Was Pauls Baptism Different? Dr. James D Tabor

Подписаться 261 тыс.

Просмотров 13 тыс.

50% 1

Dr. James D. Tabor BOOKS HERE: 👉 amzn.to/35FqNYf
Here is Dr. James Tabor's RU-vid channel
/ jamestaborvideos
Dr. James D Tabor's Blog - jamestabor.com/
In this “compulsively readable exploration of the tangled world of Christian origins” (Publishers Weekly), religious historian James Tabor illuminates the earliest years of Jesus’ teachings before Paul shaped them into the religion we know today.
This fascinating examination of the earliest years of Christianity reveals how the man we call St. Paul shaped Christianity as we know it today.
Historians know almost nothing about the two decades following the crucifixion of Jesus, when his followers regrouped and began to spread his message. During this time Paul joined the movement and began to preach to the gentiles. Using the oldest Christian documents that we have-the letters of Paul-as well as other early Christian sources, historian and scholar James Tabor reconstructs the origins of Christianity. Tabor shows how Paul separated himself from Peter and James to introduce his own version of Christianity, which would continue to develop independently of the message that Jesus, James, and Peter preached.
Paul and Jesus illuminates the fascinating period of history when Christianity was born out of Judaism.================================
GET RECOMMENDED (Joel Baden) BOOKS HERE: 👉 amzn.to/35FqNYf
MythVision Website: 🔥 mythvisionpodc...
MythVision Patreon 👉 / mythvision
MythVision Paypal. 👉 www.paypal.me/...
Cashapp: 👉 $rewiredaddiction
Venmo: 👉 @Derek-Lambert-9
Recommeded books 👉 amzn.to/35FqNYf
Email MythVision 👉 mythvisionpodcast@gmail.com
Facebook page: 👉 / mythvision
Facebook group: 👉 / thewaterboyzradio
Twitter: 👉 @DerekPodcast
Instagram: 👉 @dereklambert_7
MythVision Discord: / discord
===========================
#JamesTabor #NewTestament #MythVision

Опубликовано:

28 сен 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 80

@alkazaryyy 3 года назад

More of this guy please!

@leighmelnychuk8859 3 года назад

The Book of Acts….making a complete mess of things for almost 2000 years and counting!

@nonenone9457 2 года назад

I think it's more translations making a mess

@jackwardrop4994 3 года назад

Mythvision has been on fire lately.

@wilcoxcl01 2 года назад

He's talking about the difference between the Netzarim sect of Judaism and the cult of Christianity started in Antioch.

@wildmanchrisvevo7007 2 года назад

What about, IN ALL 3 SYNOPTIC GOSPELS, in communion JESUS tells them, "THIS is my blood... flesh..."?

@riley02192012 2 года назад

I love your videos with Dr. Tabor.

@Zxuma 3 года назад

Just wow! I was absolutely ignorant about the roots of baptism in Judaism. Thanks sir. Christianity is a Jewish sect.

@scottgiannotti5480 2 года назад

Christianity is not a sect of Judiasm friend. It's a section of Satanism. All religion is a section of Satanism. Learn deeper about Jesus and you will see he was breaking people free of ALL religion, he just started with the Jews because the word of God had been corrupted. If this were not true, Jesus wouldn't have came.

@dairyqueue 2 года назад

@@scottgiannotti5480 then why didn't he say that

@hermanhale9258 Год назад

The Jews reject Jesus, and Tabor is a Jewish name.

@kaiju2783 3 года назад

Acts 15:29 is interesting. Shows that drinking Jesus's blood is wrong

@jonasespinoza6967 2 года назад

To much jokes calling him lord and savior Tabor. In contrast I love the professionalism of Dr. Tabor respecting the believes of people even acknowledging that untill today experiences are valid especially when you examine yourself like Paul asked us to do in 2Cor. 13:5. Very good talk to distinguish the baptism of John and later Paul.

@GizmoFromPizmo 2 года назад

So the Didache says the Lord's Supper is not the body and blood of Jesus and we should go by that but Matthew, Mark, Luke and Paul all quote Jesus saying, "This is my body", and "This is my blood", and we reject that; right? What a load.

