is an example of a copy of Psalms from the period that agrees with the LXX against the MT-showing textual variations of the period are not tied just to the Greek. It is included in the notes to the DSS Bible for that reason, by Abegg, Flint, and Ulrich…
Further, the “piercing” and “wounding” motif-awaking the sword against the Shepherd-as found in CD B-based on Zechariah, appears to be discussed in the community, as well as the suffering motif overall-and that “oracle” has the lament over a slain Davidic figure…surely not Jesus. If we had a Pesher on Zechariah, similar to that of Habakkuk, I have little doubt it would have been somehow so applied. And they do make use of the "killing of the Righteous one" text, which the Jesus followers also pick up on.
I agree that the Gabriel stone reading is disputed…Knohl has expressed different views, but I think the best evidence does not support forgery-and we well might differ. I also think the Shapira scroll is ancient not modern (with Dershowitz and others) and the James ossuary inscription…and yes, those arguments are ongoing.
Again my overall point was that “Judaism” and its “messiahs” or redemptive figures are not a monolithic whole…if the Teacher figure suffers abuse and persecution, but believes he will be exalted to heaven-or his followers celebrated such, and are also thinking they will be included among the elect if they maintain faith and suffer also, then Johnson’s main point is incorrect. He throws out 4Q285 as if that “nails” things-pardon the pun. My main point overall was that when “messiahs” are killed-which they most often are in the texts we were talking about-one should not assume that none of their followers would think they had an apotheosis or heavenly vindication. The loss of a charismatic leader in terms of the social psychology of social groups, is often met with such hopes-rather than rejection of the person as some kind of failed messiah figure.
So overall what I was trying to do was to make clear that throwing out this five line fragment-as if THAT proved a messianic figure is always conquering and triumphant, is very misleading and incorrect.
Thank you very much, Dr. Tabor, for your reply.
I should like to reiterate that I am in complete agreement on this point: Johnson's entire treatment of the Scrolls and their reflection of "early Judaism" is indeed just totally inadequate, misleading and incorrect. There is so very much that we still don't know, and are simultaneously surprising us as scholars in what the texts continue to reveal.
Hey Kipp, I am sure we are helping Paul's views with our knocking these balls back and forth! I look forward to discussing. And I might add, even though our so-called "mythicists" might think there is some kind of Jewish/Messianic/Apocalyptic matrix out there in late 2nd Temple Judaism--I surely do not think such is the case. One does not need a pattern to find that real people who do exist, identify with texts, either get killed or anticipate getting killed, and their follower then think that somehow they have triumphed or live on--with their "Kingdom" either spiritualized as having come--or put off into the future. As we both know, there is never any problem in pushing any failed expectation down the road a bit @@DrKippDavis
If you want to study unsolved mysteries, study aliens (UFOs, UAP, alien abductions, trace landing cases), Bigfoot, even poltergeist.
@@theultimatereductionist7592 How about I just study what interests me?
And, besides: aliens, bigfoot and poltergeist aren't actual mysteries, are they?
Until Paulogia has the guts to take on Metatron’s undisputed proof Christ lived (he won’t he doesn’t have the guts) he’s a coward
When Paulogia said,"That was 10 years ago." I felt that. To me, the 90s will always feel like they were 10 years ago
Yeah… THAT was painful…
I feel like the 2010's was just one big year.
Well the good news is it won't be that way for long 🙃
It really bothers me how comfortable apologists are with disagreeing with scholarly consensus knowing their target audience will not fact check them. People trust them and the abuse of that trust is such a violation.
Tabor is in no way representative of a “scholarly consensus.” Speaking for myself, as a ThD scholar and an Apologist, I am not the least bit interested in either amassing or fooling any followers, but I am convinced of the truth of Christianity.
@@CCCBeaumont I really don't have a problem with you being convinced. If it's the case the hes not representative of it then I stand corrected, however it's still a thing apologists do and are comfortable doing frequently. WLC does it with his Kalam and the beginning of the universe for example.
@CCCBeaumont I don't have a stance on this particular claim, since I have no point of reference on what the scholarly consensus is on this issue. However, I will agree that OP's general point is a valid one when it comes to apologetics in general. I am much more familar with scientific or philosphical arguments than textual ones, and I see the phenomenon in those fields on a regular basis. A shocking amount of apologetic content relies upon misrepresentation of scholarly consensus and the ideas being discussed.
Science and philosophy regarding the "fine tuning" of the universal constants, the second law of thermodynamics, the Big Bang, abiogenesis, natural selection, genetic mutations, the cooling of planetary cores, teleology, the fossil record, the Problem of Evil, the scientific method, methodological naturalism, the mineral content of seawater, the carbon cycle, and radiometric dating are just a few examples of fields that I have seen repeatedly and egregiously misrepresented by apologists. Moreso by young earth creationists, but by the more respectable types as well, particularly those advocating for more abstract concepts like the cosmological or teleological arguments.
