This Channel contains a growing archive of interviews, lectures, and related videos from my forty years exploring the academic study of the origins of Christianity and ancient Judaism. Some of the videos are older than others and the emphasis is on CONTENT not slick video quality--although I will be posting newer HD productions as well. This material is based upon our surviving historical sources, particularly ancient texts and the material evidence of archaeology. Major topics of my own focus have been the historical Jesus, John the Baptizer, James the brother of Jesus, the apostle Paul, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of Jesus. Questions of focus are: Can the original message of Jesus be recovered? How did Paul differ in his gospel message from that of Jesus? How did a new religion known as "Christianity" emerge from its late 2nd Temple Jewish origins. What have we learned from the Dead Sea Scrolls and other late 2nd Temple Jewish sources?
Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. Matthew 26:27-28 is the same as Isaiah 43:24-26 “I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom” Mtt 26:29 define faith man? Faith=remembering knowing that his blood = this new covenant where by his blood you are made new. It is in his name YHWH Word/Law behold Nail Behold the name of savior no other. Malachi 3:16 then keep the parable of the wedding garment in Matthew. Simple and light. But even more what of those who fear him?
RE: Transfiguration. We should read the transfiguration event from Mat 16:21, Luke 9:22, and Mark 8:3. Jesus tries to give words of encouragement and minimize the fear of his disciples concerning what is going to happen. “If you try to hang on to your life, you will lose it. But if you give up your life for my sake, you will save it” (Mat 16:24). --- The triumph of Emergence as a righteous shining sun on the sorting-out day (Day of Judgment). The transfiguration event was a demonstration of God Power (wrongly understood as kingdom!). Those disciples observed the power of God as Jesus told them (Mat 16:28, Luke 9:27, Mark 9:1) after six/eight days. Only God has the power and authority to invade minds. The event was not real, God made them see what they saw. The essence of the “Gospel” is endeavor of face-to-FACE (will-to-WILL) living --- every blessed moment of joy and experience of growing, relating, expanding and extending to others as an encompassing source of goodness, resembling All-encompassing God--- and becoming a true fabric of DIVINE ORDER of the creation. Let every little leaven invisibly spread all over and become integral to the truth of reality and its flow. On the Day when the contingent entity 'heavens and the earth' (solar system) will pass away, the truth will not. Useless and worthless weeds (bluffing chatters!) though are not fitting to any sustainable fabric and are a good fit to the pit of fire and perfectly acceptable! Let’s turn away from Paul and his idea of space-living that did not happen and return to Jesus and his teachings making the earth a better place to live and for everyone. Jesus did not tell his disciples that he was a source of electricity, and they should plug themselves to him! They were told that they should follow Jesus and his purposeful words. Paul was not there!
It's almost like there was a world before all the chaos...there was civilization before the 'In the beginning....the earth was in a devastated state. Meteor? Earthquakes? Solar flares. Dunno. If the ancients had their own ancient civilizations they looked too, they are completely lost to us.
Lost in interpretation. Earth is our planet, not the universe as you say what you mean by the word World. Earth IS land. You just changed the term from specific to a more general one. There could be land somewhere else in the universe or world. So, yes, your transparent translation is a lot more confusing.
Relatively few witnessed the eruption of Vesuvius and lived to report on it. And it took a while for the news to reach the Empire's many capitals. By that time there must have been plenty of confusion about the event. Rome itself remained intact, as did other Imperial cities, Alexandria, Cesaria, Ephesus, Athens, etc. And it's not like Romans did not know about volcanoes. Mount Etna and Strombolis used to erupt as often at the time as they do today. Was the Book of Revelation influenced by the Vesuvian eruption? It was written on the island of Patmos (it's in the Aegean, close to Anatolia, a long way from Pompeii) in 95 CE, 16 years after the eruption. If the author witnessed the eruption first hand (but how likely is that) the event was so memorable that it would find its way to the papyrus, yet it was not the end of the world as all involved could see. More likely the memory of it, this far from Pompeii and 16 years later, would have faded.
i can't belive i'm at minute 22 and still don't know any difference between the bible and scrolls. if this is how you teach at university....i bet many will fall asleep by half...