@markhoulsby359 Год назад

Mr. Lambert There is a typo in the title of this video, i.e. the apostrophe in: "...Paul's..." is omitted. Also, quite correctly, you included a period after: "Dr.", yet not after the middle initial: "D". This seems a little inconsistent. Make of these observations what you will. The content on this channel is always interesting.

@boxerfencer 3 года назад

Brilliant!

@johnneurohr9122 Год назад

It doesn't matter how or who originated the "eucharist". It is a ritual that is meaningless for your redemption. It is the easy gospel. When Paul was talking about the "bread" he was talking about the church, the "body". We partake of the bread when we commune with each other and learn the truth. We partake of the blood when we talk the truth and are rejected by the unbelieving or deceived world. Drinking the cup" is a death. We die daily. When we tell the truth we are put on the cross...we follow Jesus. "Deny self, Take up cross, follow me".

@lissam8988 3 года назад

The word Lord can mean a king a ruler and authority this has been known for thousands of years. And in some cases even a husband back then could be a Lord. So which Lord did Paul receive this information because there was many back then many rulers. Just to use a generic name such as Lord would mean nothing. Also I'm not talking about the English word Lord however even with that there was a time an old English that women would call their husbands Lord or master.

@HarryNicNicholas 3 года назад

does anyone know if religion has got a maximum number for souls? i mean the population is increasing, and as souls are eternal does that mean there is a stockpile of souls waiting to be born, cos i would imagine there would be a maximum number you can have, but that would mean the population would remain the same or decrease, so are there a ton of unborn souls out there somewhere? what is the rule for pre birth souls, anyone know?

@GizmoFromPizmo 2 года назад

John's gospel refers to Jesus' baptism but doesn't record it. John intentionally skips over things that we read about in the other accounts. It seems intentional. It's not in John's account on purpose. We've already read all that.

@TheRobdarling 3 года назад

how about this... none of it is real... not one thing. Now, let us discuss Sherlock Holmes style of clothing. Same fuckin difference. It is called fiction for a reason. But then there is money to be made...

@willempasterkamp862 3 года назад

And a billion+ people pray to and claim a relationship with Holmes, he rules our lives and his temples and pastors are all around us ? He is involved in politics and laws ?

@EmeraldEyesEsoteric 3 года назад

Acts 9:18 "scales fell from his eyes he rose and was baptized," Job 41:15 "his scales are his pride." Paul from Tartarus was recruited in the house of Judas!

@rogerjamin1860 Год назад

I think, in Paul we could still find baptism with water in Jesus' name. Communion is a different thing.

@zeroxcliche 3 года назад

best one yet

@Arjan_2 3 года назад

Wasn’t Paul in 1 Corinthians 1:13-17 familiar with the Great Commission from Matthew 28:19? What does this say about the NT?? 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name. 16 Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other. 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.”

@Sportliveonline 3 года назад

wow this guy informative

@lazarus8910 3 года назад

oh finally somebody mentions Didache! which is likely pre-Paul

@lazarus8910 2 года назад

@@HistoryandReviews not sure how could be same trinity, Jesus is repeatedly called "Lord servant".

@Nolaready 2 года назад

I don’t believe John was Jesus’s teacher, but I’m pretty sure they where taught by the same rabbi.

