I have a theory that Moabites, Ammonites and Edomites used to be Judahites and Israelites but rebelled or refused to join the confederations and that's why they're given related status through Haran for Moab and Ammon and Jacob and Esau being brothers. Brotherness with Esau and cousins with Lot's race solely do to distance But narrations in the Bible is full of love and hate. So love verses are reconciliations for when they Annex and conquer them, and hatred, in that they were at war. I theorize that the Moabites and Ammonites were of the original 12 tribes, but Judah and Simeon redacted them and inserted themselves in. While Edomites used to be jews but rebelled before later rejoining Judah when John Hyrcanus conquered them. A reconciliation of this narrative being the inserted story of Jacob and Esau loving, hating than reconciling each other. That's why cherry pick Bible verses has love and redemption hope for Edom, Moab and Amon, but lots of hate as well. Yes, I'm calling Ammonites and Moabites Israelite and calling Edomites Jews. The Yahweh Chomosh battle? Could be same God recognized differently than immediately turned around that chomosh didn't exist and was yahweh all along helping the Ammonites. Of all the Canaanite tribes afterall, why is Moab, Edom and Ammon mentioned? Lastly, I believe the Bible racial identification is based on who Israelites live or hate or are neutral too. The various X Y Z tribes called Shuahites, Zimranites, Jokshanites, Medanites, Midianites, Ishmaelites and Ishbakites were Isaac's brother. So? Is it that they were friendly towards the Israelites? And that the multiple other Arab tribes were unmentioned? Is the Hamitic narrative simply Canaanite and Egyptian people the Hebrews hated, Philistines, Berbers (levi from Egypt and fault berbers) the Egyptians and Canaanite tribes who didn't join the Israelite confederation were called Hamitic. And Semitic were neutral familiar races. And Japhethite is whoever Israel doesn't contact much or like. Afterall some groups like Hittites and Greeks we'd assume be Japhethites, are called Hamitic. Any wartime lingering memory? Certainly Arab tribes who you'd think be called Semitic is hamitic war enemy of Israel, Nimrod the Babylonian tyrant a hamite, Assyrians, mix Hamitic and Semitic, So love hate. See what I'm saying? Hate i.e conquest and love because Job went to Nineveh to convert them to Judaism, my interpretation? 10 lost tribes inhabited Nineveh. And Samaritans are the other 10. I actually think job is a Israelite not judahite.
@@Robespierre-lI it's only a joke because people think that goat-herders are bumpkins who don't think. There's a lot of free time to think when herding goats. For your average city-dweller, not so much: they have to work harder and longer hours just to keep from starving.
This video is the Biblical Scholarship equivalent of "I found irrefutable PROOF that the US Civil War really happened! I have therefore chosen to not believe the United States ever existed or Declared Independence from Britain."
@@dougjardine8545 OK. I'll rmember remember that next time I meet a goat-herder that he is most likely a great intellectual Perhaps he will want to strike up conversation about Kirkegaard.
Now I truly understand this quote "Myths are not stories that are untrue. Rather they are tales that don't fit neatly in the historical record which serve as a foundation of a culture."
@@michaelmoon3429Truly a great qoute. Something I have to use regularly towards people who think its superstitious and unscientific to believe in myths and practices
I think the logical fallacy here is ignoratio elenchi - it presents an argument that is sound, but it's conclusion is nonsense. The last sentence is fair; myths are indeed ahistorical tales that are culturally relevant, but in no way does that mean they're "not untrue." Whilst some, such as the Trojan War, may have roots in reality the claims of Gods and Heroes cannot be supported even if it was culturally relevant. The very reason they don't fit into the historical record is because they make extremely large claims and have no evidence to back it up. As such, all, or almost all, can be dismissed as false until such time than any evidence appears. Understanding them is still valuable to understanding how people at the time thought, but the point this quote is making is a horrible one.
@@srajandikshit7590 It is. You can believe whatever you want and do whatever you want, but don't try to pass off unfalsifiable pseudoscience as science. The quote is also logically fallacious and makes no sense; I put a full reasoning of how in a comment to the original commenter if you would like to see.
The US-Canada comparison is fascinating to me. Especially as both countries have a shared language, overlapping culture, and similar histories/origins while also having political independence and key differences in their history/origins
Well, Canada had more of a French/English colonial origin, while the US had a Spanish/French/English origin. And now Canada is split between French and English languages, while the US is primarily English with Spanish rising up, and some residual French influences such as in New Orleans/Louisiana. so yes, similar origins, but only 1 (or 1.5 if you include the one major region of the US with French) shared language.
US residents are called Americans because they have "America" in the name and no other part of the country name is conducive to converting into a name in the local language (English). Neither "Uniteds" or "Unis" or "Teds" for short, nor "Stateses", "Staters", "Statesians" or "Stays" works well. How many other countries in North America or South America have the same problem and would prefer to be known by the name "American"?
This channel is exactly the kind of biblical study I've been wanting for a while. I'm super agnostic but I find the history and mythologies of religions super interesting and it's so cool to see how it all ties together and I like how you also point out what the leading theories are, noting it's not all perfectly known.
This is not only an examination of the story of the concept of the 12 tribes of Israel, but also a summary of the history of the Jewish people from ancient times as well as the Bronze Age (and its collapse), plus the Iron Age for good measure. All in around 32 minutes, well done.
No offense, but his hypothesis of our history of the Jewish nation is just as accurate as summers the fairytales he states are in the Bible. The Bible of thousands of years ago is quite a bit more accurate than researches Coming up with assumptions today.
@@HowlingWo1f No offense, but what he actually he said was that the stories in the Bible aren't fairytales but rather a mix of historical truth and myth. If you want to believe that *all* the stories narrated in the Bible are historically accurate based on faith, that's fine. But if you expect to persuade those of us who are more skeptical that *everything* the Bible says is historically factual, you're going to need to provide something more, like independent evidence.
He’s Coming Soon When Jesus comes, the rapture question will be clarified, the church will be unified, the saints will be glorified and the sinners will be horrified. When Jesus comes, the devil will be stultified, the nation of Israel will be vivified, the sonship will be satisfied and the entire Bible will be verified. If you think the coming of Jesus is a probability or a possibility, you missed it. The coming of Jesus is inevitability. Acts 2:36-38; 4:10-12; Ephesians 4:5; Colossians 3:17 KJV
He’s Coming Soon When Jesus comes, the rapture question will be clarified, the church will be unified, the saints will be glorified and the sinners will be horrified. When Jesus comes, the devil will be stultified, the nation of Israel will be vivified, the sonship will be satisfied and the entire Bible will be verified. If you think the coming of Jesus is a probability or a possibility, you missed it. The coming of Jesus is inevitability. Acts 2:36-38; 4:10-12; Ephesians 4:5; Colossians 3:17 KJV
I'm not religious, but for whatever reason, I just find biblical history so fascinating, both from a secular and a theological perspective. I've watched a fair amount of content on the subject on RUclips and other platforms, and your videos are always amongst my favorites. They are very well produced and have such clear and articulate narration. I also really like how you go into detail regarding each of the major academic theories and how they've evolved over time, instead of just presenting a snapshot of the current scholarly consensus on an ever-evolving subject.
Exactly my experience! A lot of videos I see are just like a 1 minute summary or they tell you about one detail and don't give any context, assuming you've already studied this stuff.
You should take a look at the Quran. I'm amazed at how close they are to catholics. And the story of Mary is so very detailed. Their history is much easier to fact check
@@Dani_sister4peace I've been planning to at some point, I didn't realise how similar Islam is to Judaism and Christianity beyond having arguably the same god, it's fascinating to see the overlap
@@Dani_sister4peaceas a catholic, this is the first time i've heard anyone ever said that islam is similar to catholics. How do you make that assertion?
@@yunaru3643yeah, I'm a Muslim interested to convert into Catholicism and I don't see any similarities beyond fasting for a month and the veneration of Mary. even then, it doesn't come close to how catholics venerate her. muslims used to pray to saints too, but wahabbis killed that practiced so we don't do it
Is it possible that the story of Joseph in Egypt (the famine, the other sons of Israel coming to Egypt to get food, etc) is a faint echo of the Bronze Age collapse?
It's more than possible; it's likely. That story takes place some decades before the Exodus story which could be a narrative decision and both are inspired by the same events. The Collapse is heavily tied to the eruption of Thera which was an extremely powerful volcanic event (potentially the loudest sound ever heard by human ears, fun fact). It alone would have caused every one of the plagues for at least a few hundred kilometers of lower Egypt. It did also cause volcanic winter and that tracks with several years of bad harvest. The sea people may be the remnants of the Minoans as well as general hungry pirates.
I always imagined it echoes the second intermediate period, during the Hyksos rule: Semitic pharaohs allowing other Semitic tribes to settle into Egypt in order to have more loyal subjects , with the possibility for foreigners to quickly climb the social ladder. And then, after the return of a local dynasty, bad times for those same minorities.
@@SAOS451316 Thera volcano? Where is that located? Or maybe you are referring to the Lake Toba volcano in Indonesia. Or the Tambora volcano in Indonesia. 🙏
This was very good. I'm historian of early China (post 100 AD). Not trained in ancient near east. I am impressed by choice of words, and framing of argument.
I think of the Tanakh’s relationship to the Bronze Age very similarly to Greek stories like the Trojan War Cycle: a cultural memory of the pre-collapse world, blended with supernatural religious elements to create a universal story about the world
As an American, I had a hearty laugh as well. The US and Canada are kind of the siblings or cousins that rib each other from time to time, but we generally have each other's backs when things get really bad.
@@CharlotteIssyvoo Anti ''American politics'' sentiment would be more precise. But politic is going to shit in here too. I'd say there is friendly banter on the net... (you McDo eating cowboys vs us maple syrup drinking moose riders)
DUDE i just LOVE the hustle and bustle of ramparted Uruk, it’s so DYNAMIC and makes me feel like i’m in one of my favourite EPIC POEMS. you should totally come on down to my dwellingplace, it’s got EXPOSED MASONRY OF KILN-FIRED BRICK walls and everything, we can crack open a nice beer fit for a king or seven and get crazy watching some lyre-maids [The rest of the tablet is damaged beyond recognition]
@@davidc1878it's obviously totally unrealistic, but if Canada did suddenly annex itself to the US under the current US Constitution, it would marginalize the crazy wing of the American right in a heartbeat. Ok. So Alberta might team up with Alabama. And Quebec would probably go completely rogue. But Ontario alone would change everything. It Canada annexed the US under your constitutional system, it would take a couple decades for GOP voters to even begin to understand how the parliamentary system works ... and how to pronounce Nunavut and where PEI is.
As a Christian living in the modern era, that also subscribed to scholarly disciplines like astrophysics, history and evolution, I appreciate your ability to step back from the beautiful scriptures and analyze it from a scholarly and historical point of view. People like me are torn between the teachings of the Bible, which we cherish and try to live by, and the historical and archeological things we learn in school or through independent research. I consider myself a scholarly individual and at times get into casual debates with friends about history and stuff like that and when an atheist friend tries to expose the Bible as fictional lore, I find myself straddling the two positions you have described in this video and some of your other ones about the Bible, that it is neither completely factual nor completely fiction, but a bit of both. I recently bought a few of your posters and the world history book. Beautiful literature for a history buff like me, and can't wait to enjoy it 😇
You might want to explore some of the conservative scholarship that leans towards the factual end of things. On RUclips the obvious places to start are the Ancient Egypt and the Bible channel and the various videos of the late Michael Heiser's talks on a variety of issues. In terms of things to read, the best starting place on the Old Testament would be Kenneth Kitchen's "On the Reliability of the Old Testament", which gives a good overview of how a scholar can come to the conclusion that the books of the Old Testament are reasonably reliable historical sources.
