Celentano said this what he heard when he read the news paper daily. The difference between what they reported and reality made no sense!! Damn he could move Bravo Adriano.
As a Mexican, I wonder how it is for non Spanish speakers when Dan M drops Latin American expressions out of nowhere. It really enriches the meaning for me, but I'm guessing it might be a little confusing for others.
The whole "end of times" signs and portents both amuses and bores me because people have been seeing signs and portents for centuries. I remember back in the 70s people were convinced the End was near because it would soon be a generation after the re-establishment of Israel as a nation.
Especially because you can find obvious failures in every one of the big prophetic books and feels like they should discredit them but those failures get frantically handwaved away by apologists. Because you're supposed to watch the signs except when the signs are wrong and then you're just supposed to "have faith"
Beecher - if you want to place bets on stuff like eclipse conspiracies - an idea I love - you can use the Event Contracts market through a service like Kalshi to do just that. Make these idiots put up or shut up!
@50:54 Please come back to the King of Salem/King of Sodom switcheroo. Have y'all done an episode on Melchizedek yet? Would be great information. Hebrews has always been one of my favorite books and I've always been intrigued by this character.
33:45 to 35:43 Anyone else immediately think of “choking the chicken”? Here’s some interesting translations courtesy of Google Translate. The Latin word for chicken is pullum. The Greek word is κόκορας. Spanish has a slang term for penis which is polla. The Spanish word for chicken is pollo. Polla is literally cock, but gallo is more commonly used to signify the male bird. There’s also the English word pullet (I assume from pullum) which lends itself to obvious word play as well as the famous Pullet Surprise. If any of you is an English etymologist, I’d be curious about the etymology of the word cock. While we’re at it, how about the origin of the word rooster? This comment is dedicated to Jacque of the chat streams, who loves language.
"Cock" is actually both from Old English 'cocc' which is a young bird and coc in old French and modern Coq of the same meaning. As for the word meaning male genitalia, it seems to be a pretty old usage. The etymological dictionary says at least as early at the 14th century the word 'pillicock" was used for male genitalia in an old Anglo-Irish writing called 'The Kildare Lyrics'. While unknown word origin, it appears to be related to the actual male chicken and how it struts about and that birds and bulls often represented male vigor.
I read Acts and I see stories being written to take credit for and incorporate the widespread groups of people who had adopted the Jesus stories prior to the writing. From Africa, swinging around the Eastern Mediterranean to Greece. I'm guessing there were Christians in Antioch who were known for the four regulations at the time of the writing. And the stories of Paul are obviously patterned after the Jesus stories.
Kind of scared to watch this one... my take on the Jerusalem Council is somewhere between Eisenman and Tabor. I'm guessing I won't agree with this one at all. Saving for later.
Yes, I still use that stuff. I actually use cash MORE than I did back when. The more plastic is used, the more people want cash around here. I used to use checks for pretty much everything, now I use my card at stores and cash for practically everything else. (hay, riding lessons, music lessons, farrier, etc.) Taking plastic is expensive for small businesses running on a shoestring.
"Who would cross the Bridge of Death must answer me these questions three, ere the other side he see ... What is the capital of Assyria?" And now we know!
I really struggle to understand why Paul has any authority at all. Like this guy persecuted Christians, he would’ve been considered a Greek-speaking foreigner to Jesus and his disciples, he never met Jesus during his lifetime, and somehow his letters take up most of the New Testament. Meanwhile, James, the brother of Jesus, and Peter, someone who spoke Jesus’ language and actually followed him in his lifetime, are both relegated as afterthoughts to the bulk of modern Christian philosophy and theology. Like…how? The best answer I can come up with is his teachings have been the most convenient to structure the church’s power around. Is that really all?!
It's now July 21st. Looking around, clearly, the end has happened and we're now in the kingdom of God. I conclude that God isn't bothered at all by the fact I'm an atheist, and so presumably won't be bothered by all the other stuff Christians threatened us with.
I suppose I will be making several comments here. The first comment is what is a mystical trope and how do you recognize it. So one of the ways of recognizing these things is how they set up the environment to that most people would recognize. So if I said that I went into Arava (the southern desert) and ate grasshoppers and drank dew drops for 40 days and night, you might recognize first I was a bit nuts, but where do I spend my days? And of course at some points the hallucinations would set in. and you’re be like OK, he went to the desert to find god or some daemons inside of himself. Now if you are in Romania and I go up the side of a mountain and start singing the Jesus prayer to my naval, you might see a similar thing. if went to the Himalayas and saw a man climb to a high perch, assume the lotus position and meditate for days you might assume similar things. I Greece, 2000 years ago, you would start in Athens and walk to Elusinian temple about 20 miles away, exhausted probably a bit dehydrated, and they would give you a “Manhattan Tea” concoction that had probably some opium and ergot of rye in it, and you would be buzzed out of your gourd and you would see all kinds of things. So Peter is walking down to I think Jappa from the hills, he reaches his destination, he then, without eating, goes into the Sea (which Peter did a lot) and then went up to the roof of another Peter’s house to meditate. And he is having the “I’m so hungry I could eat a horse dream”. The author of the text is signaling that Peter is a mystic of some ability since he doesn’t need to go to some extreme place to have visions, but that he does have a ritual, and that author is trying to reconstitute Peter in the rumored ways he meditated. In the ancient world there were no TVs or RU-vid, so people took measures to self-entertain. Where as the story itself is trying to reconstitute the reasoning for the conflict between Peter and Paul, part of the response is seen as the great commision in Matthew, but in the Epistles Paul is finger pointing at Peter because around Yacovs watchers Peter is more hesitant to interact to gentiles. And so this text in Luke is siding with Paul in that conflict, as Luke frequently does in his attempt to harmonize the various camps of the fledgling christian world.