@theophilos0910 3 года назад

Tabor (as usual) brings up far too much information than he could possibly ‘fully cover’ in such a light-touch 20 minute 30,000 foot overview video - it was vital that he brings out Yohanon haMakvil (John the Baptist) and the Nazorean procircumcision proTorah groups connected later with the yahadim (‘communities’) protoEvionim Messianic groups under ‘James the Just the Lord’s brother’ (Yakkov bar Yosef haTzaddiq) that was at odds with the later Pauline diaspora churches (that survived the 1st Fail’d Jewish War against Rome (66-72 CE) unlike the Nazorean Torah abiding procircumcision proDaviddic groups who were virtually wip’d out during the War-which is why 95% of all persons styling themselves ‘Christians’ to-day are all ‘Pauline Christians’ that are several steps away from the original Jesus movement which was essentially proZionist & antiGentile See ‘Matthew’ (whoever he was…) chapter 15 with the Syrophonecian Gentile woman who manag’d to force her way past the cordon of bodyguard disciples around ‘ho Iesous’ to get her daughter excorcis’d of her bleeder-daemon to which ‘the good Rebbe’ had some very nasty Greek words plac’d into his mouth ‘Lady, the BarEnasha (‘son of Man’ see AramDaniel chapter 7:13ff) was sent ONLY to the Lost Sheep of the House of Yisro’el and anyway since when would it be right to snatch the bread out of the mouths of the children and throw it away on the unclean dogs lurking about under the table ?’ The Aramaic term ‘Kalavin’ (‘dogs’) is a Zionist racist antiGentile pejorative found plaster’d all over the Dead Sea scrolls (‘Gentiles, Dogs & Other Unclean Animals’ &c.) and clearly foreshadows all the nasty antiGentile sentiments echoed in certain portions of the later Jewish Talmud … Tabor is quite right bringing up The Didache of the 12, which is bas’d on a Dead Sea Scroll entitied ‘The scroll of the book of the Doctrine of the Two Ways for all the sons of light in the last days’ - and in chapter 14 it is important to know that there was in fact an encapsulation of the earliest Eucharist formulae where the bread represents ‘qol Yisro’el’ and the wine represents the Vine (the Daviddic bloodline) - BUT - contra Tabor (sorry Jim !) we cannot dismiss the fact that Paul’s ‘vision of the Eucharist which he receiv’d from the Lord’ i.e, not by receiving a tradition from the Nazoreans but by ‘direct Revelation’ - is very close to the Mithraic Eucharist (The Mysteries of Christ borrow’d from the Mysteries of Mithras which had been introduc’d into Rome VIA TARSIAN CILICIAN PIRATES as early c. 63 BCE - so Paul being a native of Tarsus could not have been unaware of the details of the eating the flesh of the bull and drinking of his blood ‘in order to put on Mithras’ - But Tabor was quite right to bring out the wording of 1 Q28a (from the Community Rule among the Dead Sea scrolls) ‘and in the last days shall Meshia’q ben Joseph (the Daviddic messiah as opposed to the Meshia’q Ben Aaron the priestly Messiah - cc Exodus 19:6 which in the Dead Sea Corpus is ‘thou shalt be unto me saith YHWH a kingdom AND priests’) raise his hands over the bread and the wine to bless them in the Banquet wherein shall be seated 12 men chosen from the tribes of Yisro’el & 3 priests…’ But we should also add the ‘cannibal feast’ of the birds in the Aramaic Targum of the mad Prophet Hezekiel 39:18-22 where ‘in the last Days ye shall drink the blood of the warriors and eat the flesh of the slain and thus ye shall be fill’d at my Table…’ Compare the Revelation of Yohanon (whoever he was) in his early Messianic eschatological Haggadic midrashic expansion of the Cannibal Feast of the birds in the Last Days in Rev 19:10-16… Whereas normally a Jew may not eat human flesh nor drink blood - apparently in the last days this restriction will somehow be overurn’d in the final War of all the sons of light against the sons of darkness in the last days…. So many other points were rais’d by Tabor only to be quickly dropt on account of time restraints that at least a dozen of these 30-minute overview videos would have to created by Derek this autumn in order to cover even half of the material properly - especially about the inexorable rift between the earlier proCircumcision Nazorean proTorah Christianities of Jesus extended Daviddic family & the later Pauline Anti Torah ProGentile Christianities bearing in mind that the two groups hated each other with a passion (read Galatians chapter 2: ‘those two so-call’d pillars James & Kephah-hypocrites both !’ and the corresponding vitriol from the other side echo’d in Rev 2:9/3:9 ‘pay no heed to those Deceivers walking about claiming to be Judaean-born Apostles’ but are in fact nothing of the kind ! For they are Liars of the Synagogue of Satan !’ &c. We can see how later the pro-Pauline author of Acts 15 and 16 (whoever he was…) attempts to whitewash and coverup this rift within the earliest Christianities - something very very few modern ‘Pauline Christians’ are rarely (if ever) told anything about by their respective ‘clergies’ preferring to let their sheeple walk around in the dark believing the church was always United & never chang’d from the doctrines held by ‘Jesus’ - whereas nothing whatsoever could be farther from the truth …

@Antonio76D 3 года назад

This is really interesting. Are you a biblical scholar? Where can I read more about this? Also, what Bible translation are you quoting from?

