Ask Dr. Steve Mason Anything! Historian of Judea in the Graeco-Roman period 

Please consider joining MythVision Patreon to help me in continuing doing this work! 💯 www.patreon.com/mythvision -💥Get early access to 100's of videos not made public -💥Ask questions for scholars I interview and potentially have a video recording from the scholars -💥Private message me

Would like to listen to Dr. Mason every week.

Dr. Mason has a brilliant way of explaining this material to the common folk like me. Cool as a cucumber. Thanks Derek.

Not Dr. Mason again. No sleep for me. He's like that game you can't quit that is in your head for days afterwards.

Steve Mason's depth and breadth of knowledge reminds me that I know so little about the context, the connections between Judea and Egypt for example as time goes on from 500 to 200 t0 0 to 400 and on. That and how the actions of all those from 150 bce to 250 ce fit in context. where was celsus? where was marcion? why didn't we learn about these guys in the fundamentalist churches we spent 30 years with.... When I watched the John The Baptist presentation by Mason, I thought this was one of the best presentations I'd ever seen. Litwa answers in a very tight context as your viewers, like me, who were experts in specific church theology, knew next to nothing about anything else. I love watching you and Mason. It reminds me how much I learn every time...and how much i need to know...and I'm not kidding...

Professor Mason is always such a delight to hear; thank you for having him on, Derek!

Chuang Tzu is my favorite! That is so great he said that. It makes me love him even more. Great guest!

Myth vision and gnostic informant always come with the best guests. Great academics and brilliant thinkers. Thanks for sharing

just wonderful! Thanks Derek bringing Doc "Superbrain" Mason on stage! Just amazing! Can´t get enough of thie antique era! Greets from Hamburg, Germany

Love the Steve Mason episodes!

The Korean movie is 'Spring summer fall winter and spring' by Kim Ki Duk. One of his masterpieces. If professor Mason appreciated that one, he should also try 'strokes of fire' (despite that English title, the French title is closer to the movie story 'drunk on women and wine'). A painter in search for original creation/expression, it is a beautiful historical piece, inspired by the life of the painter. By Im kwon taek. One of the best Korean directors. I saw it 20 years ago, it is still with me.

I think dr miller is my favorite guest. Hes so humble and open for new thought, he's a breath of fresh air.

I absolutely loved this episode, Derek! Dr. Mason is such a wonderful storyteller and I agree with him that studying history is taking the time to examine the evidence, but just jumping to an answer. Maybe next time try to have a specific end time in mind in the beginning and cut off questions thirty minutes prior, with the option of opening for questions again if there's a bit of time left near the end? Dr. Mason is so kind and generous with his time and honestly I could listen to y'all talk for hours upon hours, but this isn't the first one of your talks where Dr. Mason had to request things wrap up quickly.

Thanks for the great video!