If you believe the scriptures aren’t true, are you even a Christian? I think you are torn because you don’t commit fully to God’s word. Compromising is and will always be source of terrible anxiety. We cannot serve two masters. 2 Peter 2:21 For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them.
@@Iskandar75 A true Christian is one who does not take the Bible literally, but take its message seriously! The message of love, forgiveness and compassion. One the other hand, a fake Christian takes the Bible as literal word of God ( i.e. dictated by God) and support death penalty, torture, war, guns and weapons.. and even genocide. All in the name of God!. One sees them all over the US.
Truly one of my favorite channels. I've been binging your videos all week and I gotta say I feel like I am learning so much, and even more, learning how little I know. This channel is giving me a whole new appreciation for history, religion, storytelling, geneology, and so much more. I love how committed to truth you are. Some people feel threatened by the idea of saying "we realized we were wrong" but I love how eager you are to explore as much factual evidence as possible, even if it contradicts the popular narrative. But still, you don't disregard things that aren't scientific as unimportant. You have such a grounded understanding of humanity as you approach your videos, knowing that stories have been important to people for as long as we could tell them, and that the "accuracy" of a story doesn't define its significance. We tell stories we need to tell to protect ourselves and loved ones - stories where someone is forced to become resilient, or be patient, or be brave. It'd be facinating to approach stories as a sort of evolution and therefore have natural selection. Stories that have the most impact stick around the longest, but they evolve and mix in with other stories as history goes on. And in a world before science, these stories helped us integrate us into the world. They helped explain a desire to want to know who we are, and the bible got to be written by so many people which is cool in some ways because people have different histories. If it is true about the people of Midian being the first to worship the God named YWHW and the Levites being the people who remember the Egyptian exodus, and so on... like this book is a collective story where these memories got to come together and make a complete narrative and various cultures got to weave their life into it too.... Thank you Matt for making me appreciate the humanity that has existed in history
It's still true, just that it's so convoluted, there's no point showing the breakdown. We still have 2 stories of Noah's flood crammed together as one telling. We still have two separate creation myths at the start of the bible.
@@fcsuper My understanding is the time lines for the two Jesus birth stories don't exactly align which is no surprise. Different writers who almost certainly did not know each other. Remember, it is the message, not the minor details, that matter.
The funny thing about them being Iron Age City Dwellers is that they hated the city lol. There is a definite dislike of city life when reading stories like Sodom and Gomorrah, the Garden of Eden, etc. that goes further than the loss of innocence we see in Enkidu. Honestly, it was written by Iron Age Hipsters and Hippies in Their "Zen" Phase.
Because cities until the 20th century where filthier and more disease ridden than the countryside, more people died in cities than were born there and the population had to be supplemented by people from the country moving there Still today, cities while much safer than in the past or often more dangerous than areas outside of them
Every time I take a new religion/archeology class you manage to upload a video discussing that weeks topic. Absolutely crazy. Today my biblical archeology class did an exercise where the Men of Gad had to negotiate with the conflicting Moab, Israel, and Assyria. Two days earlier we discussed the documentary hypothesis as well as the deuteronomistic books
There is something I find strange. If the Judahites made up the birth order to insert themselves into Israelite history, why would they claim to have the same mother as Issachar and Zebulun, while still keeping some distance?
Small addition on the tribe of Dan: Cline wrote that the Sea People included the Peleset, Tjekker, Shekelesh, Danuna, and Weshesh. Peleset are often identified with the Philistines, but Danuna may also be identified with the tribe of Dan. The Danuna are often identified with Homer's Danaans, from the Aegan
Right?? Like when he pointed out that Judah is unusually favored when Joseph was Jacob’s fave. I very much remember younger me thinking the same thing and now I finally have an answer
Agree, it is nice getting the Cliffs Notes version of several thousand years of history backed up what what scholars have managed to find in the archeological and written records. One item I had not heard before is that some of the Sea People became a component of early Jewish society rather then just one of the causes of the 1177BC collapse.
@@user-kp3ks7dk5h The reason why Judah was “unusually favored” over Joseph in Jacob’s blessing is because Christ came from the line of Judah, not from the line of Joseph. Throughout the Bible there’s a concept where the fathers would bless their sons (often prophetically) and many times the blessing is something unexpected. Although Jacob may have desired to bless Joseph and Benjamin over the other tribes (because he favored their mother Rachel), he couldn’t help but prophetically bless Judah over those tribes, because this was the tribe that would bring forth Christ, the Messiah. Therefore, the blessing needed to be greater. The real question here is- why would God choose Jesus to come from the tribe of Judah over the tribe of Joseph? My theory is that Jacob supposedly went against God’s will in choosing Rachel. He was provided Leah first and he should have accepted Leah, but instead he chose to work for 7 more years to earn Rachel. Only bad things came from Rachel: the tribe of Joseph-which eventually ended up bringing everyone to Egypt where they were enslaved for hundreds of years and the tribe of Benjamin- which produced both Sauls (Saul son of Kish who persecuted David- who was a Christ-like figure, and Saul of Tarsus who persecuted Christians before becoming Apostle Paul). Thus, the favoring of Judah over Joseph and Benjamin becomes much clearer. God would obviously favor the lineage that He chose to bring the Messiah, not the one originating in deceit. It’s a shame the people you asked in church couldn’t provide a good answer for you honestly
Isaac always read to be as being inserted as connective tissue in the stories of Abraham and Jacob since he has little to no story of his own but plays a major supportive role as the son of the former and father of the latter.
@@xtrct7303 interesting. since ancient christians or non-orthodox jews who became christians, and as well later before christianities formality set in became muslims, they followed sentiment of skism from the teaching of the orthodox. maybe then issac was the true superior prophet for christians and muslim orginate tribes, or at the very least muslim tribes, thus the direction of prophets bloodline?
The number 12 may not have been random, but may also have reflected the 12 constellations of the zodiac, of which mosaics have been found in many synagogues from antiquity. That tradition may also have been followed by Jesus described as having 12 disciples.
My guess is that the need to have it be 12 stems from Babylonian influences. The Babylonians loved anything in sets of 12 or 60 (5×12), and if what he described in the video is correct, the final editing happened during our just after they were in Babylonia. In a related note, the concept of 12 zodiac signs, as well as 12 hours for both day and night, the idea of 360 (60×60) degrees in a circle also have their roots in the Babylonian numerical system
@@robertmauck4975 Shnayim-Eser (שְׁנֵים-עָשָׂר or יב / Twelve) “It had a great, high wall with twelve gates, and with twelve angels at the gates. On the gates were written the names of the twelve tribes of Israel.” (Revelation 21:12) The number 12, which is one of the numbers symbolizing perfection, is unmistakably important in Scripture. It appears throughout the Tanakh (Old Covenant) and the Brit Chadashah (New Covenant). In Judaism, this number symbolizes totality, wholeness, and the completion of God’s purpose. It is considered the number of governmental perfection as it symbolizes God’s power and authority. The number 12 is also linked to the concept of time; for example, the ancient Israelites marked 12 lunar cycles representing the 12 lunar months of the year. They divided the day and the night into 12-hour periods.
Thought the 360 was symbolic for the days in a year. It makes a day (dia) about a degree. Also aren't the twelve constellations meant to give symbol to the twelve moons (months) we have on a yearly basis ?
@@robertmauck4975 360 - divisible by every single digit number except seven; they could likely count that high on their fingers. (by the way 60 x 60 = 3600)
Israel means” Struggled/Wrestled with God” in Genesis Jacob fought against an Angel who was representing God and in the end God blessed Jacob by changing his name to Israel and saying that he shall make him a mighty nation
1. What was Reuben calling........ 2. What was Simeon calling....... 3.what was Levi calling........ 4. What was Judah calling...... 5. What was Issachar calling..... 6. What was Zebulun calling..... 7. What was Dan calling...... 8. What was Gad calling...... 9. What was Asher calling..... 10. What was Napthali calling.... 11. What was Joseph calling...... 12. What was Benjamin calling...... Each tribe has a specific calling from GOD.....calling such as sonship....watchman...and high priest.
Just wanted to mention there is no "angel" in the Hebrew text of that event,in the original text it says Jacob fought off Shadowy aggressive man and after that "man" gave him blessing and his name "Israel"(he who fought/struggled with God).
Ive read that it originally meant something along the lines of “Land of El.” El being the leader/father of the ancient Canaanite pantheon. Thats why many Hebrew as well as other extinct Phoenician and Canaanite names end with El (see Michael, Raphael, Zerubbabel, Abiel, Ariel, Berel, etc etc) denoting that they are of the land of El, or the belief that El’s name in there’s would gift them his power and prestige. At least a decent sized chunk of the early Israelites were worshippers of El. The early Israelites were polytheists.
@@yakov95000 This in itself is misleading as you are not accounting for the idiomatic/connotative layer of language, to speak somewhat imprecisely. There are motifs in the Hebrew that indicate the figure is not actually human - as ancient Jews did not believe in an incarnate God, the figure was most certainly considered to be an angel, and this would have been plain to the original audience. To a Christian, this could be an angel or a theophany of the pre-Incarnate Son. However, to just translate it hyperliterally as a "man," as though the text is not talking about an otherworldly figure is just as dishonest as it is only true on the most hyper-literal level of translation but misses obvious implications of the passage in its original language, just like trying to literally translate idioms from one language to another.
Yes I've been waiting for this video. This is a topic I actually got inspired to investigate through this channel, in which I found very interesting things that go back to Egypt and Mesopotamian folklore. I know I'm about to learn much more while watching this, thank you Dr. Baker!
Matt, thank you for the extensive list of books you provided as sources. Sadly, there are other popular RUclips channels that have covered this material in the past, but never listed sources for their viewers to check out and learn more from.
Bravo! Thank you for going through this quite multi-faceted and unfortunately obscure scholarship and preparing it for laypeople to understand. I can imagine it takes hours to get this done in such simple, coherent way. And doing it while staying aware of religious sensibilities. Always a blast to listen to you Matt!
Don't agree that bronze age collapse is not visible in the bible. The philistines arrived in Israël just after the israelites settled in Kanaän (after the exodus). It's mentioned in the bible that only the kanaanites had iron weapons and therefore were superior. Later during the time of David, the israelites had iron weapons (and plows etc) which helped them to be strong in the surrounding lands. We know that Egypt was ruled by a different dynasty as usual (semite people, hyksos /habiru that were kind of related to the origins of the israelites. This was after 1450 BCE. You also mention that Habiru might be related to the name hebrew. Could be, and the bible mentions Heber too. Like with the term Semites, Heber /Habiru / Hebrews are related to each other but have similar origin. Just as the Edomites (Esau) , Moabites and Ammon (from Lot, nephew of Abraham).
I sound like a broken record in saying another great job of stitching all the scholarly research together and explaining it. Great explaining a complicated history, Matt!
Not to toot anybodies horn but i bring this up when discussing the history of the Bible with my Christian friends and this video usually leaves them speechless with there mouths wide open...I absolutely love your videos
The problem with low density population being the basis of dismissing the unified monarchy comes from Gobekli Tepe. A large, centralized set of structures in the middle of pre-agricultural society seems to have been shown possible.