Even when it comes to textual criticism, I regularly see misrepresentation of topics so well-accepted by scholars that even I, as a layperson, am aware. An especially pervasive (and subtle) misrepresentation is the willingness to obscure the fact that the gospels were almost certainly not written by the traditionally-assigned authors. The martyrdom of the apostles is another, very similar topic. For example, most members of my Evangelical church were under the impression that we knew Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John had written the gospels as personal eye-witness testimony and that we had good reason to believe most, if not all of the original 12 (minus Judas Iscariot) refused to denounce the risen Christ under threat of torture and death.
When I spoke to the head pastor at the time about these things, he expressed his awareness that these things were not supported by scholarly evidence and that he did not personally believe either of those claims to be true. He explained that he never pointed out or corrected these misapprehensions because it would unecessarily complicate the issue and confuse people. He shared a number of other, similar beliefs that he was aware did not jibe with scholarly consensus, and that he therefore did not personally hold. He told me that he was still convinced in the overall truth of the Bibical narrative (through his personal experience of his life being changed by the Holy Spirit) and that it was therefore more important to help people reach the right conclusion than to bog them down with things that could cause unnecessary uncertainty. During our meeting, he asked me not to share what we had discussed with the congregation, because they wouldn't understand if they found out that he didn't believe the Bible to be as accurate as he made it out to sound.
I see it as a very real and pervasive problem, even if that is not the case here. I struggled tremendously with science and philosophy at my Christian high-school because the topics were so heavily twisted to fit a certain narrative. For a long time I thought that most of secular academics had to be blatant, intentional lies perpetuated by bad actors, otherwise how could people believe such absurd claims? Eventually, I discovered that I had been horribly mislead by my "teachers", who so thoroughly misrepresented the topics as to make them entirely nonsensical. It wasn't easy to dig myself out of that educational pit.
@@CCCBeaumont You have the answer to begin with so everything is made to fit. 25 fan fiction stories which copy from aMoses imitation to miracles of Poseidon, Asklepios and Dionysos are the expression of foreign greeks making up their story and tzrn a dead preacher into a god like figure. Only four of the 25 fan flctiln get accepted into the mist common story collection. It seems like a talking cross seems to much to swallow for the believer in the fan fiction.
@@corvinredacted I meet the same peoole in a different country. A lot of the priests are aware of the false claims or outright lies. They either not inform the congregation or even repeat them. They often know better but they prefer rhe pay check and the easy way.
Paulogia is devoted, using his one time-traveller's message from the dystopian future to fact-check his video instead of calling for help and telling us to NOT make the one decision we're about to make which causes a chain reaction to that Skynet-ruled dystopia. This is why I watch Paulogia, he is super dedicated to accuracy.
Jokes on us, the ‘second coming’ ‘antichrist’ and ‘revalation’ were all ancient understandings of Skynet. Paulogia is just not spoiling the finale!!!
This is epic Paul! These edits are amazing! Dr. Tabor's course is fantastic! Hail Skynet!
Luke 9:8
_Now Herod the tetrarch heard about all that was going on. And he was perplexed because some were saying that John had been raised from the dead, others that Elijah had appeared, and still others that one of the prophets of long ago had arisen._
This establishes the belief in a single dying and rising prophet figure existed prior to the death of Jesus and in the exact same socio-cultural context.
@leoyohansen6811 Of course that's true if the author completely invented it. But apologists believe the gospels are reporting accurate history. If that's the case then they can no longer argue the resurrection of a single individual was "unique" per Lk. 9:8 cf. Mk. 6:14-16.
@leoyohansen6811 we can say the same about any religious text, that it's only a reflection of what the author wrote, but if we are trying to work out some idea about what people believed, sometimes all we can really do is hope it's a half decent reflection of beliefs from the time.
With so many cultures lost to time, it's still interesting to look back and wonder about what they thought. All the Maya people with their history destroyed all but a few books.. we'll never know exactly what most of them believed, but hopefully what remains is somewhat similar.
Edit: just to be clear, I'm not saying it should be believed as true, only that it's interesting to read and consider the implications if they believed what is written, then go out and see if it can be falsified
@@trybuntWe have at least 25 gospels and many were refuted and lost in the struggle so we are stuck with 4 which were selected by some groups infighting with others. It tells us that they either did not care what haplened or they just made it up to fit their personal needs.
@@TorianTammas I don't really follow your logic here. We have 25 gospels, many refuted or lost, now there is 4 selected by people who had disagreements amongst themselves..
..Therefore they didn't care about what happened or they made it up? 🤷 how does that follow?
I'm not a Christian, I don't believe these are factual accounts, but I feel like I've missed a step in your explanation because people argue and disagree about what has happened all the time, that doesn't really tell me much.