I would actually say Paul was the first "Christian" in the modern context. I would say that before that, pre-Paulian Yshu sect was quite a different thing and could be placed under the umbrella of Judaism. But Paul was also a Jew critiquing Judaism, and deciding to put that lifestyle behind him. I don't think there was a time when he wasn't a Jew, but there was a time when he wasn't a Christian/Messianic Jew. And as a Jew I actually think, outside of his Christology, Paul's observations and critique's of Judaism in the 1st century CE was spot on. And I would actually say he kind of saw the future of Judaism in a sense, all be it mixed with this Yeshu sect beliefs. And of course, even Paulian Christology isn't quite what Christianity is today, as the Roman's would really be the one's to finalize the paradigm. I would also say Philo was a precursor to Jews of the enlightenment and after. To the Reform movement of the 18th/19th century, or the Humanist Judaism movement of today. Philo, from a philosophical standpoint, is one of the first to modernize Judaism without implementing the Christian paradigm. And that is like modern Judaism to a large degree, outside of the Orthodox/Conservative which only make up 20-30% of modern Jews. But in regard to Judaism and what was going on at the time with the Sadducees and Pharisees, and the authoritarian legalism, I would actually say MOST Jews today would actually agree with him. And Jesus for that matter. Not Roman Christianity. And it did change with Paul. But still his critique of Judaism is spot on. If you consider that most Jews today don't follow the calendar, don't follow Halakha, eat with gentiles, most Jews today don't believe in the 13 principles. Now a lot of Jews are Kosher but that has more to do with culture I think. The taboo against pork and what not is SO strong, that even secular Jews might have a hard time eating non Kosher. But otherwise, I don't think most Jews would disagree with Paul on these Judaic issues. And many might suggest we have the same perspective in regard to Orthodox Rabbinical Judaism. Really, 10% of modern Jews around the world are Orthodox and only another 10-20% "conservative". And those are the two main groups that adhere to Rabbinical Judaism as defined by the 13 principles of Rambam. The other 70% of Jews are still Jews, and many still practicing Judaism, just outside of the Rabbinical model. Even Reform. All Jewish groups today are influenced by Rabbinic Judaism, but they don't all believe and practice within that paradigm. And I would say most Jews fit somewhere into Humanist Judaism. Which allows for a wide range of belies. Really, Rabbinical Judaism is the adherence to a text. That is its' defining characteristic. It's adherence to a very specific canon, and a very specific tradition of literature, with a very specific interpretation of that literature. And it can be further, in belief defined by Rambam's 13 principles. But Torah just means teach or guide. So restricting "torah" to a single text in my view is actually anti the practice of "torah", teaching and learning. And in the Jewish sense, we only stop learning when we die, thus an end to learning is a form of death. But we could similarly suggest that stagnation in learning, restricting Torah, fundamentally to the Pentateuch and extended Tanach, is restricting the act of torah and stagnating torah. Bringing us closer to death not life. But that's just one interpretation I suppose. Anyway, Paul definitely understood what direction Judaism was headed in. It might have taken another 1900 years or so, but 70% of modern Jews do not believe Torah/Tanach is the literal and direct word of God. Not divinely authored. The brilliance of our ancestors? Sure. With some amazing insights into the nature of the universe, the nature of eternity which in the Judaic since IS "God". That eternal thing that must exist for all else to exist. As we still haven't come close to tackling the problems of infinite regress and absolute non existence. The latter which simply can't exist if anything else exists. Which means something, some entity must be eternal. And this is essentially the YhVH name, the was, the is and the will be. And in Rabbinic Judaism it is taboo to say this word in full because they believe in word magic. There is a lot of magic and divination in Judaism. And they believe, the Orthodox that is, that saying this word takes you out of yourself and away from god, looking at eternity from the outside almost. And thus seeing your insignificance and how small we are, and they believe this is spiritually, or I would argue they really mean psychologically, dangerous. And it can be, psychologically speaking. It removes one from their ego. Which can be good if you are prepared for that sort of abyss. But if you aren't it can lead to some terrible psychological side effects, like nihilism and depression and the sort. Anyway, Paul understood Jews wanted to join the greater world. Now, in a way he also understood that many wanted to put their superstitious version of Judaism behind them also. But he got a lot of push back on that, because I think that element was overlooked by the Jacob and crew in Israel. If Jesus really said the things he is supposed to have said, in regard to the spirit of the law, I think they kind of missed this element. He was likely pointing to the fact that Halakha is basically all superstition. At least that's how Paul seems to have interpreted it. And most Jews today would agree with that.

06:00 The region is called Asia Minor.

absolutely interesting, thanks for this.

Jews were so prominent in Egypt for such a long period of time, something like 2500 years straight, from the Persian period onward, that it's estimated that up to 5% of modern Egyptian ancestry is Jewish. For all of the modern Egyptian population.

They don't make them like Steve Mason anymore!