The first page was a collection of mythos compiled by the Daughters of Crete. The Garden of Eden is Arcadia Peloponnese, where the nymphs were located. The Orion Seven Cities created the four rivers of 'people' not water. Often accepted as the Swa*tika symbol, thus its hidden history. 'U' is Orion Seven Cities of Aegean coastline, 'r' is the boot of Italy. La Biblia of Crete was given to the Land of Ur in Mesopotamia which the Orion 12 of Jupiter mistranslated the Bible to adopt its own territory as the Garden of Eden. Simple. Orion Circle.
Thoroughly enjoyed the recap of your tour, but it is the Greco-Roman motif itself that places another major roadblock in the Talpiot story. The area itself was under Greco-Roman influence for a considerable period by the time Joseph of A. shows up, but it's more likely he would have still had a traditional Jewish tomb built. And considering the amount of time it takes to build such a tomb, it isn't something he could have built between Thursday and Sunday of the same week. At any rate when Joseph buries Jesus' body, Christianity as a religion isn't well formed as an idea yet, and it would be several more years before Paul starts preaching, which makes any connection between Joseph of A. at the time of the crucifixion and the Greco-Roman decoration at Talpiot a practical impossibility. But there is a cup worth pouring more thought into, and it reminds me of that line from an Indiana Jones movie; "he chose... poorly". Who was the Jewish religious order that crucified Jesus at odds with? Obviously in the immediate aftermath his Jewish followers, but none of the Jews at Jesus' trial would have uttered the word Christianity, let alone predict the Roman empire itself would convert to it. But in the decades that followed the crucifixion, that same Jewish religious order would have heard about Paul's preaching to the Gentile masses and the growing Christian movement that resulted, and it would have helped redefine their enemy. The type of tomb the boxes were found in not only suggests they were placed there at a later date, but points a finger of guilt squarely at the Jewish religious order responsible for the crucifixion. Looks a lot like Professor Plumb did it in the library with a candlestick holder.
Thieme? In the beginning, it was not the beginning. So what He did to the earth was not the 1st beginning. God restored the earth, it was already there. Restored it for Adam. This can explain why the earth is so old as well.
It took him forever to get to his point and then his point was, literally, his own translation, using the tanahk as a springboard. You can see how he is leaving room in his text for controversial biblical ideas instead of taking God at face value. Scripture interprets scripture. We don't.
Repent, pray, humility in this dust formed image of God. Just as Paul could not completely describe the Transfiguration, ye think Paul can describe the mystery of a Trinity or other Almighty configuration ? Psalm 46:10
Beautiful picture at 11:42. Brings to you good thoughts. However, I can't help but wonder why you didn't notice that the horizon was not curved, but was essentially flat! Seems even experts have a tendency to over look the obvious when it goes against Hellenistic inspired thoughts of the Cosmos. Genesis give an entirely different viewpoint of Earth's Cosmos separate from the totality of that of the Universe. Earth's reconstruction along with her cosmos which was separated from the rest of the Universe by the firmament happened some 6,000 years ago, but the Eternal One was not sitting around doing nothing before that.. The story of Lucifer's demise as recorded in Isaiah was what caused the necessity of a new beginning of the arena that Lucifer dominated before his destruction. Surely you've heard of this theory. Dr. Donald Gray Barnhouse proposed it years ago. Many have presented their views on why there seems to be ancient ruins that predate the Genesis account while ignoring the Isaiah account's implication.
If Jesus didn’t preexist then the virgin birth is a lie. Scholars are required to assume that the virgin birth was a lie. I just as gratuitously assume it was true. It’s a twist on the old math proof cartoon. Jesus doesn’t preexist then a miracle doesn’t happen and now I’ll compete my argument
Big project...there is an Ammon Hillman gaining in popularity among many who enjoy academic and scholarly truth as a pillar of their truth seeking. The issue is he is appearing as an expert indeed in classical Greek and claiming the OT was a product of translating Greek into Hebrew. Now this is indeed counter popular opinion, again showing the draw for those of us who enjoy truth regardless as a foundation of their seeking. Now...he is very entertaining and engaging and the problem is he KNOWS more about his area of expertise than many and thus the students of truth are left at the mercy of his knowledge lol. Now his hugest claim is that the Abrahamic and even early Christian culture , even pre Constantine was a product and outreach of human trafficking's. A scholarly refute to this , that is undeniable would be VERY refreshing. And if he is right...that would be groundbreaking. If a brilliant mind could counter his claims easily, it sure would be nice. If you have a peer who is exert enough to counter his narrative about the historical Yehua or even the historical Paul they could easily build a super huge audience in this new debate he is bringing about. Just a suggestion for some scholar out there with enough knowledge to at least provide a polarized view of the opposite. Peace . Any scholars out there to take up an academic pursuit in this regard to clarify some of the sensational views of this Ammon would be appreciated. Till that happens I'll continue to listen and learn from all sources lol. sorry to riddle this video with this , my own adhd baggage however I know that the enjoyers of Talbots material may know or have some sources qualified to do this.