Anyone who has ever formed part of or studied any kind of a resistance movement of _any_ kind is thoroughly familiar with the themes of suffering before ultimate victory, betrayal by trusted people, predictions of splintering into a gazillion of mutually-opposed groups... _Any_ resistance group at that time, whether violent or nonviolent (and that's a major splitting factor), would have experienced the same.
The Jesus movement _was_ special, but in only _one_ major point: it became huge.
@19:29 - There is more to discuss here for sure, but if Dr. Tabor is eager to have such a discussion, perhaps Jeremiah J. Johnston won't be keen to respond (god knows, I can't get him to respond to me, but perhaps James will have better luck), but in any event these are things I am also happy about which to have friendly chats.
I should say, I am just happy to see more people getting excited about the volumes of amazing information in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
The more I hear about this time period the more I realise The Life of Brian was pretty spot on. "Messiahs" were everywhere.
Indeed the time was ripe for the arrival of the true Messiah, and He arrived.
@@CCCBeaumont - Over and over and over again! ^_^
Kind of like they are now too.😀
Seems like Dr. James Tabor is having the time of his life with teaching his new course. I am very happy for him!
The thing I find striking about these apologetics is how clearly they're arguing to a conclusion, not arguing to the truth. When Jesus matches expectations, he's the Messiah because he's fulfilling prophecy. When he's breaking expectations, he's the Messiah because they couldn't have made it up. Heads I win, tails you lose.
Hey apologists, how about this: if Jesus breaks expectations, he's breaking prophecy and so couldn't be the Messiah, and when he meets expectations, it's clearly being made up by people who wanted to claim prophecy fulfilled. Now what?
prophets came to fix the oresebt they lived in. They never were their to make future claims. This is mainly a christian invention.
Them's fightin' words!
I don't know. Were you there
@Hailfire08 All arguments are arguments "to a conclusion." Whatever the argument demonstrates it demonstrates. The question is the validity and soundness of the arguments. Whatever the motivation is immaterial (no pun intended) and demonstrates nothing. The best Apologists for Christianity (generally) have the winning arguments because we are arguing for something which is apparently true.
@@CCCBeaumontArguing to a conclusion, in this context, refers to confirmation bias.
Granted I left Christianity/ presbyterian few years back.. but the history of it is still quite intriguing.
I still want to read as much of the religious texts as I can... (not just Christianity)
Trying to learn Hebrew so I can read the torah.
Arabic so I can read Quran.
Something I've been wanting to do for YEARS. 💯
If you've got the free time, it's all here to learn on TH-cam! It's amazing really.
I’m a native Arabic speaker and have spoken Hebrew since 4th grade. I tried reading both and it was quite difficult even as a native speaker. Good luck.
@Jin420 - From what I understand from a talk by Dr Ehrman, the tradition of strict copying existed in Islam so that the "Torah" should be MUCH closer today to the original than the "Bible" is. The "Bible has been scrambled all over the place.
no one expected joseph smith to receive revelation on golden plates that he could read inside a hat. therefore true.
No one expected that Douglas Adams would write a how-to guide on how to fly but here we are.
No one expected a child’s wish for candy rain to start a cannibal apocalypse, “Sweet Story” by, Carlton Mellick III proved us wrong.
No one expected this sentence to.
@@SteveLaw-UK - To....do what?
@maddyjean - SUCH a pity that Maroni returned the golden plates to Golub or whatever heaven it was. Proof was THIS close!
You gotta love when a Christian runs with 7 "proofs" and then leads with a speculation propped up by a piece of scroll that's maybe the size of your palm.
Confirmation bias is the main reason I decided, as a scholar, that I could not subscribe to Judaism as I was much inclined to do at one point.
In order to be objective, in my opinion, one can’t begin with a ready made conclusion. Christians and Jews believe prima facie scripture is accurate and reliable in relation to their own religions ideology.
This is a huge problem for a scholar, or anyone dedicated to objectivity.
Is it the size of the piece of scroll that invalidates the hypothesis? If so, why?
Same exact thing with that "Case for Christ" book, He immediately establishes that his "proof" is that he trusts the eye-witness reports. Nothing you say after that has any weight to a skeptic.
@@worshadar150 Actually, the key is why those testimonies are so trustworthy. There are more than a few reasons to trust the story of Jesus as essentially, or substantially historical, and it is primarily non-historian, internet keyboard warriors who have no training or education who subscribe to Jesus mythicism.
@@CCCBeaumont - We don't even know if the "EYEWITNESSES" existed! Perhaps it is the gullible who subscribe to the existence of Yeshu'.
"Why would they lie?" Because they were trying to start a cult.
And make a bit of money/support. Clever grifters, true believers or truly deceived?
one of the world's first grift!
actually not lying but stealing the concept of coming back from the dead. All hail Baal!
Wrong, they were trying to keep the cult from disolving.
Personally I always felt like a lie does not need to serve what the lie says but something very different entirely.
If a lie is useful for championing a certain cause OTHER than the lie itself, you can bet that's what people will do.