We know that Israel was a minor regional power and that the major powers rarely felt the need to mention Judah. We know that Israel had commerce, cultural interchange, and cities, while Judah was comparatively poor and sparsely populated. When we reconcile this with the claim that Jerusalem -- which was hardly more than a fortified town at the time -- was the cultural and political centre of the region it's hard to parse it as anything but over-compensation, especially since they are the only ones claiming it. If I told you that I was the coolest guy in my high school, super athletic, handsome, and popular -- and totally went to prom with the three hottest girls in school instead of just staying home -- would you believe me? Spoiler alert, I have a school photo where my glasses are literally taped together.
It was a Kingdom. The Old Testament has references to many Petty Kings. If you controlled a walled settlement and nearby villages/farmlands you were a King. In fact when the Egyptian Emigrants entered Canaan they were welcomed by Melkhezedek, The Priest-King of Jerusalem. The Kingdoms in these early days were basically just City-States.
Fascinating as always Please continue tracing the lost 10 tribes (but mainly focus on actual evidences not any random cults or rumors such as the British Israelites).
Can you do a video on the history of Lebanon like you did for Gaza? I know you primarily focus on cities but Lebanon is tiny, and that is compared to tiny US states. Lebanon was home to the Phoenicians (a category of Canaanites) who created the alphabet and it was prized by kingdoms like Egypt for its forests. It also holds importance to Abrahamic religions as it is considered part of the promised land of Canaan. Lebanon is also one of the most diverse countries in the middle east having 18 religious groups.
I just bought Jacob L.Wright’s book “Why the Bible Began”. I love learning about history and your videos have definitely inspired my interest in learning about religious studies. This book should help me better understand the Abrahamic religions. So far I’m enjoying it. Thank you.
Amazing video! I had suggested such a video a while back and its great to see it come to life. One thing about the Shasu (nomads) which is fascinating is how that the Egyptian mentioned the names of these tribes, and it seems they are referring to both Rueben and Yaweh in their inscriptions. From wiki: "In 13th century BCE copies of the column inscriptions ordered by Seti I or by Ramesses II at Amarah-West, six groups of Shasu are mentioned: the Shasu of S'rr, the Shasu of Rbn, the Shasu of Sm't, the Shasu of Wrbr, the Shasu of Yhw, and the Shasu of Pysps."
I'm so grateful for a channel like this, I personally fall in the nuances of life rather than a black and white way of thinking and this + many other videos from this channel help support me gathering truths about the world. It's quite fascinating how the bible is both fiction and Historical. Love it, Slowly becoming a history nerd
I really wanted to see some videos that present the academic consensus on the bible, but dan Mcclelan does short form stuff that never really explains the consensus view of a whole part of the bible or any singular story, so I love this new series you're making here plus the visuals are amazing
Love him. He smacks the crap out of people who think they can read a few articles and become experts. Many just want to have RUclips sites and make money.
Thank you for this well done video about Jewish history! I’m a Bukharian Jew. My family lived in Central Asia for centuries, after our exile from the land of Israel. We are not sure if we were exiled by the Assyrian or Babylonian Empire, but we always referred to ourselves as “the children of Israel” in Hebrew, including in our dialect of Persian that has a lot of Hebrew loan words, called Bukhori. As a Cohen it’s also interesting to see where the tribe of Levi originally came from, especially that they may have truly been slaves in Egypt.
A native hebrew speaker here from Israel, Benjamin means "the son of the right." like in terms of right and left. the right always symbols the strong hand. basically means "the son of the right hand." like in other places in the hebrew bible you find this term of "strong hand" and "right hand." are synonymous, can you explain how did you get the name of "the son of the south". google also gave me this as a possible meaning for this name. like, because left is north and right is south? but this is sound weird, because in the bible I don't recall times when they use "right" to mean "south" (if I am wrong, please correct me and give me the places they do. if so, it does makesens)
In Ancient Hebrew, the word yamin was often used to mean south and likewise smol (left) was often used to mean north. Yamin is also where we get the word Teman (Yemen) as the land to the right (south). So yes, Benjamin does indeed mean Son of the South.
This was excellent. It went directly to a concept and issue I have been wondering about since seeing Esoterica's videos about the origins of how YHWH went from a regional storm/war god to THE god. You're a fantastic communicator, and despite your mistake of denying that Canada is the 51st state, I trust your information. :)
I will never not be impressed by the sheer literary power of a bunch of iron age nerds writing down their very local legends in such a way that 3000 years later the *majority of humanity* treats the mythology of their rather unimpressive empire as THE religion.
This is quite interesting and I thank you. Your presentation is clear and concise. Without being at all argumentative, however, I would like to clarify a parenthetical point. As a life-long atheist, I want to make it clear that neither I, nor any other atheist I have ever discussed the matter with, would assert that the Bible is devoid of history. Of course, we do not believe the parts that involve events we see as supernatural, but there was obviously a coherent group of people who had a history that they remembered and incorporated into their many writings. Being religious, they viewed their history through a lens that injected the influence of a god that they viewed as being intimately engaged with their lives, but I see that as an overlay that can sometimes be rendered transparent. Beneath it is a history that is accessible to varying degrees. The writings we now have were also influenced by the same kind of selection that affects all literature. Some stories are more memorable or hold more appeal than others. To armies clashing with one of them winning isn't so memorable. But the story of David and Goliath is. It has the literary appeal afforded by irony. It provides a memorable allegory. The little guy can, indeed, be triumphant. So that story is told and survives and eventually becomes the historic view of the event whether it's actually true or not. Between the theological lens and the literary selection, the people ended up with a narrative that made sense to them and justified the actions their forefathers took to mold their nation. The narrative is often fanciful, self-serving and (to me) not believable, but it was not invented out of whole cloth. Its roots lie in the very real history that real people experienced. Thank you again.
Your videos are very educational. And it is an absolute pleasure to watch, because this clear and calm presentation is always beautifully made. And you are so articulate, it is very nice to listen to your words, while enjoying the presentation. The best way for me to learn is visual content. And your content so well structured. Thank you for all your work!! All the best to you from 🇩🇪
Very interesting video. As a jew I feel somewhat uncomfortable acknowledging the info, but it is what it is and I can't disprove research that I respect😅😅 I always thought it was no coincidence that Egypt had Akhenaten who believed in monotheism (sort of) and Israelites who also believed in monotheism. I would also like to agree that Judaism consolidated into what it is, as a direct result of the Roman conquest and expulsion of Jews from Israel. It made Judaism turn from temple based religion (being in physical need of the temple ceremonies for worship) to community based religion (10 men is enough let's worship). I think about it a lot, how being sent to the diaspora moulded our identity.
I agree with most of what you wrote, except Akhenaten: the short-lived Egyptian monotheism seems to have come too early to influence Jewish monotheism. Israel was polytheistic, with some groups preferring one god over another God. That preference had probably turned into monolatry in Judah by 600BC: only worship of Yahweh was allowed, while the existence of other gods was still acknowledged. Compare that with Akhenaten around 1400BC, 800 years earlier. . . . Monotheism developed in the Jewish exile in Babylon, maybe under Persian influence, too. The text with mature monotheism like Genesis 1 and Deutero-Isaiah are from after the forced exile.
@@Achill101 I appreciate your input and I have a question regarding it: If monotheism is an idea developed in exile, then why did the Israelites prefer monotheism at all? I do find it more logical that Judaism's monotheism originated in Midian earlier.
Great Job! as a historian with really basic interest in the subject, I have to congratulate you on a job well done. Extremely interesting and formative. Me saco el sombrero.
Honestly, as a Filipino Christian, weaned on the Holy Bible, this video and its contents contain many new and shocking statements regarding the twelve sons of Jacob which became the Twelve Tribes of Israel. 😲😲😲
Love the channel. This is, perhaps, one of my favourite videos. I am not a theological scholar but I found The Bible Unearthed fascinating. Have you had any academic dialogue with Prof. Finkelstein? The archaeology, history and theological history of The Levant is complicated and mesmerising. The transition from the Bronze Age collapse through to the Iron Age is such a dynamic, short but very important period in such a geographically small area that it is a pity some/much of its evidence has been lost in tragedy of modern conflict given how influential it has been on western identity for the last 2500 yrs. Keep producing these amazing vids.
I’m imagining a future where people debate the number of states, cause of all the data that says 50, but when counted in lists it clearly shows 52 cause Canada and Quebec at one point edited all the lists but couldn’t change all the 50 star flags lol
Thank you so much for the list of references. I just finished reading The Bible Unearthed, and I found it fascinating, but I knew it was 22 years old and would most likely have out of date information. Now I can read some more modern books with updated research and ideas.
73 different books with different themes, authors, styles, and context containing myths, histories, legends, theology, liturgy, philosophy, poetry, and music compiled by people documenting their existence. Scholarship and theories come and go: the editing during the exile is not a new concept.
I heard the Sea People Dan theory on Dragons in Genesis. I take all their info with a grain of salt, so glad to hear the theory is acknowledged by others.
Literalist take the history literal, Atheist take it mythical. Meanwhile he takes the approach of the video as a minimalist, which is the alternative “lets satisfy atheist” approach of the Bible. Would be more interesting for everyone if you redo this video but with a more maximalist approach, the evidence is quite there.
First -- especially since this is basically a complaint -- I ought to say that I really like your videos and charts. Thank you for spending so much time and energy on this stuff! Now for the irritating part. Several things about this video kind of frustrated me; I don't want to get into everything, but one point _really_ stands out: what sense does it make that the Levites were religious leaders _and therefore weren't_ a civic threat to the power of the Judahites? That isn't how authority worked in the Ancient Near East! They didn't have the First Amendment, they didn't practice separation of church and state. I mean, for heaven's sake, that's exactly how the Hasmoneans came to power (admittedly in a far later period). It was completely normal for the same person or the same office to have both religious and secular responsibilities and to wield both types of authority: not universal, maybe (as passages like II Chronicles 26.16-20 suggest), but normal. Now, I'm far from a Biblical literalist myself. I realize that its authors had an agenda -- all authors do, including modern ones, after all -- and often weren't trying to record chronological fact in the first place. But even granting that, it's sometimes hard to avoid the impression that modern scholarship makes a point of treating the Bible as specially, disproportionately disqualified as a source. That, when combined with constant protestations of talking about "what _really_ happened," when scholarly consensus 1. consists in reconstructions (which are different from facts as such _no matter how_ good they are), and 2. seems to change in substantive ways every thirty years or so (remember the upset made by the very existence of the Hittites in the nineteenth century?) -- well, it seems tendentious, as if scholars either don't recognize or won't acknowledge that they're susceptible to bias. That gets under my skin.
Also my reply is not criticism of your good post, just an attempt to explain: the Levites didn't own land but had to live in settlements of others who were different from them. That made them less able to wage war and less of a threat.
@@Achill101 That's certainly true, though I wasn't concerned to demonstrate that the Levites _did_ have any kind of military advantage. If their scattering, such as it was, did prevent them from wielding political power, okay; but my point is simply that that's a very different reason than the "disqualified by being priests" idea.