Judaism really so different today in the sense that converts are joining a nation not a single belief system. Even though the initiation itself may be in that tradition. They might not realize it at the time, but they aren't adopting a specific belief, they are joining a nation, a people. That means they are adopting all of us, the atheists, secular, Reform, Humanist, reconstructionist, messianic... and once you become a Jew it is for life. It's not like joining any other religion. Accept for Samaritanism really, for obvious reasons. The term Jew comes from "Iudaeus" which was Latin for "Yehudim" or "Judean". Jews are the people of the KINGDDOM of Judah, not the tribe specifically and not the faith practices of the people of that Kingdom and their descendants. And when someone converts to Judaism, they might not be descended of Israelites. But when they have children with other Jews, their descendants are eventually just as much descended of Israelites and converts as all other Jews. But Jew does not mean someone who practices Rabbinic Judaism. That is a specific and very limited form of Judaic practice and belief. And today, 70% of Jews do not follow Rabbinic law. All modern Judaism is influenced by the Rabbinic tradition of course. But only about 20-30% adhere to Halakha, Rabbinical law and the 13 principles as defined by Rambam in the 12th century CE. Judaism isn't just Rabbinic Judaism. Judaism is what JEWS do. All Jews, not just 20% of Jews or however few follow the 13 principles and Rabbinic law. Jews are still a NATION first and foremost. And Judaism itself isn't a formalized religion. Rabbinic Judaism specifically has been formalized, but Judaism can't be, because it's what Jews do and believe, the common threads that hold us together. Reform and non Orthodox/Conservative accept patrilineal or matrilneal descent today as it should be and as it likely was, the only difference being patrilineal would override matrilineal if there was a conflict. But yes, both NATION and tribe came from the father. So things are changing. The only reason this even still matters is because the Orthodox Rabbinate still controls a lot of the social standards for Israeli society. They oversee Aliyah and thus children of a male Jew and female non Jew must go through an Orthodox conversion specifically even if they want to make Aliyah. Which is pretty messed up as again, we are a nation not a formal religion. And the Rabbinate also controls marriage and Israel doesn't allow interfaith marriage to take place in Israel. So this is why this still matters. As soon as the Orthodox Rabbinate of Israel loses their power, which will have to happen eventually, there will no longer be an real social ramifications for not following the Rabbinical tradition specifically.

Never ever in the history there was a pushback from the Jewish people on excepting converts all you had to do is be sincere about it and except it 100% that was always the case and still is today

19th cent scholars oft repeated the term ROMANISM to express the larger influence of the Roman world.

Since Jesus prophesied the destruction of the Jewish Temple in the Gospel of Mark, does that indicate that gospel was written during or after 70 CE?

Is it too late to pass a msg toward Dr. Mason? If not, what is Josephus' sources forJesus Christ? I am guessing Christians, not Roman sources.

In a way, the relation of Christianity and Judaism is analogous to that of Shi'i and Sunni Islam.

It is interesting that Dr. Mason rejects the scholarly consensus that Paul wrote the prison letters (including Philippians) from Rome, and instead favors an imprisonment in Ephesus, several years before making his appeal to Caesar in Rome, as the place where he wrote those letters. This is N.T. Wright's position, as well.

26:43 was he referring to Ben F Meyer?

About the splitting of the path, isn't the idea about how early Jewish Christianity (epitomized by James, Peter and later the Ebionites) eventually differed from Judaism?

To add to my question: I didn't know that 'angels/ghosts/spirits' were so interested in literacy.

1:23:05 If Matthew hypothetically read the scriptures and wrote about two donkeys, on what prima facie basis should we assume a Jew such as the historical Jesus couldn't have read the scriptures & deliberately shaped his public symbolic actions to do PRECISELY that?? Why couldn't Jesus have deliberately taken two donkeys along, making a public show of it based on his reading of Zechariah, with Mark mentioning only one because he could only physically sit on one.

What was the significance of Mark 6:3, identifying Jesus by his mother’s name, rather than his father’s? (First post-live comment)

I’m confident this channel has an agenda

The Hebrews excepted the will of God when they were conquered by empires but always resisted when there was laws made against the torah practices.

join the livestream now on "Hamza's Den" At 9:30 p.m. UK December 23, 2021 Come and ask any questions you want about Islam and tell us about your religion!

Where and when was Paul born, raised, educated, died... all speculation. No evidence of his actually ever having been anywhere, no references outside of his own "writings". ..

Judaism or Abrahamic religion? Abrahamic religions would be a better term?

When you say, as an atheist or agnostic or whatever, "Buy it for someone for Christmas," are you supposing that Santa Claus usurped Christianity?

The sources for discouraging converts is in the Talmud way before the rise of Christianity and definitely had no effect on the rabbis of the talmud and they derive this from the verses in the holy Hebrew Scriptures not influenced by Christians whatsoever And later rabbis discussing that you should discourage convert are in Muslim lands and also only has to do with the word of the Torah and Nach

i think i may have cracked one of the big ones ~~~The origin of the Muslim Faith and Islam

1:18:00 People keep trying to associate Jesus with Mithra and keep failing. Jesus (who gets sacrificed) has more similarity with the bull Mithra slays than with Mithra.