@theophilos0910 3 года назад

@@Antonio76D - I have an Honours Masters’ Degree in Theology from a British University (Durham in the far north of England) having studied under CK Barrett in the late 1970s (he was the top biblical NT scholar at that time in the UK) and also I studied under a number of other top theologians (including Dead Sea Scrolls scholar Dr John Rogerson who was a pupil of linguist Dr. John Allegro & the great Drs. H. H. Rowley, F.F. Bruce & G.R. Driver) among others - I’m thinking about doing a Ph.D. Course in Intertestamental studies possibly next year - we’ll see…hmmmm If you would like me to furnish you with a reading list I could select the top 25 or so for you to choose from written say between 1920 - 2020 (beginning with e.g. the great German theologian Dr Rudolph Bultmann etal.) so let me know the particular area of theology you wish to focus on (OT, Intertestamental or NT studies) and I’ll be happy to oblige anyone like yourself who has the interest to pursue these matters - As for the translation of my citations - one has to bear in mind there are at least 5,446 Greek MSS copies of New Testament texts-no two exactly alike - so the question to be pos’d would be best phras’d as ‘what MS TEXT family are you translating from ?’ E.g. the post 330 CE Byzantine family (= very roughly the later Textus Receptus of Erasmus from c. 1530 such as Codex Alexandrinus) or is it a copy of one of the Alexandrian text families such as Codex Sinaiticus ? Or is it the version of one of the Western Codices like Codex Bezae or possibly a Caesarean-mix’d hybrid text family such as Codex Ephraemi-Palimpsest? Or is it from one of the preVulgate (i.e. pre382 CE) Old Latin MSS? Or is it from one of oldest fragmentary papyri (e.g one of the 1-141) ? Or is it a translation of a quotation of early witnesses to the ‘logia yeshu’ (oracles of Jesus) which are often paraphrases or entirely unknown ‘sayings’ (as with the Gospel of Thomas etc.) in the writings from one of the early Christian 2nd century bishops (aka the ‘Patristic Fathers’) e.g. Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna or Bishop Ignatius of Antioch or Clement of Rome or Bishop Papias of Hieropolis in Egypt ? I find the differences in their source material frustrating & fascinating at the same time - because I am fluent in Koine Greek, Latin, Aramaic & PaleoHebrew I have little trouble translating these texts in front of me - but the difference in my translations is often the source text I am choosing - the one over the other (usually but not always the earlier over the later MS) Clear as mud ?

@Antonio76D 3 года назад

@@theophilos0910 Amazing! Most certainly interested. I'm fascinated by both the OT and NT, so inter-testamental? Do you see the Bible as myth or history or both? You should definitely pursue the PhD ... and publish your own translations of the books of the Bible! I've always wondered just how accurate/inaccurate the English translations are. For example, Genesis 1: "Elohim" is plural. It is translated as "God", yet should it not be "gods"? It pains me that the original names are not retained (i.e. Yahweh, Elohim, etc.). I've never heard of the "Logia Yeshu"