If the lie helped with group cohesion and identity in a time of Roman oppression, corrupt religious authorities and to a certain extent death and persecution anxiety, then you can start to see why some would lie.
Thank you Paul & Dr Tabor! I painstakingly read Vermes & Wise translations over many years and highly recommend "The First Messiah, " to give a GREAT 1st Century perspective on life of these folks prior to 70 CE. I love scholarship has been renewed in this valuable material.
Dr. Tabor's scholarship makes perfect, objective sense. Human beings are so afraid of death, we come up with anything to deal with that fact.
That is entirely what religion is about . . . something to comfort us about the impending death we all fear to begin with.
Some of us . . . only some of us!
Although true, that fact has no bearing, whatsoever, on whether Christianity (or any religion) is true. At most it just indicates a fortuitous correlation. "How fortunate we are that our fear of death is unfounded," is not the same as claiming all of history was perverted, distorted, and rewritten to assuage those fears. That would be a conspiracy theory of such colossal proportions it would likely collapse within a few years, not last for two millennia. Such a theory does not deal honestly with the historical data, nor the consistently changed lives in the subsequent centuries, nor the strong philosophical case for God, as well as meticulously documented miracles, healings, and other interventions in the name of Jesus. It doesn't deal forthrightly with the changed lives of the Apostles, and hundreds of millions of changed lives in the ensuing years. Scholastically, it's a giant swing and a miss.
@@CCCBeaumontdude what are you babbling about, keep it simple if you want to pull people to christianity, show proof, evidence and facts, and people will believe.
@@sammie4166 It is a shame you appear unable to comprehend my writing. Have you considered it may be due to the Dunning Kruger effect?
I'm embarrassed to say that I didn't know the Dead Sea Scrolls were only the Old Testament. Dang. The way they are talked about, I always thought they were the whole bible. Learn something new every day.
chalk it up to another situation where apologists and pastors use vague language to imply lots of things to otherwise uninformed listeners
But, importantly, they are not "only" the Old Testament. In fact, all the Scrolls stem from a time before there ever was such a thing as a "Bible." Only around ¼ or ⅓ of the entire collection is what we would consider "Bible." The majority of the mss are other pieces of literature from rules, to stories, to prophecies, to calendars, to songs and poems, to wisdom teachings and on and on.
@@DrKippDavis Those were my thoughts! Btw, anyway of knowing if the Habakuk commentary, War Scroll, or the Damascus Document could possibly date to the mid 1st Century CE? I wasn't sure if these were Carbon Dated or not. Thanks.
@@Zen_Traveler Neither the War Scroll nor the Habakkuk Pesher has been carbon dated, but two mss of CD were dated to between 168-50 B.C.E. The palaeographical dates for both 1QM and 1QpHab are set in the last half of the first century B.C.E., but importantly, there are also a handful of scrolls from Cave 4Q which contain text-and probably source material-for the War Scroll that all date to the mid first century B.C.E.
@@DrKippDavis Thank you for your reply, especially concerning possible War Scroll ideology found in Cave 4!
=== SIGN UP FOR DR TABOR'S DEAD SEA SCROLL COURSE === www.tinyurl.com/TaborDSS
I love how you stand at a nexus between faith and those without and explain things. It helps me to not other the believers. Got to be more kind to them than they are to me right? :P
It's interesting that Christian scholars argue both that Jesus' death was obviously prophesied by the texts and that no contemporary scholars would have interpreted it that way at the time.
Yeah, exactly
Religious people are sincere for the most part, but they've been taught that faith is a valid epistemology. The idea that faith gets anyone closer to the truth is a con job.
Very true. You can have faith in anything.
Excellent interview and discussion. Thank you, both. 36:51 t/s
It's interesting that Dr. Tabor freely admits the point that Richard Carrier makes about a dying messiah in the Scrolls that really sets Dr. Kipp Davis off. Dr. Davis told me the Dead Sea Scrolls don't provide a template for Jesus, that there are only interesting comparisons, but you couldn't invent Jesus from the Scrolls. It sounds here like you actually could.
The interesting thing is that it's vague enough and we have so little concrete evidence that you can get different things out of the subject depending on what you are looking for or how you look for it. That's why it's super important to show your work.
Actually i may have misunderstood you because they don't actually disagree on their being a person who died on the cross. Can you clarify what you meant?
I think that Dr. Davis' point is that Carrier overstated his case and deliberately misinterpreted the Dead Sea Scrolls to make his point. If pressed, I imagine that Dr. Tabor would agree with Dr. Davis far more than he would with Carrier.
Yes this is a result of Davis simply hating Carrier and then doing spurious, non-academic rants to show that Carrier is wrong. What people miss on this subject is that all Carrier has to do is demonstrate plausibility, not show that the intent of any writing was the suffering and dying messiah, only that it was a plausible interpretation at the time.