Thank you for yet another amazing video! Learning about Abrahamic religions objectively like this has really helped in healing my personal and generational trauma related to the idea of these religions and such. I gave up trying to understand my families obsession and literal interpretations from their Southern Baptist views... It left me really angry and they would guilt and shame me as well. But knowing there is more to the story (pun intended) and that academia and archeology has better explanations about the whole issue - makes me feel a bit more... secure? Like that the Bible isn't black and white but nuanced, multifaceted, flawed, and more just like the humans that wrote it - makes it feel more like actually literature than the "because God" reason. I'm now not religious at all, though I do follow some Shinto lifestyle teachings for inner peace and nature worship which calms me, and as that is more related to my Asian heritage; I feel a lot more interest in the stories/myths leading up to and around these periods of time, and how people wove the myths into historical accounts by their understanding. It's fascinating. Like, I didn't realize that Samson was possibly related to the stories of Hercules! But again thank you ^_^
Judaism isn’t a religion Jews are an ethnic group first and foremost, our religion is merely one facet of who we are. There is no “Abrahamic religion” there is Judaism and the appropriation of jewish history and culture by non Jews.
@@m.s.6586 If you're going to be asinine in someone else's comments, that clearly wasn't meant for you either; at least don't spout inaccuracies. Judaism is both a religion and, for some, an ethnic group - as there are Jewish people aren't ethnic Jews but rather converts to the religion but still Jewish. Matt from this video is one such person. He's Jewish even if he is not ethically Jewish. I don't accept 'No True Scotsman' fallacies here. And there are, in fact, many Abrahamic Religions recognized by scholars - as their traditions have historically been linked back to the same origin of believing in the God of Abraham and consider Abraham the first prophet. Any faith that falls under that criteria, that believes in that version of God, is Abrahamic; doesn't matter their origin, or how they're different - they believe in the same God. Also, Christianity was started as a sect of Judaism BY Jews. They didn't "appropriate" anything from their own history. Your words hold no credit to historical and academic facts. Call me pedantic or whatever but I'm not believing anything you have to say over actual scholars like Matt.
@esthercom5672 What are you even talking about about? We did evolve, just as everything on the planet has, for millions of years and we are still considered as sub-group of primates called Great Apes by current scientific understanding. Whilst the common ancestor of our closest cousins, the chimpanzee, was only alive 6 to 8 million years ago before we diverged from it, doesn't change the fact that it was a common ancestor. I'm not listening to creationist conspiracy theorists or Bible literalists over scientists either! I left a traumatic religious group - I'm not going to "back the Bible" because it's "best", I'm not going to "buy a chronological Bible" whatever that is; I've read through the Bible enough when I was forced to. I can follow scientific discoveries in the archeological record, from reputable scholars like Matt that tie it to literature with the understanding that myth, legend, and some historical things are bound to be mixed together and can explain the actual context of what was happening during that period from their professional research and opinion. It's only from their diligence for scholarly research and archeological references that I can even stomach the topics discussed. I appreciate that Matt is up front about the things they don't have good references for and that some of it in the earliest eras were more mythology by scholars understanding anyway. I don't feel like I'm being pressured to believe past traumatic things or proselytized too in any way. It's objective.
It was a good session, with beautiful medieval finishing music. This information must deeply annoy fundamentalists, who appear driven to believe almost any nonsense they are told.
I have to disagree with this "... versus what REALLY happened" approach when talking about events from so long ago, because it gives a false air of certainty while in fact most of it is highly speculative. Sources are extremely rare from that time period, and many of what has been written is lost. Therefore we might only make some inferences and assumptions from what little remains. It's not "what REALLY happened", it's rather "what we can infer from non-religious sources". Otherwise we would be falling into a trap many agenda-driven atheists do, going through the Bible, saying ok, this person is referenced in other sources so he existed, hm, this one too, and this other one too... oh wait, I've finally found someone from the Bible who is not referenced in other sources, so this is a proof that no person with such a name could ever have existed, instead of just saying we don't have other sources (maybe because it was so long ago that they did not survive to the present day)
Except the “experts” start from the position the Bible is unreliable and assume the whole of the extra-biblical evidence is the truth. But why do scholars place so much faith in the extra-biblical sources exactly? No group has been carefully preserving those sources from change. We keep finding more archeology that verifies the Bible. The absence of archeology showing something is not convincing when there are SO MANY places unexplored.
Great discussion! Two interesting footnotes from the New Testament: Luke 2:36 mentions Anna, a prophetess, of the tribe of Aser (Asher). Revelation 7 has a list of the twelve tribes of Israel, but for some unknown reason excludes Dan, while adding Manasseh.
Matt - FABULOUS presentation. I have heard the blble described as more of a history book than a religious document. Many thanks for the references, particularly the two books. I just may have to pick those up & read them. Just out of curiosity, how much flak - if not worse - have you caught from the "purists" & others of that ilk whose stories your own presentation does not support? Keep up the great work. joeinbuenosaires 😎
I read a study that said the Samaritan Levites are Egyptian based - Y DNA E, while the levites in Judah have the Cohen Y DNA which is J (this is from memory so may not have it exact), which also matches the Ethiopian Levites. It is interesting that you said the Levites could be egyptian priests, but it appears that perhaps jewish priests took over that role during the second d temple period.
Levi Judah Joseph. You are doing a good job proving that Judah and Israel fought with each other. But the Bible already says that. Your main topic, "Where did the 12 Tribes come from?" Can't disagree with the Bible that "well it looks like they were the sons of Jacob"
The name, Benjamin does not mean, son of the south. The name Benjamin means son of the right ( as opposed to left). The Hebrew word for , South is, "DorRome". Now this puts everything else I've heard in this video to question.
You are correct. However, in ancient times, the land of Israel was thought of as being oriented with the Mediterranean Sea at the bottom. This meant that the south was on the right. Thus, ימין also often meant "towards the south".
@@UsefulCharts the ancient hebrew word for south is teyman תימן which is also the name for the kingdom which was in modern day yemen today also called teyman so no they definitely considered south as south not as "on the right" or "towards the sea"
What surprises me as a scientist and a researcher is the facts that there are people who takes the bible as true history book and source of information. but yet fails to identifies who wrote the bible. I would not read or rely on any book i dont know who is the author not to mention the hundreds of contradictions that covers the bible from cover to cover.
Wow, fascinating!! Thanks so much for the breakdown! Question: You said initially that the "not really 12 tribes" hypothesis is a newly put forward theory, but my impression from your presentation was that it is actually the accurate truth of the matter. Is that your conviction or was I not paying attention enough? Regardless of the answer, I highly recommend implementing persistent visual indicators of when you are not presenting established fact, like when delving into thought experiments or exploring a hypothesis. Think of someone skipping through your video to see whether your content is worthwhile and just sees the part on the Americans becoming Canadians, or just someone who didn't pay attention for a moment exactly when you qualified the following part as exploration of a hypothesis. To be conctete, I'd put the clichee vignette-blur for thought experiments and I'd use the chapter-function from youtube, as well as maybe dedicate some part of the screen (which can shift around if necessary) for some sort of title of each part, like "what we know so far", "The not-12-tribes-hypothesis". Just a suggestion. Anyways, I love your content! Can't wait for the next video!
His point is that from the historical POV, there likely weren't 12 original tribes as many of them had outside origin and their mythos were mostly made up to seem that they were always there.
So you disagree with the general scholarly belief that the Samaritans are the descendants of the Israelites from the northern kingdom that were left behind after the destruction of Samaria? Any specific reason why? Any chance you'll make a video about it?
In the Talmud, the "Samaritans" are known as Kutim, implying they are descendants of Cutheans who moved to Samaria after the Assyrian conquest. Its likely that their descendants later converted to a branch of Judaism down the road.
@@valman1199 in the talmud, written/heavily edited by the Judeans after the fact to cement their authority, so there's a very clear motive/bias. and i'm not saying that it can't be true, just that it can be false, and there are other things to consider.
Never Trust Anyone NOT following the Laws & Commandments....God's People are destine to rule this world representing The Most High and Yahawashi as our King
@@Giantcrabz Yahawah The Most High is the creator of all that is and All that will ever be:) The Father of Yahawashi’s, who was sent un to the Lost Sheep of the 12 Tribes of Israel (the people, not the place)
I always thought that it was kind of odd that a loose tribal group named themselves after their god El, but finding out that Asher and Gad did it too is mind-blowing b/c maybe it was a thing people did in Canaan at that time. And given that even in other places, people traced their ancestry back to a god, it now makes sense that these might be deified legendary patriarchs that were un-deified when monotheism took hold.
@@UsefulChartsit's also possible that the northerners had to assimilate into the southern culture. And it's pretty easy to read this clash of cultures into things like the 10 commandments and Deuteronomy. The latter is an entire book that was written pretending to be older than it was reminding people what their national religion is. It's all a bit speculative though.
Judah was not 2 tribes, that is Christian ideology. In Judea there was Judah, Benjamin, Simeon and the Levites assigned to those tribes as well as the spouses and merchants that lived in the Southern Kingdom of Judea from the Northern kingdom of Israel.
@@mrjdgibbs - yes, Northerners had to assimilate somewhat into Southern culture. But Jerusalem was growing so fast after 722BC, it seems they were a majority within and around Jerusalem. . . . Deuteronomy is so full of reminders to be kind to strangers and to accept strangers in your midst, I always thought it was based on the experience of the refugees from Israel in Judah.
@@shainazion4073 - who says Judah was two tribes and where? . . . And Benjamin was the tribe between Judah and the northern Kingdom of Israel, seen by the latter as its most southern tribe.
Really well done video! I'd like to toss out that Benjamin has a couple of meanings, not just son of south but also right hand and joy. I do wish you had left in the bit about when the scepter would depart.
Both ‘right (hand) and ‘south’ are correct in the biblical context. Nomadic tribes (and presumably the mythical Exodus hordes), would pitch their tents or camps with the setting sun behind them. So the rising sun would be directly ahead (East), making the South, right. Right? Old hypothesis which might be spurious though.
"Sea Peoples" always makes me think of the Mediterranean equivalent of Vikings -- smash-and-grab attackers that show up out of nowhere on coasts, burn and steal things, and then leave. And they keep coming back.
I would also consider how various tribes mingled with the other tribes in the area. I would not assume that that means a tribe didn’t exist originally as sons of Israel.
There’s a lot of stuff I feel l gotta fact check, so I’m just gonna thread some comments in one at a time: Firstly, talking about the secular version as the “real” version seems… odd since the secular story is always changing. I haven’t seen the end yet, so I’m interested in if you expand on that later.
Secondly, the version of the “biblical” account of events seems to be the Young Earth one. Though it is the traditionally held belief, it ignores the Hebrew gematria used across the Bible, so I’m unsure why you dated it that way. I do not take this video personally, but so far it seems a bit concerning. I love a lot of your work, so this seems to run counter to everything else. If you bring up any good points, I’ll definitely make note of those.
Thirdly, Egyptian rule of Canaan was nothing like medieval/modern rule of colonies. The Egyptians took canaanite city-states as their vassals. They were easy to avoid. There are also documentaries that showcase how the story of the exodus has no anachronisms to it, and perfectly fits within the timeframe of the early Ramesside Period. That is a lot to demand out of a story told generations later. And yet it tells it, with details such as Egyptian birthing stools and tube-shaped baskets, things that weren’t prominent in Iron Age Israel.
4th, I’m unsure how the same scribes have to be the definitive authors of both Deuteronomy and it’s succeeding books. The only evidence for this is that they share the same grammatical style. Is there anything else proving that? There’s also evidence that tribal people have accurate cultural memories lasting for many centuries. I know we’re only focusing on archeology today, and that is respectable. But ignoring linguistics and cultural memory then saying this is all the “real” history of the people? I do not understand this claim.