I wonder if Revelation 18 is referring to the great fire of Rome in 64AD, which Nero blamed on the "Christians" ? Even if Revelation was written at a later date, Revelation 18 my be a remembrance of that earlier 64AD event - Rev 1:19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter.
EXPOSING JESUS AND HIS LIES (NO.3) JESUS DIED FOR YOUR SIN, KEEP SINNING AND BE HAPPY; OTHERWISE, WHY REPENT? When we sin, we sin against God and the aggrieved party. That is why only God can forgive your sin if the other party refuses to forgive you. For example, in the case of David and Uriah (2 Samuel 11:15), since Uriah was killed in battle, only God could forgive David. Fortunately, David turned directly to God in repentance and asked for forgiveness. The Golden Calf incident is another example when God rejected Moses' offer to pay or die for the sin of the people for idolatry (Exodus 32:31-33). Below are some passages where God explained that He does not enjoy seeing a sinner die but would rather see them repent and live. How much more, if Jesus were truly His Son and sinless? But we know that God sent Moses to tell Pharaoh that Israel is His firstborn son, not Jesus, the Anti-God (Exodus 4:22, Hosea 1:10, Jeremiah 31:9). (Exodus 32:31-33, Deuteronomy 24:16, Ezekiel 18:20, Ezekiel 18:23, etc.) However, we have Jesus claiming that God wanted him to die for the forgiveness of sin in Matthew 26:28, Matthew 20:28, and especially Matthew 26:39, where he claims that it is God's will for him to die for the forgiveness of sin: Matthew 26:39: "Going a little farther, He fell facedown and prayed, 'My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me. Yet not as I will, but as You will.'" As for Leviticus 17:10-11, where it is stated that "blood atones for sin," it must be understood that those verses clearly state that blood cannot be consumed, whereas Jesus urged his followers to drink his blood, even figuratively, in Matthew 26:27-28. Can any Christians show me one example or one instance where Jesus OBEYED God instead of going against Him in everything? Do you now understand why Jesus is a false prophet and Anti-God?
Almost everything you explore in this lecture is contextualized in the mainstream presentation of the Orthodox Christian world including iconography, the texts of the services, the church calendar and hymnography. Check out the services of Holy Saturday, iconography of the Transfiguration (metamorphosis), burial service for a priest, baptismal rite, etc. If one starts from the perspective of American Protestant sects, very basic stuff can seem revolutionary.
I believe Jesus resurrect from the dead as Lazarus did , il was a bodily resurrection and he was eating and drinking but it's only later when he disappear in the clouds that he was transform into is eternal state.
I like James Tabor's hypothesis but it raises additional questions for me The main question I have is why the disciples, family members, female followers or others in the movement were not aware that Joseph of Arimathea had moved the body, had plans to move the body and had no idea where he had moved it. Joseph of Arimathea is presented and identified as someone who was very sympathetic to the Jesus movement and he was likely intimate or in communication with its followers and key members. Yet in James Tabor's hypothesis he appears to moves the body to a new location after passover out of concert, and out of communication, with any of the movements key members or family members. I dont think this is plausible. The members were aware Joseph initially put Jesus in a tomb and knew where the tomb was. It makes sense they would have likewise been aware or informed if Joseph moved the body early on. The members (especially the women or family members) would have likely been involved in moving the body cleaning, and giving respect to the body as it was moved. Even if they hadnt...once they realized the body was gone, the first person who would have been contacted for information would have been Joseph of Arimathea. If he had in fact moved the body he would have told Jesus' followers and the resurrection narrative would not have gained traction. As I've said I appreciate James Tabor's analysis is intriguing, but not completely satisfying.