@@J_Z913it doesn't really matter who he would agree more with across the board. The only thing that matters is validation of Carrier's point that it was a plausible pre-christian interpretation among messianic Jews. That's literally Carrier's whole point, and he cites scholars going way back who believe this was a plausible interpretation some Jews would have made. This is a argument that some pre-Christian Jews DID interpret it that way.
The Pagan Christ by Tom Harpur investigates how Jesus was a composite character, not a living person. Great book, highly recommend it. It increases one’s spiritual understanding of the religion.
Its really disheartening when i hear an apologist say things like 'the ancient jews had no reason to lie!' Like, sure they did. They wa ted to start their religion. Or maybe they didn’t lie but had wrong beliefs. Either way, didnt happen.
I've been saying this for awhile now: We could find the bones of Jesus tomorrow and Christianity would probably go on just fine. The same was even more true in the first century. Believers would just reinterpret the resurrection to be a spiritual one instead of a physical one and nothing much else would change. Maybe some people would lose their faith, but enough would stay that the religion would live on. It's nice to hear a proper scholar validate this view.
It is even worse as it is most likely that a spiritual resurrection was the original belief. We have people wuth visiins in a story which where all male and the followers. The woman and tomb story is a latee invention.
very true, there are no miracles required to have faith in the miracles of life, the coincidences of blessings, the challenges, a belief in eternity and God...none required.
Not going to start a fight, but from a Christian perspective, aren't Atheists going to be just fine if the resurrected Jesus shows Himself to the world tomorrow? Don't you feel they would also give all sorts of reasons not to believe as well? Don't just give a "no, He won't" thoughtless response. What if He does? Would you? I am okay with people not believing in Jesus because religion is a personal matter and different people have different experiences, perspectives and opinions. But many people here seem upset because people don't believe as they do (atheism). I must admit we Christians sometimes make that mistake too. I guess the world is a better place if everyone let people believe what they believe and always be kind.
Correct, there were pre Constantine christians that believed the "human" Jesus was an illusion and not an actual human body. so..yep
whenever you see a puzzle or riddle, its usually due to context connotation and denotation. words can mean many things especially words like "believe". Context connotation and denotation indicate things like the "intent" of the heart and growth level. @@chihangbenjaminting647
I loved your Paulogia from the future bit! All hail SkyNet!
I’m very thankful for Pauologia, De Tabor and the likes for being honest!!
I really can’t stand apologists, they are very deceptive with what the actual information says. Talking their base from jumping off the Christian ledge. Knowing most in the camp won’t fact check if what they are saying is true. That is very deceptive on apologists part.
Someone who says that they can be _certain_ that _nobody_ believed the Messiah would die should not be trusted as a scholar just for using such unjustifiably strong language. That is an absurd claim on its face.
It's always seemed to me that the Jesus of Mark and the other Gospels is a combination of a real person Jesus, a number of other messianic figures from the period, and an extrapolation of 'biblical' texts. That is not to say that anyone is creating a fiction, but rather, that authors, many years after the actual events, are attempting to assemble their versions of the truth. Separating all of those components into actual historical bits is complicated.
Or maybe it is all fiction, but that does not mean that the people writing it thought about that the same way we do these days. Fiction was not a bad thing, the forming of the Roman empire was written about a lot, all if it fiction, yet what they believed.
We have copied miracles - Poseidon (god of water) miracle (walk over water, calming the sea), Asklepios (god of healing) miracle, Dionysos (god of wine) turn water into wine. So the author imitated miracles well kniwn and performed by gods and not preaching peasant. Then we have the author who tzrned Jesus into a second Moses including return from Egypt and the murdering of babies. ( Just to mention the Moses nevef exksted and the story us from Sargon of Akkad) So Jesus is in gokd fan fiction company.
@@michaelchampion936They thought exactly the same way we did about fiction.
The gospel authors are doing synthesis, as you noted, from many stories and the events of the late 2nd Temple era. That's why the gospels are not biographies and are not chronicles. They are constructed from many streams of events and people.
The point of the gospels is not to convey history but to convey the rhetorical goals of the cult leaders. Paul gives the game away. People know Jesus from scripture and visions. There are no historical bits evidenced anywhere.
All of the historical bits that the authors of the gospels used were thrown in for verisimilitude by copying from historians. These authors were creating fiction with historical background flavor, not history with fictionalized elements.
I just enjoy seeing the apologists capitulate in the comments trying to explain why the expert is wromg and why their side is right while not using any actual evidence.
Rhetoric and Polemics are FAR easier to master than actual history or anthropology with the math required for the empirical techniques to pin down DATA, not bald assertions and opinions based on those bald assertions.
Paulogia , you're videos can be so varied, one of the bestest channels on these 'tube of you'! I'm still trying hard to get to where I can support! And I like how calmly Dr. Tabor shows his expertise!👍🎃💙🐈⬛💙🥰✌
Wow, thank you!