@theophilos0910 3 года назад

@@Antonio76D - I should recommend Charlesworth’s excellent 2-volume set (now available in Paperback editions by Hendrickson Publishers ISBN 0-385-09630-5 (Vol 1) & ISBN 0-385-18813-7 (Vol 2) of the Old Testament (but in reality ‘Intertestamental’ in content) Pseudipigrapha’ in English as a starting point - -this set is invaluable for someone just starting out as it gives the reader a broad introduction (over some 2,000 pages of rather ‘fine print’) as well as providing literal translations of the specific MSS they cite with ample useful footnotes… As for ‘Elohim’ (the nominative masculine plural of Eloah-the feminine singular of the word (‘power, clan-god’ ‘spirit’) used e.g. throughout the older poetical sections of Job (beginning with chapter 3 through 40) though the noun is plural in form ‘it governs a singular imperfect tense verb ‘bara’ (‘when the elohim (he) began to create (i.e. ex nihilo despite thd mayyim (‘waters of creation’) being already in some kind of pre-existent state over which ‘the wind of Elohim brooded like a dove over the face(s) of the Tehom (‘watery chaos’ ) which is cognate with Babylonian Tiamat, the chaos goddess monster over which Marduk prevails in the Babylonian Epic of Creation by splitting her in half ‘like a clam shell’ and forming the earth and the firmament (sky) … Why Elohim is plural governing a singular verb (technically a grammatical impossibility on its face) probably refers to a grammatical construction known as ‘plural of Majestie’ which is the kind of thing we hear kings & queens use (e.g. to cite a famous example : ‘WE are not amus’d’ Queen Victoria us’d to quip c. 1850 -meaning ‘I don’t think that is very funny..,’) Interestingly perhaps is the fact that the Hezekielite writer of the 1st creation myth of the Jews (Gen 1:1 - 2:4a) aka the ‘Priestly’ writer returns in Gen 5:1 where Elohim is an androgynous being (‘When Elohim created Mankind male and female created he them in his own image & after his own likeness and he call’d THEIR name Adam in the day in which they were created…’ There is absolutely No CHavvah (‘talkative’) in the first creation myth where male & female are created together - in the 2nd Creation Myth the name of the god changes to YHWH Elohim (mistranslated as ‘the LORD God’) and Adam is (‘form’d’ I.e. out of mud or some precistent material) before the animals & CHavvah is ‘form’d from the side of Adam’ as an AFTERthought … The post exilic editors of the 2nd Creation Myth (Gen 2:4b to 4:26) even got poor Eve’s Hebrew etymology wrong when he added ‘she was nam’d Chavvah because she was the mother of all living’ which would have been ‘chayyah’ in Hebrew not ‘CHavvah’ - which gives you an idea of how ‘mess’d up’ the actual texts of ‘the Bible’ really are for those who are stubborn enough to discover these things !! Many times ‘Elohim’ governs plural verbs in paleo Hebrew & should properly be translated into modern English as ‘gods’ (as in the later prose sections of Job chapters 1 & 2 with the Council of the gods) But when they come to ‘Elohim’ in the grammatical plural modern translators often give other milder translational equivalents (such as ‘angels’) especially in the post exilic period when YHWH lost his wife ‘Asherah’ and became the sole clan-god of the Jews - Here is another translation for your soon to be growing notebook : the Shema’q in Deuteronomy 6:4 which is often butcher’d in modern English translations - Hebrew : shena’q o yisroel YHWH elohenu YHWH echad which is often badly translated as ‘hear o Israel The LORD our god The LORD is one’ / whereas a more accurate rendering into modern English would be : ‘Hear O Yisro’el: Yahweh is our National clan-god, Yahweh alone’ which if you were to tell either a modern day Christian or even a Rabinnic Jew would say they never heard it translated that way (despite the fact that scholars know it is correct) So there is a vast chasm between what the flocks of ignorant sheeple are given in their Bibles as ‘translations’ and what the texts actually say - and this is just one example among hundreds just like it !! Hope this helps !

@Antonio76D 3 года назад

@@theophilos0910 This is most excellent and endlessly intriguing! I think you should be a guest on the Mythvision podcast.!

@edinshealtiel3754 3 года назад

SHOULD BE CALLED .... JOHN'S VS JESUS VS PAUL BAPTISM...

@GizmoFromPizmo 2 года назад

Show me "symbolic" in the gospels. It's not there. Everybody (even the church of Christ) wants us to believe that the Lord's Supper is a symbol but where is it ever called that in the bible? Nowhere. In fact, Jesus said this in the sixth chapter of John, "Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood, ye have no life in you!" Did Jesus say, "Except ye eat a SYMBOL of the flesh and blood of the Son of man?" No and hell no. These errant denominations have changed the original wording of the text to conform with their unscriptural beliefs. When we eat the bread and drink the cup we are eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Jesus BY FAITH, which means, if you don't believe it then you're not. Now unbeliever, quote that passage from John 6 again. "Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood, ye have no life in you." All these good church of Christ folks who dutifully gather on the first day of the week to eat SYMBOLS and EMBLEMS don't have any life in them. Jesus said, "Do THIS in memory of me", not something else. God has a way of weeding out the pretenders.