Also, the OT - check out Chronicles for a complete rewrite of Samuel and Kings. "wait who killed Goliath? David? Elhanan? or did Elhanan just kill Goliath's brother? All 3 versions are in there - INERRANT!
All along the watchtower. For a gentile to adopt the laws of 613 Mitzvot, it would be contrary to the gentiles well being. If you refrain from the assumtion that the hebrew bible denotes being of jewish origin, you might be able to understand cultural appropriation.
The JW's base their whole structure of their belief on Acts 15. They claim it supports that there was a Governing body of Christians in the first century and they have a Governing body today, even though Governing Body is a corporate term. This GB runs the lives of the Jehovah's Witnesses. They have many, many written and unwritten laws. Many lives have been lost due to their prohibition on blood transfusions, including children because they misapply the prohibition of blood, which only referred to the eating of blood. It is not possible to apply this to human blood. But they do. They claim they are the people for his name. Many thousands are disfellowshipped for sexual immorality. All of this is based on a mistranslation of Amos. There are those expelled from the congregation if they dare say there is no GB and accused of being apostates and are shunned even by their close family members. Be aware that there are those who STILL follow and believe these verses.
So this issue about Edom is a complex issue. It has some relevance to today political conflict but that’s another issue. The big issue is Egypt and Arabia. In around the 31st century BCE Egypt tried to colonize the region (This is about the time Sumerian civilization is forming and Egyptian civilization has yet to form) and they failed. So at this time we have South Semitic peoples down in Arabia, the west Semitic peoples in the region, and NW Semitic peoples up along the coast and North and East Semetic peoples down the Euphrates. The NW semetic peoples extend down the Euphrates, Ebla is established, the East Semetic peoples begin to integrate and the South Semetic peoples are trading to whoever will trade with them, Egypt and Nubia are composed of Hamitic speakers already established over the Nile and the Sahel by this time. In Arabia you have a developing Sa’aba and Sa’ana cultures. But between the South and the Judean hills is essentially seasonally useful grazing land. So let’s plot this out, we have some kinds of cultural center in the Nile delta, there are developing centers at Urushalim, Ashdod and Lachish. Egypt has set up a kind of management center at Gaza. In the 12th century BCE, the whole of the upper region is in collapse and Israel has made contact with the Shasu, Bedouin’s by their nature. Here we need to understand what a thing is before we can talk about its evolution. The people who graze the land sell wool and meat. The textile markets are in the city, thus the meat and textiles need to be traded up. In the same way, if you wanted papyrus you would have a guy in the wetlands gathering plants for drying and then taking things to Market. In addition there was a spice trade through southern Arabia. So that in the System of trade you don’t want people all bringing herds of Sheep into Urushalim as there is not enough food and water. So we get to Edom. Edom started out as a collection of watering holes between South Arabian culture and Gaza as Gaza stood as a major transportation hub between Egypt and the Euphrates. Of course that system of trade would collapse, though South Arabian culture at the time does not appear to collapse. What developed is individual micro states vying for political domination. The current understanding appears a bit fuzzy but in the 9th century a cultural center was established at Yathrib, and this served what was probably lost in the LBAC, there are watering holes between Yathrib and several trading sites in Moab, Egypt, Judea and around the Dead Sea north to Samaria. When Egypt retracted it is natural to assume that there are petty trading kingdoms at the trade endpoints south of Judea. During the early attested Israelite Monarchy it would appear the primary focus was upon trying to access the Euphrates, but Assyrian and Syria knocked Israel backwards. Again the name of the game is about securing trade routes. Trade routes equal power. Shut out of northward expansion, Israel expanded south to Aqaba and at this time. What this does is “block” off the northern part of the trade route and this is Edom. The edomites follow a desert god, much like Yahweh known as Qos, and so the Bedouin’s to the south also follow Yahweh. So this extension of Israel is in line with shared world views. What is Amos talking about. Here is what I think is going on. During the LBAC there were still sages at Beth Lahmi, given the fact that South Arabian culture had not collapsed but that the philistines were an increasing threat these sages, many went to Arabia and settled around Arabia. They eventually coalesce in the townships of Yathrib and to the east. Meanwhile Egypt retracts and some of the sages try to resettle the Levant. When Israel expands southward it now borders the Yathrib culture and thus reconnects trade and the sages of Arabia. But many remain in Yathrib. During the exile many Yahwist are going to flee south to Egypt or Arabia. And so during this time people who sided with the Babylonians would keep their trading posts. Now what I think Amos is talking about is this conceptual Edom which idealizes the Exiles living SSE of Judea including those in Yathrib. Judea by this time is starting to go its own way and Jews living elsewhere are keeping their own traditions. He probably thinking in terms or reconnecting the various priesthoods and sages so that they might all be one big happy family
This podcast is understating to what extent the Septuagint was influential in the Aramaic speaking world. It was better known than any of the Aramaic "Targum"s, and Greek was the intellectual Lingua-Franca of the time. So there is no need to mockingly say "James is quoting Greek, and he wouldn't do that" because he might. Acts is fiction, indeed, but this is not a point of evidence. Also, James is not Jesus's brother, that's an interpretation requiring historicity.