A P source that’s separate from J makes sense. I understand post-exilic ideas are used in some of the passages. But why is D also separate from J? A lot of the “D” ideas could’ve easily existed in the Bronze Age. Edit 8/6/24: I’ve just come to learn that pre-exilic prophets like Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Amos, and Hosea all quoted from the “JEDP” sources. Meaning no later editor made it up the fact they were all connected to begin with. They just “were” connected, at least orally. And the repeating lines in each book indicate they were memorized musically for many centuries.
20:02 it’s a little odd that the criteria for this division isn’t given. I read a couple books on what’s consider pre-exilic vs post-exilic, and some of it seems to be just an accusation of anachronisms? If that’s true then how’s that fair?
Try Speakly free for 7 days + get a 60% discount of an annual subscription:
speakly.app.link/usefulcharts
You have to admit "bronze age goat-herders" was a funny joke. "Iron age city dwellers" just doesnt have the same punch.
I have a theory that Moabites, Ammonites and Edomites used to be Judahites and Israelites but rebelled or refused to join the confederations and that's why they're given related status through Haran for Moab and Ammon and Jacob and Esau being brothers. Brotherness with Esau and cousins with Lot's race solely do to distance
But narrations in the Bible is full of love and hate.
So love verses are reconciliations for when they Annex and conquer them, and hatred, in that they were at war.
I theorize that the Moabites and Ammonites were of the original 12 tribes, but Judah and Simeon redacted them and inserted themselves in.
While Edomites used to be jews but rebelled before later rejoining Judah when John Hyrcanus conquered them.
A reconciliation of this narrative being the inserted story of Jacob and Esau loving, hating than reconciling each other.
That's why cherry pick Bible verses has love and redemption hope for Edom, Moab and Amon, but lots of hate as well.
Yes, I'm calling Ammonites and Moabites Israelite and calling Edomites Jews.
The Yahweh Chomosh battle? Could be same God recognized differently than immediately turned around that chomosh didn't exist and was yahweh all along helping the Ammonites.
Of all the Canaanite tribes afterall, why is Moab, Edom and Ammon mentioned?
Lastly, I believe the Bible racial identification is based on who Israelites live or hate or are neutral too.
The various X Y Z tribes called Shuahites, Zimranites, Jokshanites, Medanites, Midianites, Ishmaelites and Ishbakites were Isaac's brother. So? Is it that they were friendly towards the Israelites? And that the multiple other Arab tribes were unmentioned? Is the Hamitic narrative simply Canaanite and Egyptian people the Hebrews hated, Philistines, Berbers (levi from Egypt and fault berbers) the Egyptians and Canaanite tribes who didn't join the Israelite confederation were called Hamitic.
And Semitic were neutral familiar races. And Japhethite is whoever Israel doesn't contact much or like. Afterall some groups like Hittites and Greeks we'd assume be Japhethites, are called Hamitic. Any wartime lingering memory?
Certainly Arab tribes who you'd think be called Semitic is hamitic war enemy of Israel,
Nimrod the Babylonian tyrant a hamite,
Assyrians, mix Hamitic and Semitic,
So love hate.
See what I'm saying?
Hate i.e conquest and love because Job went to Nineveh to convert them to Judaism, my interpretation? 10 lost tribes inhabited Nineveh.
And Samaritans are the other 10.
I actually think job is a Israelite not judahite.
@@Robespierre-lI it's only a joke because people think that goat-herders are bumpkins who don't think. There's a lot of free time to think when herding goats. For your average city-dweller, not so much: they have to work harder and longer hours just to keep from starving.
This video is the Biblical Scholarship equivalent of "I found irrefutable PROOF that the US Civil War really happened! I have therefore chosen to not believe the United States ever existed or Declared Independence from Britain."
@@dougjardine8545 OK. I'll rmember remember that next time I meet a goat-herder that he is most likely a great intellectual Perhaps he will want to strike up conversation about Kirkegaard.
Now I truly understand this quote "Myths are not stories that are untrue. Rather they are tales that don't fit neatly in the historical record which serve as a foundation of a culture."
I don’t know why but I did not expect to see another Extra Mythology fan
Greetings my friend!
@@stratisgeorgilis7703 greetings to you as well
@@michaelmoon3429Truly a great qoute. Something I have to use regularly towards people who think its superstitious and unscientific to believe in myths and practices
I think the logical fallacy here is ignoratio elenchi - it presents an argument that is sound, but it's conclusion is nonsense.
The last sentence is fair; myths are indeed ahistorical tales that are culturally relevant, but in no way does that mean they're "not untrue." Whilst some, such as the Trojan War, may have roots in reality the claims of Gods and Heroes cannot be supported even if it was culturally relevant.
The very reason they don't fit into the historical record is because they make extremely large claims and have no evidence to back it up. As such, all, or almost all, can be dismissed as false until such time than any evidence appears. Understanding them is still valuable to understanding how people at the time thought, but the point this quote is making is a horrible one.
@@srajandikshit7590 It is. You can believe whatever you want and do whatever you want, but don't try to pass off unfalsifiable pseudoscience as science. The quote is also logically fallacious and makes no sense; I put a full reasoning of how in a comment to the original commenter if you would like to see.
The US-Canada comparison is fascinating to me. Especially as both countries have a shared language, overlapping culture, and similar histories/origins while also having political independence and key differences in their history/origins
Vive la différence! 😂
Well, Canada had more of a French/English colonial origin, while the US had a Spanish/French/English origin. And now Canada is split between French and English languages, while the US is primarily English with Spanish rising up, and some residual French influences such as in New Orleans/Louisiana. so yes, similar origins, but only 1 (or 1.5 if you include the one major region of the US with French) shared language.
@@Jess-737 Central-South America has a far more wide indigenous descent than the US and Canada.
Also if Canada and the United States merged together, I'm sure more than 1 state would have been added. Each province could become another state.
US residents are called Americans because they have "America" in the name and no other part of the country name is conducive to converting into a name in the local language (English). Neither "Uniteds" or "Unis" or "Teds" for short, nor "Stateses", "Staters", "Statesians" or "Stays" works well. How many other countries in North America or South America have the same problem and would prefer to be known by the name "American"?
*casually drops Ea-nasir’s face in a timeline*
Refuses to elaborate
Top ten copper merchants, hands down.
The worst copper seller of all time
wait i missed that, where was he referenced?
@@cesarionoexisto2848the timeline, just a generic sumerian statue 😂 @ 4:15
I like how the internet just randomly decided that this statue was Ea-nasir
This channel is exactly the kind of biblical study I've been wanting for a while. I'm super agnostic but I find the history and mythologies of religions super interesting and it's so cool to see how it all ties together and I like how you also point out what the leading theories are, noting it's not all perfectly known.
This was a total waste of my time . The narrator told you in the beginning he was going to lie and he was true to his word.
This is not only an examination of the story of the concept of the 12 tribes of Israel, but also a summary of the history of the Jewish people from ancient times as well as the Bronze Age (and its collapse), plus the Iron Age for good measure. All in around 32 minutes, well done.
It did not seem like 32 minutes tbh. I could have had another hour and been enrapted.
No offense, but his hypothesis of our history of the Jewish nation is just as accurate as summers the fairytales he states are in the Bible. The Bible of thousands of years ago is quite a bit more accurate than researches Coming up with assumptions today.
@@HowlingWo1f No offense, but what he actually he said was that the stories in the Bible aren't fairytales but rather a mix of historical truth and myth. If you want to believe that *all* the stories narrated in the Bible are historically accurate based on faith, that's fine. But if you expect to persuade those of us who are more skeptical that *everything* the Bible says is historically factual, you're going to need to provide something more, like independent evidence.
He’s Coming Soon
When Jesus comes, the rapture question will be clarified,
the church will be unified,
the saints will be glorified and the sinners will be horrified.
When Jesus comes, the devil will be stultified,
the nation of Israel will be vivified,
the sonship will be satisfied and the entire Bible will be verified.
If you think the coming of Jesus is a probability or a possibility,
you missed it.
The coming of Jesus is inevitability.
Acts 2:36-38; 4:10-12; Ephesians 4:5; Colossians 3:17 KJV
He’s Coming Soon
When Jesus comes, the rapture question will be clarified,
the church will be unified,
the saints will be glorified and the sinners will be horrified.
When Jesus comes, the devil will be stultified,
the nation of Israel will be vivified,
the sonship will be satisfied and the entire Bible will be verified.
If you think the coming of Jesus is a probability or a possibility,
you missed it.
The coming of Jesus is inevitability.
Acts 2:36-38; 4:10-12; Ephesians 4:5; Colossians 3:17 KJV
I'm not religious, but for whatever reason, I just find biblical history so fascinating, both from a secular and a theological perspective. I've watched a fair amount of content on the subject on RUclips and other platforms, and your videos are always amongst my favorites. They are very well produced and have such clear and articulate narration. I also really like how you go into detail regarding each of the major academic theories and how they've evolved over time, instead of just presenting a snapshot of the current scholarly consensus on an ever-evolving subject.
Exactly my experience! A lot of videos I see are just like a 1 minute summary or they tell you about one detail and don't give any context, assuming you've already studied this stuff.
You should take a look at the Quran. I'm amazed at how close they are to catholics. And the story of Mary is so very detailed. Their history is much easier to fact check
@@Dani_sister4peace I've been planning to at some point, I didn't realise how similar Islam is to Judaism and Christianity beyond having arguably the same god, it's fascinating to see the overlap
@@Dani_sister4peaceas a catholic, this is the first time i've heard anyone ever said that islam is similar to catholics. How do you make that assertion?
@@yunaru3643yeah, I'm a Muslim interested to convert into Catholicism and I don't see any similarities beyond fasting for a month and the veneration of Mary. even then, it doesn't come close to how catholics venerate her.
muslims used to pray to saints too, but wahabbis killed that practiced so we don't do it
Is it possible that the story of Joseph in Egypt (the famine, the other sons of Israel coming to Egypt to get food, etc) is a faint echo of the Bronze Age collapse?
It's more than possible; it's likely. That story takes place some decades before the Exodus story which could be a narrative decision and both are inspired by the same events. The Collapse is heavily tied to the eruption of Thera which was an extremely powerful volcanic event (potentially the loudest sound ever heard by human ears, fun fact). It alone would have caused every one of the plagues for at least a few hundred kilometers of lower Egypt. It did also cause volcanic winter and that tracks with several years of bad harvest. The sea people may be the remnants of the Minoans as well as general hungry pirates.
Same case with the book of Judges, which some Bible scholars posit to have happened around up to 1200 BC
I always imagined it echoes the second intermediate period, during the Hyksos rule: Semitic pharaohs allowing other Semitic tribes to settle into Egypt in order to have more loyal subjects , with the possibility for foreigners to quickly climb the social ladder. And then, after the return of a local dynasty, bad times for those same minorities.
@@SAOS451316 Thera volcano? Where is that located? Or maybe you are referring to the Lake Toba volcano in Indonesia. Or the Tambora volcano in Indonesia. 🙏
@@nicholassilverio2227 The Thera eruption that happened on the island of Santorini in the Aegean Sea in 1600 BC.
Love your stuff. Wish I could join full time but here is a quick thanks. I do have some of Useful Charts physical chart! Thanks!
Contrary to what he says, there is actually proof of Bronze age characters like Abraham too.
What archaeological evidence is there for Abraham?
@@UsefulChartsIf you do your research in the East.. Asia, Turkey…. You will find all the answers you seek
This was very good. I'm historian of early China (post 100 AD). Not trained in ancient near east. I am impressed by choice of words, and framing of argument.