@berglen100 3 года назад

After Paul woke he knew OT was all allegory and Imagination was God in man not classic theology Saul and all sons of man are blind about thinking like sons of God in them, Paul hinted with this Phil 2:5Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

@Darisiabgal7573 3 года назад

Paul could not believed we all imagine what he saw in his vision. Paul was trying to sell his vision as god. I think Tabor hits the nail squarely on the head. Paul is fabricating the founding tenets of Christianity based on his interpretation of what Jesus was in his vision. The body will not be resurrected but a spiritual/light form of the body suitable for heaven. The bread and wine are symbolic of the Spirit in the communion. More importantly we have this resolution of Sheol and gahenna (rarely used in Judaism) into Heaven and Hell and the division not based on repentance, but on belief.

@youngknowledgeseeker Год назад

@@Darisiabgal7573 you are definitely off about some of the things you're saying about Paul, and you're saying it's so confidently. For example it's pretty clear Paul never taught that the end destination goal for believers is heaven. Very obvious. He taught the kingdom of God coming to the Earth just like the rest of the Apostles and Jesus. He also definitely thought that repentance was part of belief, there was no division between those two things. He never thought belief was merely literally belief only and then you do nothing else

@Darisiabgal7573 Год назад

@@youngknowledgeseeker Works were piety, lack of piety meant works not important, simple as that. Whose kingdom was he waiting for, Jewish. No way to get around that. Read the epistle of James, cant say it any better than that. No he could have said, I'm breaking from Judaism and The Evyon, im going to start my new cult, and in this new cult we are going to cherry pick rules from greeks and Jews. But thats not what he did, he played the two-faced game. I like Paul alot more now that I understand than before as a christian trying to figure out all the contradictions he appears to create with christianity. As the inventer of christianity he is not obligated really to anyone, but we are aware what he left behind in the rear view mirror, we know this because he says as much. James watchers, go to hell. Judaizers, chop off your junk, the Pillars, I'll just thriw the Saducees on their backs and see if they survive. To actually get to a working invention however alot had to happen. Pauls christology, largely forgotten, it was a failure. But the wake of the Ephesian movement, choked of from Judaism and far from the temple when it fell inspired the Signs Gospel and in its Interpolated form the gospel of John which was a thoroughly christian movement that could be sculpted by the protoorthodox into a viable theology. Your mistake is confusion the (half) dialog of Paul, however impressive his missives are with his actual theological acumen. His christianity was a prototype that he believed (key word) lived inside of Judaism, when, in fact, the Jews were rapidly moving to exclude it and him. As a mystic he deluded himself that he could cleanse the gentiles into tribes of Jacob, thats what he was trying to do, that somehow other Jews might see things his way, but that all failed. When you read a greek tragedy you dont read it because everything will turn out rosy, you have to like it because of the drama and plot twist it entails. If you read Paul trying to read a hollywood feel good into it you miss the point. Paul was a failure as a pharisee, he was a failure at the herodians work, he was a failure as an Evyon, he was a failure at keeping his flock, they pretty much all left him, he set the saduccees on the back of James and got him killed, the Evyon fell apart, and the greeks took his theology, added alot of greco roman myths and made it fly.

@youngknowledgeseeker Год назад

@@Darisiabgal7573 I'm sorry, I don't understand what any of what you said has to do with what I said. Paul was waiting for the Kingdom on Earth and regeneration at the parousia, nothing to do with going to Heaven. And Paul 100% believed that faith = faithfulness = repentance. Lack of repentance and piety = possible disqualification from the Kingdom. Thank you for your response though.

@jezuswizardspatula5804 3 года назад

Greetingz cuzinz and Paul The Antichrist 🏵🧙‍♂️📜

@lissam8988 3 года назад

The word Christ or Christos meant anointing so every time I hear someone talk about Christ I replace it with the word anointing or anointed. It changes the whole story. And once again there were many Christ before and after because they were anointed or dedicated or consecrated whatever word you want to use. Just as the person is being anointed the anointing oil runs down the whole entire body because it was poured so you were taking in the anointing.