When I read Acts and Paul’s authentic letters and then some of the other epistles-so that it becomes pretty obvious just how stressful and contentious the fighting was (between the Peter/James and Paul factions) over whether new Gentile Christian converts needed to keep the Jewish law or not-I can’t help wondering if it was the Peter/James faction who actually set Paul up into getting arrested in the Jewish temple in Jerusalem. Anyone have any thoughts on this?
That is my thought also. Gustav Volkmar said in 1857 that Mark's Jesus is a parable for Paul. Paul is the sower who went out to sow his word in Antioch among other places Gal 2:11-14. But birds of the air (scribes/teachers of the Law) sent by the chief priest James devoured up the seed that Paul sowed. Other seed fell on rocky ground like Peter, and when persecution arose from James, then Peter and the other Jewish believers in Antioch separated like hypocritical Pharisees from eating with Paul's Gentile believers. But the Gentile believers brought forth a hundred fold to Paul's word. On Paul's last Passover, the Zealot chief priests of the Way conspire with the Judas Sicarios to have Paul killed. But instead Paul falls into the hands of the Romans authorities and is accused by the Quisling high priest Ananais of being a ringleader of the seditious Nazarene sect. Ananias was himself later murdered by the Zealots when war broke out with Rome. Therefore it seems unlikely the Judas Sicarios would have conspired with the high priest Ananias to murder Paul and his Roman guards. Instead the Judas Sicarios (Sicarii) conspired with the Zealot chief priests of the Way, James and the others of the council of the Way. It seems to be a parable, perhaps because the plain facts are too embarrassing and too dangerous? The Jerusalem church denied Paul, Paul's Gospel, and Paul's Jesus Christ, and chose instead the teaching of their own Jesus Barabbas (Rev 2:27). For which cause the lord of the vineyard destroyed those wicked husbandmen who made the Temple a den of insurgents and a desolation? I think we fail to see this because we are so used to imposing Paul's and Mark's tax paying and pacifist Jesus onto the early Jewish Zealot church. And this is partly what Mark intended for those who do not understand the parables. That seeing they may see but not perceive, and hearing they may hear but not understand. They are outsiders, according to Mark. But according to Mark, Jesus's own family also do not understand Paul's Jesus and Paul's Gospel, and they also are outsiders, and that is so that they will not be forgiven and so that Isaiah 6:9-12 will be fulfilled in them. They could not watch one hour for their lord to return from his far journey and the fullness of Paul's Gentile harvest to come in. Therefore what will the lord of the vineyard do when he comes?
My goodness. The Bible is not secular history, it is Salvation history... Sacred History. The story of Paul is the story of Christed Man when he Experiences the Birth from above. Literally in your skull, Golgatha, Calvary. Jesus was not a man who walked the earth 2000 years ago, he is you. This is the biography of every man. God became man so that man could become God. God sleeps within every man. There is a definate process of awakening, you cannot make it happen. Paul to the Galatians: Do you not know that Jesus Christ is IN you. The Bible is addressed to the Imagination of man. All the characters in the Bible are states of conciousness. Your own wonderful human Imagination is God. Paul is talking about the awakened man. Henceforth we regard no man after the flesh, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth regard him thus no longer. The Bible, the greatest book ever written . Presented in allegory and dark sayings to hide the Truth from the profane. It all takes place within the mind of man.
Instant click and like! 🤩 Interesting point about how hot Italy is in early September, I remember visiting Italy (Rome and surrounding areas) during earlyNovember and thinking the weather was very pleasant, neither too hot or too cold. Granted this was a decade ago 😁
Paul was the most honest in his conversion to follow Yeshua, and did not place rituals over Gentiles. He earnestly and humbly brought the good news and hoped both jews and Gentiles would love one another and serve loving Yeshua. His future views of all becoming one under Jesus Christ/ Yeshua Hamachiach and singing a new song. Having relationship with the living GOD through Jesus Christ/ Yeshua Hamachiach.
Grace is a pagan deity that took the place of many words. All creation will not be saved. The na,me Jesus Christ is a pagan Christian lie that goes back to Constantine. "You have no clue to the meaning of John 3:16.
![How James [Yaaqov] Beloved Brother of Jesus Was Written out of Early Christianity](/img/0.gif)