Have you looked into Biblical and Christian symbolism in ancient Chinese characters?
I think of the Tanakh’s relationship to the Bronze Age very similarly to Greek stories like the Trojan War Cycle: a cultural memory of the pre-collapse world, blended with supernatural religious elements to create a universal story about the world
That Canadian-American flag with the tag "Howdy, Hosers!"😂😂😂😂 as a fellow Canadian I approve the message
As an American, I had a hearty laugh as well. The US and Canada are kind of the siblings or cousins that rib each other from time to time, but we generally have each other's backs when things get really bad.
There is an anime that has all yhe countries as people. Ive only seen a few episodes, but Canada, USA, and Englands interactions are highlarious.
@@p12423073 I think I've heard of it. Is it similar to the countryballs that's been gaining popularity??
@@CharlotteIssyvoo Anti ''American politics'' sentiment would be more precise. But politic is going to shit in here too. I'd say there is friendly banter on the net... (you McDo eating cowboys vs us maple syrup drinking moose riders)
"Howdy, hosers" sounds like the most Alberta greeting ever :D
Now we need a Iron Age city dweller meme
Yes please.
@@UsefulChartsawesome
friendship ended with Uruk, now Assur is my best friend
Let's call them Ferro-Bougeoisie, or Iron Yuppies, or Sidero-Hipsters (that would explain the beards).
DUDE i just LOVE the hustle and bustle of ramparted Uruk, it’s so DYNAMIC and makes me feel like i’m in one of my favourite EPIC POEMS. you should totally come on down to my dwellingplace, it’s got EXPOSED MASONRY OF KILN-FIRED BRICK walls and everything, we can crack open a nice beer fit for a king or seven and get crazy watching some lyre-maids [The rest of the tablet is damaged beyond recognition]
Conclusion: Matt hopes Canada will conquer the US some day.
Don't we all?
These days, it seems more likely that the US will destroy itself!
@davidc1878 Sadly, you're right.
@@davidc1878it's obviously totally unrealistic, but if Canada did suddenly annex itself to the US under the current US Constitution, it would marginalize the crazy wing of the American right in a heartbeat.
Ok. So Alberta might team up with Alabama. And Quebec would probably go completely rogue. But Ontario alone would change everything.
It Canada annexed the US under your constitutional system, it would take a couple decades for GOP voters to even begin to understand how the parliamentary system works ... and how to pronounce Nunavut and where PEI is.
@@UsefulCharts
You are correct on that point.
The U S is driving its own self right off the cliff.
Great video
Thanks
As a Christian living in the modern era, that also subscribed to scholarly disciplines like astrophysics, history and evolution, I appreciate your ability to step back from the beautiful scriptures and analyze it from a scholarly and historical point of view.
People like me are torn between the teachings of the Bible, which we cherish and try to live by, and the historical and archeological things we learn in school or through independent research.
I consider myself a scholarly individual and at times get into casual debates with friends about history and stuff like that and when an atheist friend tries to expose the Bible as fictional lore, I find myself straddling the two positions you have described in this video and some of your other ones about the Bible, that it is neither completely factual nor completely fiction, but a bit of both.
I recently bought a few of your posters and the world history book. Beautiful literature for a history buff like me, and can't wait to enjoy it 😇
You might want to explore some of the conservative scholarship that leans towards the factual end of things. On RUclips the obvious places to start are the Ancient Egypt and the Bible channel and the various videos of the late Michael Heiser's talks on a variety of issues. In terms of things to read, the best starting place on the Old Testament would be Kenneth Kitchen's "On the Reliability of the Old Testament", which gives a good overview of how a scholar can come to the conclusion that the books of the Old Testament are reasonably reliable historical sources.
If you believe the scriptures aren’t true, are you even a Christian?
I think you are torn because you don’t commit fully to God’s word. Compromising is and will always be source of terrible anxiety.
We cannot serve two masters.
2 Peter 2:21
For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them.
@@stephengray1344 I checked out the "Ancient Egypt and the Bible" Channel. I find it more to do with dogma than scholarship.
@@Iskandar75 A true Christian is one who does not take the Bible literally, but take its message seriously! The message of love, forgiveness and compassion.
One the other hand, a fake Christian takes the Bible as literal word of God ( i.e. dictated by God) and support death penalty, torture, war, guns and weapons.. and even genocide. All in the name of God!. One sees them all over the US.
@@stephengray1344 I checked out a few videos on the "Ancient Egypt and the Bible" channel. I find it is more to do with dogma than true scholarship.
Truly one of my favorite channels. I've been binging your videos all week and I gotta say I feel like I am learning so much, and even more, learning how little I know. This channel is giving me a whole new appreciation for history, religion, storytelling, geneology, and so much more. I love how committed to truth you are. Some people feel threatened by the idea of saying "we realized we were wrong" but I love how eager you are to explore as much factual evidence as possible, even if it contradicts the popular narrative. But still, you don't disregard things that aren't scientific as unimportant. You have such a grounded understanding of humanity as you approach your videos, knowing that stories have been important to people for as long as we could tell them, and that the "accuracy" of a story doesn't define its significance. We tell stories we need to tell to protect ourselves and loved ones - stories where someone is forced to become resilient, or be patient, or be brave. It'd be facinating to approach stories as a sort of evolution and therefore have natural selection. Stories that have the most impact stick around the longest, but they evolve and mix in with other stories as history goes on. And in a world before science, these stories helped us integrate us into the world. They helped explain a desire to want to know who we are, and the bible got to be written by so many people which is cool in some ways because people have different histories. If it is true about the people of Midian being the first to worship the God named YWHW and the Levites being the people who remember the Egyptian exodus, and so on... like this book is a collective story where these memories got to come together and make a complete narrative and various cultures got to weave their life into it too.... Thank you Matt for making me appreciate the humanity that has existed in history
My heart absolutely breaking for what they did to my boy documentary hypothesis 😭
It's still true, just that it's so convoluted, there's no point showing the breakdown. We still have 2 stories of Noah's flood crammed together as one telling. We still have two separate creation myths at the start of the bible.
I think that would have been worth his clarifying, it almost sounded as though he didn't think that was the case to me
@@fcsuper My understanding is the time lines for the two Jesus birth stories don't exactly align which is no surprise. Different writers who almost certainly did not know each other. Remember, it is the message, not the minor details, that matter.
@@benniepatton6544The Documentary Hypothesis with the JEPD sources pertains to the Old Testament, not the New Testament.
The what.
The funny thing about them being Iron Age City Dwellers is that they hated the city lol. There is a definite dislike of city life when reading stories like Sodom and Gomorrah, the Garden of Eden, etc. that goes further than the loss of innocence we see in Enkidu. Honestly, it was written by Iron Age Hipsters and Hippies in Their "Zen" Phase.
Looking back to a mythical golden age when life was simple and natural seems to be almost as old as humanity itself.
@@AnaIvanovic4ever"back in my day"
Seems like religious hierarchies hate places of cultural diversity. From, like, the dawn of time.
Because cities until the 20th century where filthier and more disease ridden than the countryside, more people died in cities than were born there and the population had to be supplemented by people from the country moving there
Still today, cities while much safer than in the past or often more dangerous than areas outside of them
I imagine they were the 'make judah great again' folks...
Every time I take a new religion/archeology class you manage to upload a video discussing that weeks topic. Absolutely crazy. Today my biblical archeology class did an exercise where the Men of Gad had to negotiate with the conflicting Moab, Israel, and Assyria. Two days earlier we discussed the documentary hypothesis as well as the deuteronomistic books
Don't worry; if no faith in anything is true, then it is pure coincidence and doesn't matter.
There is something I find strange. If the Judahites made up the birth order to insert themselves into Israelite history, why would they claim to have the same mother as Issachar and Zebulun, while still keeping some distance?
It doesn't make sense
This video is just speculation from an atheistic perspective
Small addition on the tribe of Dan: Cline wrote that the Sea People included the Peleset, Tjekker, Shekelesh, Danuna, and Weshesh.
Peleset are often identified with the Philistines, but Danuna may also be identified with the tribe of Dan.
The Danuna are often identified with Homer's Danaans, from the Aegan
This video and this channel in general answer so many questions I had as a kid that no one ever bothered to answer in church
HaHa
Right?? Like when he pointed out that Judah is unusually favored when Joseph was Jacob’s fave. I very much remember younger me thinking the same thing and now I finally have an answer
Agree, it is nice getting the Cliffs Notes version of several thousand years of history backed up what what scholars have managed to find in the archeological and written records. One item I had not heard before is that some of the Sea People became a component of early Jewish society rather then just one of the causes of the 1177BC collapse.
"no one answered" = you didn't like their answers 😂😂😂
@@user-kp3ks7dk5h The reason why Judah was “unusually favored” over Joseph in Jacob’s blessing is because Christ came from the line of Judah, not from the line of Joseph. Throughout the Bible there’s a concept where the fathers would bless their sons (often prophetically) and many times the blessing is something unexpected. Although Jacob may have desired to bless Joseph and Benjamin over the other tribes (because he favored their mother Rachel), he couldn’t help but prophetically bless Judah over those tribes, because this was the tribe that would bring forth Christ, the Messiah. Therefore, the blessing needed to be greater. The real question here is- why would God choose Jesus to come from the tribe of Judah over the tribe of Joseph? My theory is that Jacob supposedly went against God’s will in choosing Rachel. He was provided Leah first and he should have accepted Leah, but instead he chose to work for 7 more years to earn Rachel. Only bad things came from Rachel: the tribe of Joseph-which eventually ended up bringing everyone to Egypt where they were enslaved for hundreds of years and the tribe of Benjamin- which produced both Sauls (Saul son of Kish who persecuted David- who was a Christ-like figure, and Saul of Tarsus who persecuted Christians before becoming Apostle Paul). Thus, the favoring of Judah over Joseph and Benjamin becomes much clearer. God would obviously favor the lineage that He chose to bring the Messiah, not the one originating in deceit. It’s a shame the people you asked in church couldn’t provide a good answer for you honestly
Isaac always read to be as being inserted as connective tissue in the stories of Abraham and Jacob since he has little to no story of his own but plays a major supportive role as the son of the former and father of the latter.
Your comment is interesting, because as a Muslim, it’s customary in our religion to believe that The Prophet Muhammad PBUH is descended from Isaac
@@xtrct7303Ismail do you mean?
@@xtrct7303 interesting. since ancient christians or non-orthodox jews who became christians, and as well later before christianities formality set in became muslims, they followed sentiment of skism from the teaching of the orthodox. maybe then issac was the true superior prophet for christians and muslim orginate tribes, or at the very least muslim tribes, thus the direction of prophets bloodline?
@@xtrct7303ismail you mean
@@xtrct7303Muslims believe he was a descendant of Ishmael, not Isaac.
The number 12 may not have been random, but may also have reflected the 12 constellations of the zodiac, of which mosaics have been found in many synagogues from antiquity.
That tradition may also have been followed by Jesus described as having 12 disciples.
My guess is that the need to have it be 12 stems from Babylonian influences. The Babylonians loved anything in sets of 12 or 60 (5×12), and if what he described in the video is correct, the final editing happened during our just after they were in Babylonia.