@youngknowledgeseeker Год назад

It's good you know what the word Christ means, however I would add that I think that Jesus is definitely a special Christ. In the same way that there are many kings, but there is the specific davidic King in the prophets that was said to accomplish incredible amazing things for the world and God. In the same way there is this special anointed one who is prophesied to do special and incredible things.

@lissam8988 Год назад

@@youngknowledgeseeker However Christianity has used it as a crutch to not do anything to help the world and make it a better place. Christianity is waiting on someone else to do it for them... This causes many problems. Because every generation believes it's going to be their generation.... Which causes more problems. We ourselves are responsible for our own generation and ourselves. Each of us need to help make the world a better place... We should not be waiting for somebody else to do it for us. Because even married couple has children They eventually have to let the children do things on their own... There have been many people who have helped the world and so many different ways. There is a balance between good and evil. Because according to to the tanak the creator created both good and bad and he's in control of both. Let me give you an example of something say there is a soldier and he saves 50 people who go on to live their life have children and grandchildren and great grandchildren. In so many years later you will end up with thousands and thousands and so many years after that will end up with hundreds of thousands and so many after that hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people saved by that one soldier. Because without him saving those lives there wouldn't be children and grandchildren and great grandchildren and so forth. People do not understand the word salvation They have modernized it changed it reworded it and tweaked it for their own purpose. However in the ancient days the word salvation meant to bring out of harm's way physically not spiritually at all. Was always a very physical salvation bringing people out of harm's way. Us humans have been borrowing from other cultures other religions and other politics for thousands of years we change words we tweet them to our purpose for our culture for our well-being each generation and it keeps going forward. There have been many people who are anointed either spiritually or physically with a special oil that God said to anoint all Messiahs which Jesus was never anointed with that special will because it has to be applied by a king a priest or a prophet a woman cannot anoint a man.

@willempasterkamp862 3 года назад

Jesus, new David. the dude or Priest John, new Jonathan. the hero or King It becomes problematic when you put them side by side (in 'reality' John was a generation earlier, they never even met) Jesus was a successor of John not a temporary and becomes also a king (from Melchi-sedek thus both; King+Priest) 2 kings at the same time is impossible thus John degrades in 'just a man'. Paul the father of John is a humble dude, his counterpart is his deputy the harsh Simon Peter (the first generation) John (baptizer) has another counter-character in his older pious brother Andrew named James ( just ) , 2nd gen. All stories about Jesus together with John or James are made up, the uncles became martyred at young age, there by they lived in rome not the Levant. Jesus on paper shifts 32 year in the past to make him a temporary. Communities/churches around John and James could only have existed in Rome not Palestine. Paul travelled to the east (antioch) and so the name chrestians coming into use there at first is plausible. Paul as the first leader / Chrestos of a movement there. The old and wise Simon (named Ananus/ Ananias) succeeds John (Simon bar Jonah, not a bloodline but a succession) as the mentor of the young Jesus, Jesus had an halfbrother Lazarus (they are the third generation). Mother Mary is the sister of the 'twin' John + James, the daughter of Paul and married with her uncle Joseph named Justus who is the brother of Paul. Joseph and Mary share the same bloodline. Joseph one generation older then Mary. Paul and John are based upon real historical persons who didn't write or practised baptizing (no historical report of such). These things therefor are made up. Ritual bathing is part of several religions and could have reached Rome from the Middle east, Persia or India with greece as step in between. Most likely the custom spread from Rome as the center into christianity. With the development of public (non-religious) bathing culture it could have grown with that side by side. Connections with floods or crossing of waters in the OT could easily be fabricated by the NT writers as they were used to do. Judaism only had it for purification. 1) Paul > 2) Jacobus > 3) John > 4) Joseph > 5) Lazarus > 6) Simon > 7) Jesus. (the origin of the seven sleepers legend).

@mouthpiece200 3 года назад

Where do you find all this stuff?