@@Paulogia❤ Jesus power Level 1 portion of youth longevity digestion an self beauty Jesus energy wash. Negative energy will creep out yr feet tell it's time.
I am twelve minutes into this, and I have a sudden, overpowering urge to watch “Life of Brian” again.
Don’t grumble give a whistle!
Love future Paulogia. Nice work with the digital static.
Great guest.
I am happy to support this channel.
A great teacher admits he maybe wrong and is always ready to learn; whereas a preacher is Omniscient and knows he's always right.
Great preachers also admit they can be wrong. That's a broad generalization that is unbecoming scholastic honesty and fruitful discussion.
@@CCCBeaumont it is a matter of your faith that Yahweh can never err therefore the prospect of a religious person admitting possible error is far lower.
@@davidbudge8359 It is also a matter of our faith that men are inherently flawed, this capable of all manner of mistakes, both moral and mental.
Oh, dear. One more thing, and then I promise I will shut up ...
@25:46 - the so-called "Ḥazon Garbiel Stone" is a non-provenanced artefact belonging to David Jeselsohn, and its authenticity is hotly disputed. Most of the text reads like a weird stream of consciousness, which appears to have been constructed on the basis of a string of Christianised Jewish messianic tropes. If it is authentic-which at present remains a very conjectural "IF"-it is also highly unclear what this text even is, or what it means. In situations like this scholars are usually better off to avoid depending upon disputed, non-provenanced possible forgeries in making what are already also conjectural claims for early Jewish religion.
Future Paul: Good grief, man! Tell us when Judgement Day happens so we can get our behinds down to South America!
My thanks to Paulogia & James Tabor, for them revealing the truth!
Interesting that the Dead Sea Scrolls depict a teacher, a priestly messiah and a kingly messiah. To my mind, Mark depicts Jesus as a man, Luke as a Priest, and Matthew as a king. This seems to correlate with the scrolls thematically. Could the Q source have been involved here?
I think of all the great guests that have been on here, Mr. Tabor stands out as one of the absolute best. I just love hearing what he has to say.
Why does no one ever question why no one absolutely no one has seen or heard from someone who supposedly rose from the dead for thousands of years. ridiculous. Wake up
Yes there's a lot of linguistics and mental gymnastics when it comes down to trying to shoehorn jebus into Old Testament history.
Mental gymnastics and cherry picking is a sport for some Christians.
What data leads you to that conclusion?
@@CCCBeaumont the Wholly Fables aka the Bible.
@@grapeshot Yet remarkably powerful in the lives of those who follow them. Excellent guides for archaeologists, historically reliable, especially when compared to other documents of antiquity, and they appear to provide the truest information about how one can relate to God.
@CCCBeaumont nope and Archeology where you have a shovel in one hand and a Bible in the other has long been discredited.
Seems like this is kind of a Catch-22. Either the prophecies were clear and the disciples had little reason to be confused, or they were not clear, and thus not very useful as prophecies.
Omni-omni God is impotent to even say, "Hi", but apparently LOVES me oooooh so much..
31:12 love the Life of Brian visual during this bit…
This is excellent info for a response I'm putting together for an article by N.T. Wright on second-temple Judaism and their beliefs in slain and resurrected Messiahs. Thank you both!
Dr. Jeremiah was much more interesting as the mayor of Flavortown!
Drinking Game: Take a drink every time Jeremiah name drops “Oxford”
Oh, he's *that* guy
You've also got the story of Osiris as well, not necessarily a messiah of course, but a God who died and comes back.
No reason to invent resurrection story? If they didn't expect Jesus to die, when he died that was the end of story. They wanted to continue the story so they had to come up with something. That something is resurrection.
His disciples had to justify why their messiah had to die in such an embarassing way, thus the need for a ressurection story. And that narrative is powerful for the modern audience who wouldnt know better
Lol sorry i just reworded what you said
Love the monolith scenes from 2001…but even better would have been the spoof scenes from Mel Brook’s “History of the World Part 1”
(44:22) "I don't take labels like that, I think the cosmos is much more complicated than anybody's label."
This is exactly why I invented the term and refer to myself as an Ecumenical Deist - two words that have never (to my knowledge) been used together. It is both a label and not a label. The breadth of different beliefs - and respect of beliefs of others, that these two terms can encompass is compounded when placed together. It is my way of saying, "I respect the faiths of others without affirming them to be true. I acknowledge the value of your religion without excluding the value to be found in the beliefs or nonbelief of others. I reject the dogma of religion without discrediting the good that it has drawn out of people. And I am willing to seek shared meaning and 'truth' in the religious traditions and beliefs of all without forgetting that the cosmos is too vast for anyone to claim a monopoly on truth, and humanity is too diverse and complex for anyone to claim a monopoly on meaning."
"Ecumenical Deism" is, in my opinion, the ultimate no-labels label. #ShamelessPlug
On an unrelated note: The new US Speaker of the House (3rd in line for POTUS) is a Ken Ham follower and a major contributor to AIG and the ARK Encounter. Have seen at least one interview with him where they also included Ken Ham.