In a related note, the concept of 12 zodiac signs, as well as 12 hours for both day and night, the idea of 360 (60×60) degrees in a circle also have their roots in the Babylonian numerical system
@@robertmauck4975
Shnayim-Eser (שְׁנֵים-עָשָׂר or יב / Twelve)
“It had a great, high wall with twelve gates, and with twelve angels at the gates. On the gates were written the names of the twelve tribes of Israel.” (Revelation 21:12)
The number 12, which is one of the numbers symbolizing perfection, is unmistakably important in Scripture. It appears throughout the Tanakh (Old Covenant) and the Brit Chadashah (New Covenant).
In Judaism, this number symbolizes totality, wholeness, and the completion of God’s purpose. It is considered the number of governmental perfection as it symbolizes God’s power and authority.
The number 12 is also linked to the concept of time; for example, the ancient Israelites marked 12 lunar cycles representing the 12 lunar months of the year.
They divided the day and the night into 12-hour periods.
Thought the 360 was symbolic for the days in a year. It makes a day (dia) about a degree. Also aren't the twelve constellations meant to give symbol to the twelve moons (months) we have on a yearly basis ?
@@robertmauck4975 360 - divisible by every single digit number except seven; they could likely count that high on their fingers. (by the way 60 x 60 = 3600)
I recently learned that Puritan and Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell held the belief that the English people were one of the lost tribes of Israel.
Israel means” Struggled/Wrestled with God” in Genesis Jacob fought against an Angel who was representing God and in the end God blessed Jacob by changing his name to Israel and saying that he shall make him a mighty nation
1. What was Reuben calling........
2. What was Simeon calling.......
3.what was Levi calling........
4. What was Judah calling......
5. What was Issachar calling.....
6. What was Zebulun calling.....
7. What was Dan calling......
8. What was Gad calling......
9. What was Asher calling.....
10. What was Napthali calling....
11. What was Joseph calling......
12. What was Benjamin calling......
Each tribe has a specific calling from GOD.....calling such as sonship....watchman...and high priest.
That is correct
Just wanted to mention there is no "angel" in the Hebrew text of that event,in the original text it says Jacob fought off Shadowy aggressive man and after that "man" gave him blessing and his name "Israel"(he who fought/struggled with God).
Ive read that it originally meant something along the lines of “Land of El.” El being the leader/father of the ancient Canaanite pantheon. Thats why many Hebrew as well as other extinct Phoenician and Canaanite names end with El (see Michael, Raphael, Zerubbabel, Abiel, Ariel, Berel, etc etc) denoting that they are of the land of El, or the belief that El’s name in there’s would gift them his power and prestige. At least a decent sized chunk of the early Israelites were worshippers of El. The early Israelites were polytheists.
@@yakov95000 This in itself is misleading as you are not accounting for the idiomatic/connotative layer of language, to speak somewhat imprecisely. There are motifs in the Hebrew that indicate the figure is not actually human - as ancient Jews did not believe in an incarnate God, the figure was most certainly considered to be an angel, and this would have been plain to the original audience. To a Christian, this could be an angel or a theophany of the pre-Incarnate Son. However, to just translate it hyperliterally as a "man," as though the text is not talking about an otherworldly figure is just as dishonest as it is only true on the most hyper-literal level of translation but misses obvious implications of the passage in its original language, just like trying to literally translate idioms from one language to another.
Matt you are really the best to explain all these details. Amazing work here.
Yes I've been waiting for this video. This is a topic I actually got inspired to investigate through this channel, in which I found very interesting things that go back to Egypt and Mesopotamian folklore. I know I'm about to learn much more while watching this, thank you Dr. Baker!
Matt, thank you for the extensive list of books you provided as sources. Sadly, there are other popular RUclips channels that have covered this material in the past, but never listed sources for their viewers to check out and learn more from.
Bravo! Thank you for going through this quite multi-faceted and unfortunately obscure scholarship and preparing it for laypeople to understand. I can imagine it takes hours to get this done in such simple, coherent way. And doing it while staying aware of religious sensibilities. Always a blast to listen to you Matt!
Don't agree that bronze age collapse is not visible in the bible. The philistines arrived in Israël just after the israelites settled in Kanaän (after the exodus). It's mentioned in the bible that only the kanaanites had iron weapons and therefore were superior. Later during the time of David, the israelites had iron weapons (and plows etc) which helped them to be strong in the surrounding lands.
We know that Egypt was ruled by a different dynasty as usual (semite people, hyksos /habiru that were kind of related to the origins of the israelites. This was after 1450 BCE.
You also mention that Habiru might be related to the name hebrew. Could be, and the bible mentions Heber too. Like with the term Semites, Heber /Habiru / Hebrews are related to each other but have similar origin. Just as the Edomites (Esau) , Moabites and Ammon (from Lot, nephew of Abraham).
Really appreciate the way you describe things, but calling it "REAL" origin is very unscientific. You can only hypothesise, but not prove it.
I sound like a broken record in saying another great job of stitching all the scholarly research together and explaining it. Great explaining a complicated history, Matt!
So far, one of the most interesting works you’ve given us. Thank you so much! JE bless you!
Not to toot anybodies horn but i bring this up when discussing the history of the Bible with my Christian friends and this video usually leaves them speechless with there mouths wide open...I absolutely love your videos
The US/Canada analogy is a really good explanatory tool! Thanks for another great video!
The problem with low density population being the basis of dismissing the unified monarchy comes from Gobekli Tepe. A large, centralized set of structures in the middle of pre-agricultural society seems to have been shown possible.
Yet it's not that large and there's no proof of a kingdom there.
We know that Israel was a minor regional power and that the major powers rarely felt the need to mention Judah. We know that Israel had commerce, cultural interchange, and cities, while Judah was comparatively poor and sparsely populated. When we reconcile this with the claim that Jerusalem -- which was hardly more than a fortified town at the time -- was the cultural and political centre of the region it's hard to parse it as anything but over-compensation, especially since they are the only ones claiming it.
If I told you that I was the coolest guy in my high school, super athletic, handsome, and popular -- and totally went to prom with the three hottest girls in school instead of just staying home -- would you believe me? Spoiler alert, I have a school photo where my glasses are literally taped together.
It was a Kingdom. The Old Testament has references to many Petty Kings.
If you controlled a walled settlement and nearby villages/farmlands you were a King. In fact when the Egyptian Emigrants entered Canaan they were welcomed by Melkhezedek, The Priest-King of Jerusalem. The Kingdoms in these early days were basically just City-States.
Fascinating as always
Please continue tracing the lost 10 tribes (but mainly focus on actual evidences not any random cults or rumors such as the British Israelites).
Can you do a video on the history of Lebanon like you did for Gaza? I know you primarily focus on cities but Lebanon is tiny, and that is compared to tiny US states. Lebanon was home to the Phoenicians (a category of Canaanites) who created the alphabet and it was prized by kingdoms like Egypt for its forests. It also holds importance to Abrahamic religions as it is considered part of the promised land of Canaan. Lebanon is also one of the most diverse countries in the middle east having 18 religious groups.
I just bought Jacob L.Wright’s book “Why the Bible Began”. I love learning about history and your videos have definitely inspired my interest in learning about religious studies. This book should help me better understand the Abrahamic religions. So far I’m enjoying it. Thank you.
Thank you UsefulCharts for getting me addicted to Biblical history and criticism! 😁
Amazing video! I had suggested such a video a while back and its great to see it come to life.
One thing about the Shasu (nomads) which is fascinating is how that the Egyptian mentioned the names of these tribes, and it seems they are referring to both Rueben and Yaweh in their inscriptions.
From wiki:
"In 13th century BCE copies of the column inscriptions ordered by Seti I or by Ramesses II at Amarah-West, six groups of Shasu are mentioned: the Shasu of S'rr, the Shasu of Rbn, the Shasu of Sm't, the Shasu of Wrbr, the Shasu of Yhw, and the Shasu of Pysps."
Could not possibly get bored of these videos, keep on with this amazing work on religion
I'm so grateful for a channel like this, I personally fall in the nuances of life rather than a black and white way of thinking and this + many other videos from this channel help support me gathering truths about the world. It's quite fascinating how the bible is both fiction and Historical. Love it, Slowly becoming a history nerd
Y'all people have really done it now!! " EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW AND EVERY TONGUE SHALL CONFESS"
Amen!! Praise the Lord❤😂
Sounds violent and unpleasant. I'm glad there's no reason to believe this.
I really wanted to see some videos that present the academic consensus on the bible, but dan Mcclelan does short form stuff that never really explains the consensus view of a whole part of the bible or any singular story, so I love this new series you're making here plus the visuals are amazing
Love him. He smacks the crap out of people who think they can read a few articles and become experts. Many just want to have RUclips sites and make money.
“Hey boss, going on my lunch break. I’ll be back in 32:27”
Are you suggesting that UsefulCharts change name to Religion for Lunch?
A complicated topic explained so simply and beautifully, thanks so much Matt!
Thank you for this well done video about Jewish history! I’m a Bukharian Jew. My family lived in Central Asia for centuries, after our exile from the land of Israel. We are not sure if we were exiled by the Assyrian or Babylonian Empire, but we always referred to ourselves as “the children of Israel” in Hebrew, including in our dialect of Persian that has a lot of Hebrew loan words, called Bukhori. As a Cohen it’s also interesting to see where the tribe of Levi originally came from, especially that they may have truly been slaves in Egypt.
A native hebrew speaker here from Israel,
Benjamin means "the son of the right." like in terms of right and left.
the right always symbols the strong hand. basically means "the son of the right hand."
like in other places in the hebrew bible you find this term of "strong hand" and "right hand." are synonymous,
can you explain how did you get the name of "the son of the south".
google also gave me this as a possible meaning for this name. like, because left is north and right is south? but this is sound weird, because in the bible I don't recall times when they use "right" to mean "south" (if I am wrong, please correct me and give me the places they do. if so, it does makesens)
Interesting comment. Perhaps if facing the rising sun - East - then right is south and left is north?
In Ancient Hebrew, the word yamin was often used to mean south and likewise smol (left) was often used to mean north. Yamin is also where we get the word Teman (Yemen) as the land to the right (south). So yes, Benjamin does indeed mean Son of the South.
The 12 Tribes are descendants of Jacob 10 of them were his sons and Joseph’s was split into two the Tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh
This was excellent. It went directly to a concept and issue I have been wondering about since seeing Esoterica's videos about the origins of how YHWH went from a regional storm/war god to THE god. You're a fantastic communicator, and despite your mistake of denying that Canada is the 51st state, I trust your information. :)
I will never not be impressed by the sheer literary power of a bunch of iron age nerds writing down their very local legends in such a way that 3000 years later the *majority of humanity* treats the mythology of their rather unimpressive empire as THE religion.
This is quite interesting and I thank you. Your presentation is clear and concise. Without being at all argumentative, however, I would like to clarify a parenthetical point. As a life-long atheist, I want to make it clear that neither I, nor any other atheist I have ever discussed the matter with, would assert that the Bible is devoid of history. Of course, we do not believe the parts that involve events we see as supernatural, but there was obviously a coherent group of people who had a history that they remembered and incorporated into their many writings. Being religious, they viewed their history through a lens that injected the influence of a god that they viewed as being intimately engaged with their lives, but I see that as an overlay that can sometimes be rendered transparent. Beneath it is a history that is accessible to varying degrees. The writings we now have were also influenced by the same kind of selection that affects all literature. Some stories are more memorable or hold more appeal than others. To armies clashing with one of them winning isn't so memorable. But the story of David and Goliath is. It has the literary appeal afforded by irony. It provides a memorable allegory. The little guy can, indeed, be triumphant. So that story is told and survives and eventually becomes the historic view of the event whether it's actually true or not. Between the theological lens and the literary selection, the people ended up with a narrative that made sense to them and justified the actions their forefathers took to mold their nation. The narrative is often fanciful, self-serving and (to me) not believable, but it was not invented out of whole cloth. Its roots lie in the very real history that real people experienced. Thank you again.