I feel exactly like dr. Steve Mason but in my case it's true LOL.

Mason's supposed to be an expert on Judaea, yet pretty much gets all the names and titles wrong. And why is he using the word "Jews" so often to reference the Israelites of Judaea when he's written articles on the accuracy and superiority of using Judaeans?

Reform Judaism has nothing to do with Judaism

Your lack of understanding of Judean values is your problem even though some stopped following the traditions most people did not care about earthly possessions but spiritual

Jesus was an insignificant individual to Judaism and not mentioned anywhere at all unless you are referring to mamzer that was playing without a head covering and the rabbis said he will be trouble

From after MountSinai Hebrews was determined by the mother as recorded Deuteronomy 7:3/4 And 1 chronicles 2:35 And most famous Ezra Show that it went after the mother Your guest is wrong he should stick to his own subject And as we see from Chronicles is the father that didn’t have any sons wanted the territory to stay in the family so he brought a male from the outside so the land will stay in the hands of the grandchildren nothing to do with wars Which follows the laws of Moses that women will keep their territory if their father is gone and they have no brothers but if they married out with in the Hebrew tribes the land will be given to the husband But if they married a non-Hebrew male he does not inherit the land from them

Finally got time to return and comment on Dr. Mason's response... he didn't connect the dots at all. Christianity started in Asia, there in the Assembly at Antioch's Synagogue. Rav Sha'ul (Paul) spends a whole year there, a distraction in his mission that he had to invest a large chunk of time on. Before he leaves, those followers are deemed "Kristianay" (Christian) as a collective and unique group within the Netzarim sect which Paul is a leader of (Acts 24:5). Think of this event as striking the match... From here on, Paul is in a tug-of-war between the teaching of the gospel and trying to keep the Christians, growing with gentile members, in check. As Paul continues his work, meandering here and there, the Christian fire spreads through Asia. Conflicts arise so, that in 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Paul shares how Asia got so sideways, they try to kill him. His depression is because he failed to reel them in. Reading Revelation 2, we see that Yochanan (John) reports that Y'shua has come to hate Asian Assembly's for various reasons. Additionally, there's a guy going around preaching hogwash to the Assembly's at various Synagogues that Paul tells the followers needs to be kicked out. While there's many suspects, Ignatius is the obvious suspect. He's pushing an end to Torah and other blasphemous theologies. A totally new religion (Christianity) is spun off of the Jewish sect and takes on a life of its own due to its lacks in observation of the laws of Moshe. Eventually, Nicea adopts Ignatius' doctrine and Christianity takes over while the Netzarim continues, with the other Jews, to be persecuted. Point is, until that year in Antioch, everything was going smooth, Christianity was an accident and it took over.

It think Aryan is saying that Tobia, in this site and on his two other favored channels says, ‘Don’t go to the scholars (referring apparently to those studies of extra biblical sources) read the Hebrew Scriptures” In other word the rabbi resorts alot to special pleading. BTW Mason knows an awful lot of stuff about near eastern history

Good evening.. I found guests who talk about Islam ignorantly, and we know our religion well.. I hope you are neutral in your dress and try to host Sheikh Othman bin Al-Farouq or Shamsi or Sheikh Assim Al hakim ، Dr Muhammad Salah ، Shaykh Abu Usamah At-Thahabi ، Sheikh Shamsi ، Sheikh Mufti Menk ، Dr. Laurence Brown and Dr.Tahir Wyatt, Saajid Lipham, Joe Bradford ,Nicholas Pelletier, Yusuf Estes,، Sheikh Othman Al-Khamis ـ Shaykh Hasan Somali ، Raheem McCarthy's - ـ Ustaadh Muhammad Tim Humble- Sheikh Abdul Rahman Al-Dimashqieh ، Shaykh Wasim Kempson ، Ibrahim menk + Adnaan Menk . Mufti Muneer ، Khalid Green . Sheikh Bilal Philips، Farid Responds ،Sheikh Khalid Yasin Sheikh Okasha Kameny ـ Sheikh Abdur Rahman Hassan ، Dr. Ahmad Ibn-Saifuddin ،

The absurdity of this “professor” to ignore everything in the Hebrew writings and rabbinical writings is appalling and shows his biased against the Hebrew people🤮🤮🤮