The US turns more and more in some weird religious cultists home.
This was an incredible video. Thanks guys
*grabs popcorn and sits intently* 🍿
As a person who could not care less about the bible, I am interested in Dr. Johnson's apparent lack of due diligence.
Love your content as alway!!!❤❤❤
I'm really interested in christian mythology, only just found the channel recently but I love it so far!
The problem with “they pierced “in psalm 22. Even if you use the Dead Sea Scrolls or variants in the LXX is that the word Karu does not mean “to pierce” it means “to dig.” as in dig a hole.
Homiletically you can get to the notion of animals piercing flesh from the verses, kind of like Rashi would, but it does not say pierced, even if you use the variant readings.
Zachariah, 12 verse 10 is the clearest reference to a dying figure.
You can make people believe anything especially when they already believe anything.
"I'm not an atheist I don't accept labels like that I think the cosmos are too complex for..."
Dude c'mon..
Great podcast, Im purchasing the course 🎉...
jesus story is reflected in fantasy like, king Arthur, Merlin, the black knight, Robbin hood, stood against some thing bad, prevailed but lost in the end, hail the legend.
Excellent video, thank you!
As another guy named Paul, my endorsement of Paul on his take about Paul is two thumbs up. PS - in the bible that would be considered four independent sources that James has two thumbs.
Great video and book recommendations. ✌️
Had to attend a funeral recently, Minister took over the eulogy to talk about how Jesus invented compassion - apparently before Jesus the Romans were all Libertines and believed in only “tit for tat,” there was no unconditional compassion (for woman, old, the enfeebled)-unless there was the chance for some gain or repayment. Apparently, if you accepted the Emperor’s coin in charity you would be obligated to pay Rome back (apparently this is why the Emperor’s face was on the coin…) So the Minister said.
Someone famous must have said this recently, because I saw a comment on TH-cam making the same claim, his evidence being that the word “charity” didn’t even exist until the rise of Christianity. I’m don’t know whether that’s true or not, but claiming that the lack of a specific word shows that even the concept compassion/charity didn’t exist is silly
Thanks for the video :)
Again I am struck by how much these early Christians sounds like cults.
"Cult" is what the big religion calls the small religion.
@@Kyeudo "Religion" is what the big cult calls the big cult.
@@noracola5285
Also true. We just tolerate them more because they score lower on the BITE model.
@@Kyeudowhat’s the BITE model?
@@DeruwynArchmage
It's a model of controlling behaviors exhibited by cults. BITE is an acronym that stands for Behavior/Information/Thought/Emotion, four areas of control that are very common in cult behavior.
Dr. Tabor sounds a lot less like a robot this time around! Whatever audio tweaks were made have worked well!
I want to see more from future Paul, that effect was amazing! Hail skynet!
John 10:27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know
them, and they follow me. 28 | give them
eternal life, and they shall never perish;
no one will snatch them out of my hand.🤔
Yet he says in the earlier text of Matthew, "You will all fall away because of me this night...strike down the shepard, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered." The writer of John didn't like that part. It's comedy gold. 😂
I agree that 1 Cor 15 is the earliest reference we have to the resurrection. But I'm wondering if it accurately represents the _earliest Christian view_ of Jesus' resurrection. Paul is speaking to a Greek audience there and using terminology we find in texts about Stoic metaphysics. So it seems he's catering to his audience with terms they understood.
But would Peter and James actually agree with all the "spiritual body" talk? Unfortunately, we don't really know because we don't have any firsthand writings from them explaining what they actually believed.
We don't know. Though, if 1 Peter is authentic, then Peter agreed with Paul that Christ's body was spiritual (see 1 Peter 3:18, "He was put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit").
This citation shows clearly that he talks about a person and not a "god".
The more I learn, the more I’m convinced that these were literary works.
The repetition of the stories, changing a bit every time but hitting all the same notes just sounds like people retelling a known story with their own twists. The intentional parallels drawn to earlier figures. Everything tells me it’s a character. A story. It fits so much better with the data.
I feel like Paul had a seizure, said he saw things, and kicked off a new Jewish cult that we call Christianity. One thing led to another; people expanded on the story, filled in the gaps, and over the decades the story grew and you get the New Testament.
A lot of apologists in here who missed the point that Jesus is not unique, and want to nitpick the doctors statements to find a way to justify their belief.
That sounds like a fantastic course
14:38 "So when their teacher died, they turned to these same texts that Christian Slater turned to.."
What's he got to do with this?
Cameron Bertuzzi should read Francesca Stavrakopoulou's "God: An Anatomy". It's a much more interesting dive into what the ancients believed about the body of God/gods, and it's based in...facts!!
Of course they didn’t expect him to die. Scripturally, the messiah was supposed to usher in an age of peace and end war in Jerusalem.