@willempasterkamp862 3 года назад

@@mouthpiece200 Simply , It are julio-claudians (the germanicuus branch), chrestianity grew from ceasarism obviously. The Ufus & Rufus twin Paul meets in Rome are his own John & James sons you may conclude. When traveling through Asia he always complains they have left him alone, lol. Sure they were dead martyrs but as saints they all 3 have an extended or second life-time. This is a side-effect of Jesus backshift in time, all the others seem to receive free bonus-time and live longer including Peter.

@delfimoliveira8883 3 года назад

Professor Tabor looks more and more a Biblical Patriarch in the books of Sunday School 😁😁 If i ever do a movie about Abraam i will invite him As to schoolarly amazing

@TheScotsalan 3 года назад

Strikes me that the concept of women being unclean during their period is still going in many places. Nepal is one example. Then there is India, where bathing in the Ganges is important. Seems the same concepts were going on independent of Abrahamic religions. Even the concept of breaking bread, offering a drink, most likely existing customs stolen by christianity.

@Flum666 3 года назад

people taking the eucharist daily or going to mass daily, instead of actually righting their wrongs is a hoorrible thing

@jamesstrohl2016 Год назад

There was not a Pauline Baptism. This man doesn't know what he is talking about. Run from this man, run! Jesus didn't learn from John. The student is never greater than the master.

@Sportliveonline 3 года назад

Amazing how Paul is probably the best known person writer in history more than any Queen or King or Emperor

@keithsmith3678 2 года назад

@@flipflopski2951 Paul is not mentioned in the gospels at all.

@markwilson8925 2 года назад

@@keithsmith3678 And why should he be? He was not among the disciples in Jesus' earthly ministry.

@EGGSCENTRIC 2 года назад

@@markwilson8925 the Joseph Smith of his day.

@Bravetrain13 Год назад

@@keithsmith3678that may be but Paul is the earliest source for the New Testament. His early letters are older than mark by 30 years.

@ghostriders_1 2 года назад

4:26 "That's where John the Baptist is baptising, in the river Jordan." I wonder what Dr Tabor's source is for this statement? Josephus who is relatively trustful says nothing about John and any river let alone the Jordan. G Mark's account of the baptism seems to be constructed entirely from scripture or Mark's imagination. Why would you state this as a fact if have no verification for it other than Mark?

@markwilson8925 2 года назад

@Geoffry Chaucer In book 18:116-119 of his Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus mentions John as having been a Baptist, in terms of purifying those who went through the rite.

@ghostriders_1 2 года назад

@@markwilson8925 so Mark used Josephus & can be dated 75CE +

@ghostriders_1 2 года назад

@@markwilson8925 Yes but he provides a completely different purpose for the ritual & does not place it in the r.Jordan.

@lissam8988 3 года назад

For thousands of years in Asia they're teachings were to examine one's own mind and soul well before Paul and Christianity.

@revcrussell 3 года назад

The Q source didn't exist and I think Tabor would get closer to the truth of mythicism if examined through this lens. The idea of two christs fits with Zachariah 6:11. Maybe some early Christians believed in two christs including John the Baptist. Paul clearly believed that Jesus was *manufactured* of David's seed.

@GizmoFromPizmo 2 года назад

When you say that Paul invented the Eucharist the "the way we got it now", what does that mean? I mean, the word Eucharist doesn't really appear in the bible - the way we got it now - and certain denominations need magicians to perform the "miracle of transubstantiation" the way we got it now. So which one do you think Paul "invented"? James Tabor plays fast and loose with the word of God. You cannot go by anything he teaches. It's a hodge-podge.

@Arjan_2 3 года назад

How about 1 Cor. 15:29 (used by the LDS church to support their baptism for the dead practice)? 29 Otherwise, what will they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead do not rise at all? Why then are they baptized for the dead?

@henryschmit3340 Год назад

I'm glad I'm not a 'scholar'.. I wouldn't want to be that dumb.

@hermanhale9258 Год назад

Tabor, nobody cares what you think.

@whysoserious8666 3 года назад

I used to listen to a lot of game of thrones fan theory about the books, not the HBO abomination. This Bible anti-fan theory is almost as good. And just as fictional.