Jesus died and war and violence increased.
The end
He also wasn't related to david unless Mary and Joseph are siblings. Look it up they just reused Josephs genealogy on Mary who was the only biological parent out of the two. Joseph was the one who was distantly related to david and he straight up didn't even contribute genetically to Jesus.
"... hail Skynet."
🤣
Another damn person said the same thing for a 51 minutes video with no damn time stamp. Thanks for nothing!
Future Paul won't go back! The borg is everywhere!
You mean Marcus Borg?
Leaving aside the question of whether the Messiah might have suffered versus triumphed in the pre-Christian Jewish conversation, neither interpretation eliminates the possibility that the disciples invented the resurrection. There is plenty of evidence that followers of cult leaders improvise and adapt when unexpected things happen - we see this in modern-day cults all the time. So perhaps: His followers thought he was bound for greatness, but instead he was arrested and executed. They improvised and adapted. They retrieved the body (it implies so in the book of Matthew) and then circulated stories claiming that he came back to life and will return to finish the job later. It's exactly what cults do. . .
The cult members who left their job and families ruined their lives. After their cult leader was executed as a crimal that rebelled against Rome they had to run for their life. The Romans would have executed everyone for insurection against Rome rule. So either they went back home trued to get their old jobs and mend cut ties with family or they believed he wasn't dead. As we have Today people who see people after their death. This can be Elvis or Grandma but few make a religion out of it.
Dr James thank you for mentioning Paul. The endless back and forth discussions about the resurrection only referencing the Gospels when they are not the earliest texts mentioning Jesus’s post death appearances ( or Jesus for that matter) were wearing me down.
7:40 that little impromptu outro took me out! 🤣
People never could have ever read earlier writing and being it into the Jesus story
*The Highly Ambiguous Bible ;*
_Might be, could be, maybe, ect, ect._
(stand firmly on your bias/faith)
Do Islamic, Chinese, Indian or Scandinavian scholars refer to the area around where the events of the Bible take place, the Holy Land?
Does it matter?
Johnston's argument seems exactly backwards to me. I can't imagine anyone who would be MORE psychologically motivated to deny their Messiah's actual, irrevocable death than someone who deeply and unshakably believed that God guaranteed their Messiah's victory. A resurrection story is just a denial that your Messiah is really and irrevocably gone.
3:48 love that.
Has anyone ever used AI to scan for all multiple deffiniton words in the texts and for it to determine the definition to use for the story?
I’m not an expert and have no background in Hebrew but I think trying to run an AI on the DSS could be complicated if the characters are not standardized
James Tabor you are a great professor! #humblescholar
*_I'll tell you what Jesus said_** ;* (It's all hearsay)
As all we have are others telling us _"what Jesus said & did"_ the "faith" that Christians have,
is in the words of men that _claim to speak for Jesus._
Maybe Jesus was the Teacher of Righteousness?
Even I know there are much older resurrection myths, like from ancient Egypt, for example.
If I were God-Emperor of Mankind and could decree all AI art be outlawed, I'd do it. But Paulogia would still be allowed to use it. He should be able to benefit from these cheap and effective thumbnails. Is that special treatment? Goddamn right, because Paulogia is just that special. ❤
How does he feel about Jesus being completely made up from an amalgam of people? As someone raised jewish and read the new testament, from interest and from watching The Bible Reloaded, I've noticed that the writers (as they get farther from the date) know less and less about jewish customs and try to interpret things as a christian not as a jew. For instance, the Nazarite, the writers assumed it was someone from Nazareth when instead it was someone of priestly origins (which means, Levi, Cohen or someone who became a rabbi)
I'm not Jewish but married into it & was raised Christian. The idea that Jesus was entirely constructed out of older stories and legends has always seemed like the most likely scenario to me, since my deconversion. It seemed the most likely while I was believing too but I refused to face it, out of insecure pride - that most recognizable feature of Evangelicals.
Chris "Bear Claw" Lapp has one question for Jeremiah Johnson: "Kin you skin griz, Pilgrim?"
Given that the community had ideas about a suffering messiah I think the followers of Jesus were more in-line with a non-suffering messiah and were confused by John the baptist and Jesus' teachings. Only after his death and their ( a few maybe 3) experienced him being raised did they encounter ideas and texts from the Qumran community - and the rest is history. Jesus, as Tabor said, was a quasi figure of the Qumran community but not so militant but definitely thought of himself as the chosen of god to lead his followers to glory through suffering to be exalted and then conquer their enemies!
Claim first, argue, ghost, then write another book that says the same thing..
one question
I was under the impression that at Jesus' time the Jews had no concept of a soul. That resurrection and death wasabout the body and the "breath of life". Dr. Tabor made it sound like the messiah of the Dead Sea Scrolls believed in turing into a spirit after his death (if I understood correctly). Was that already a belief in a soul that is basically freed from its mortal coil or should I see that as an ascension to something like a jinn?