I'm a devout atheist but I love the content.
Atheism is factually false
I just LOVE the way you make your videos, whether it's the charts or the facts your present.
Super interesting as always! Thank you.
Very interesting! I had heard of the Phillistine/Peleset connection before, but hadn't heard of the Dan/Danaan connection. Makes a lot of sense!
Philistines were absorb the by Babylonians during the Captivity.
Your videos are very educational. And it is an absolute pleasure to watch, because this clear and calm presentation is always beautifully made. And you are so articulate, it is very nice to listen to your words, while enjoying the presentation.
The best way for me to learn is visual content. And your content so well structured. Thank you for all your work!!
All the best to you from 🇩🇪
Thank you for another fascinating look at history
Very interesting video. As a jew I feel somewhat uncomfortable acknowledging the info, but it is what it is and I can't disprove research that I respect😅😅
I always thought it was no coincidence that Egypt had Akhenaten who believed in monotheism (sort of) and Israelites who also believed in monotheism.
I would also like to agree that Judaism consolidated into what it is, as a direct result of the Roman conquest and expulsion of Jews from Israel. It made Judaism turn from temple based religion (being in physical need of the temple ceremonies for worship) to community based religion (10 men is enough let's worship). I think about it a lot, how being sent to the diaspora moulded our identity.
I agree with most of what you wrote, except Akhenaten: the short-lived Egyptian monotheism seems to have come too early to influence Jewish monotheism. Israel was polytheistic, with some groups preferring one god over another God. That preference had probably turned into monolatry in Judah by 600BC: only worship of Yahweh was allowed, while the existence of other gods was still acknowledged. Compare that with Akhenaten around 1400BC, 800 years earlier.
. . . Monotheism developed in the Jewish exile in Babylon, maybe under Persian influence, too. The text with mature monotheism like Genesis 1 and Deutero-Isaiah are from after the forced exile.
@@Achill101 I appreciate your input and I have a question regarding it: If monotheism is an idea developed in exile, then why did the Israelites prefer monotheism at all? I do find it more logical that Judaism's monotheism originated in Midian earlier.
Another great video, i bought your new and even bought my Christian friend a copy because he wants to study Christianity more academically
Great Job! as a historian with really basic interest in the subject, I have to congratulate you on a job well done. Extremely interesting and formative. Me saco el sombrero.
Thanks for yet another amazing video Matt. I have seriously learned more history from you than any other YT channel (and I subscribe to a ton of them)
Honestly, as a Filipino Christian, weaned on the Holy Bible, this video and its contents contain many new and shocking statements regarding the twelve sons of Jacob which became the Twelve Tribes of Israel. 😲😲😲
Love the channel. This is, perhaps, one of my favourite videos. I am not a theological scholar but I found The Bible Unearthed fascinating. Have you had any academic dialogue with Prof. Finkelstein? The archaeology, history and theological history of The Levant is complicated and mesmerising. The transition from the Bronze Age collapse through to the Iron Age is such a dynamic, short but very important period in such a geographically small area that it is a pity some/much of its evidence has been lost in tragedy of modern conflict given how influential it has been on western identity for the last 2500 yrs. Keep producing these amazing vids.
I’m imagining a future where people debate the number of states, cause of all the data that says 50, but when counted in lists it clearly shows 52 cause Canada and Quebec at one point edited all the lists but couldn’t change all the 50 star flags lol
Omg this is epic! I love the scholarship behind this topic Matt!
Matt are you aware of russel gmirkins platonic Torah theory?
Very well done. I suspect that our information and theories of what happened historically will continue to grow over time. Keep up the good work.
Thank you so much for the list of references. I just finished reading The Bible Unearthed, and I found it fascinating, but I knew it was 22 years old and would most likely have out of date information. Now I can read some more modern books with updated research and ideas.
73 different books with different themes, authors, styles, and context containing myths, histories, legends, theology, liturgy, philosophy, poetry, and music compiled by people documenting their existence. Scholarship and theories come and go: the editing during the exile is not a new concept.
I heard the Sea People Dan theory on Dragons in Genesis. I take all their info with a grain of salt, so glad to hear the theory is acknowledged by others.
Literalist take the history literal, Atheist take it mythical.
Meanwhile he takes the approach of the video as a minimalist, which is the alternative “lets satisfy atheist” approach of the Bible.
Would be more interesting for everyone if you redo this video but with a more maximalist approach, the evidence is quite there.
Thanks!
i love the way you ended the video. It truly is inspirational.
First -- especially since this is basically a complaint -- I ought to say that I really like your videos and charts. Thank you for spending so much time and energy on this stuff!
Now for the irritating part. Several things about this video kind of frustrated me; I don't want to get into everything, but one point _really_ stands out: what sense does it make that the Levites were religious leaders _and therefore weren't_ a civic threat to the power of the Judahites? That isn't how authority worked in the Ancient Near East! They didn't have the First Amendment, they didn't practice separation of church and state. I mean, for heaven's sake, that's exactly how the Hasmoneans came to power (admittedly in a far later period). It was completely normal for the same person or the same office to have both religious and secular responsibilities and to wield both types of authority: not universal, maybe (as passages like II Chronicles 26.16-20 suggest), but normal.
Now, I'm far from a Biblical literalist myself. I realize that its authors had an agenda -- all authors do, including modern ones, after all -- and often weren't trying to record chronological fact in the first place. But even granting that, it's sometimes hard to avoid the impression that modern scholarship makes a point of treating the Bible as specially, disproportionately disqualified as a source. That, when combined with constant protestations of talking about "what _really_ happened," when scholarly consensus 1. consists in reconstructions (which are different from facts as such _no matter how_ good they are), and 2. seems to change in substantive ways every thirty years or so (remember the upset made by the very existence of the Hittites in the nineteenth century?) -- well, it seems tendentious, as if scholars either don't recognize or won't acknowledge that they're susceptible to bias. That gets under my skin.
Also my reply is not criticism of your good post, just an attempt to explain: the Levites didn't own land but had to live in settlements of others who were different from them. That made them less able to wage war and less of a threat.
@@Achill101 That's certainly true, though I wasn't concerned to demonstrate that the Levites _did_ have any kind of military advantage. If their scattering, such as it was, did prevent them from wielding political power, okay; but my point is simply that that's a very different reason than the "disqualified by being priests" idea.
Thank you for yet another amazing video!
Learning about Abrahamic religions objectively like this has really helped in healing my personal and generational trauma related to the idea of these religions and such.
I gave up trying to understand my families obsession and literal interpretations from their Southern Baptist views... It left me really angry and they would guilt and shame me as well.
But knowing there is more to the story (pun intended) and that academia and archeology has better explanations about the whole issue - makes me feel a bit more... secure?
Like that the Bible isn't black and white but nuanced, multifaceted, flawed, and more just like the humans that wrote it - makes it feel more like actually literature than the "because God" reason.
I'm now not religious at all, though I do follow some Shinto lifestyle teachings for inner peace and nature worship which calms me, and as that is more related to my Asian heritage; I feel a lot more interest in the stories/myths leading up to and around these periods of time, and how people wove the myths into historical accounts by their understanding. It's fascinating. Like, I didn't realize that Samson was possibly related to the stories of Hercules!
But again thank you ^_^
Judaism isn’t a religion Jews are an ethnic group first and foremost, our religion is merely one facet of who we are. There is no “Abrahamic religion” there is Judaism and the appropriation of jewish history and culture by non Jews.
@@m.s.6586 If you're going to be asinine in someone else's comments, that clearly wasn't meant for you either; at least don't spout inaccuracies.
Judaism is both a religion and, for some, an ethnic group - as there are Jewish people aren't ethnic Jews but rather converts to the religion but still Jewish. Matt from this video is one such person. He's Jewish even if he is not ethically Jewish. I don't accept 'No True Scotsman' fallacies here.
And there are, in fact, many Abrahamic Religions recognized by scholars - as their traditions have historically been linked back to the same origin of believing in the God of Abraham and consider Abraham the first prophet. Any faith that falls under that criteria, that believes in that version of God, is Abrahamic; doesn't matter their origin, or how they're different - they believe in the same God.
Also, Christianity was started as a sect of Judaism BY Jews. They didn't "appropriate" anything from their own history. Your words hold no credit to historical and academic facts. Call me pedantic or whatever but I'm not believing anything you have to say over actual scholars like Matt.
@@Koutouhara - well replied.
@esthercom5672 What are you even talking about about? We did evolve, just as everything on the planet has, for millions of years and we are still considered as sub-group of primates called Great Apes by current scientific understanding. Whilst the common ancestor of our closest cousins, the chimpanzee, was only alive 6 to 8 million years ago before we diverged from it, doesn't change the fact that it was a common ancestor.
I'm not listening to creationist conspiracy theorists or Bible literalists over scientists either!
I left a traumatic religious group - I'm not going to "back the Bible" because it's "best", I'm not going to "buy a chronological Bible" whatever that is; I've read through the Bible enough when I was forced to.
I can follow scientific discoveries in the archeological record, from reputable scholars like Matt that tie it to literature with the understanding that myth, legend, and some historical things are bound to be mixed together and can explain the actual context of what was happening during that period from their professional research and opinion.
It's only from their diligence for scholarly research and archeological references that I can even stomach the topics discussed. I appreciate that Matt is up front about the things they don't have good references for and that some of it in the earliest eras were more mythology by scholars understanding anyway.
I don't feel like I'm being pressured to believe past traumatic things or proselytized too in any way. It's objective.
It was a good session, with beautiful medieval finishing music. This information must deeply annoy fundamentalists, who appear driven to believe almost any nonsense they are told.
I have to disagree with this "... versus what REALLY happened" approach when talking about events from so long ago, because it gives a false air of certainty while in fact most of it is highly speculative. Sources are extremely rare from that time period, and many of what has been written is lost. Therefore we might only make some inferences and assumptions from what little remains. It's not "what REALLY happened", it's rather "what we can infer from non-religious sources".
Otherwise we would be falling into a trap many agenda-driven atheists do, going through the Bible, saying ok, this person is referenced in other sources so he existed, hm, this one too, and this other one too... oh wait, I've finally found someone from the Bible who is not referenced in other sources, so this is a proof that no person with such a name could ever have existed, instead of just saying we don't have other sources (maybe because it was so long ago that they did not survive to the present day)
... religious sources are used as well. It's what we can infer from all the evidence, texts, archeology, philology, etc., etc.
Except the “experts” start from the position the Bible is unreliable and assume the whole of the extra-biblical evidence is the truth. But why do scholars place so much faith in the extra-biblical sources exactly? No group has been carefully preserving those sources from change.
We keep finding more archeology that verifies the Bible. The absence of archeology showing something is not convincing when there are SO MANY places unexplored.
Matt, your scholarship and presentation is absolutely brilliant. You've answered many questions I've had for years, and I thank you.
Watched the whole thing. Loved it!
Great discussion! Two interesting footnotes from the New Testament:
Luke 2:36 mentions Anna, a prophetess, of the tribe of Aser (Asher).
Revelation 7 has a list of the twelve tribes of Israel, but for some unknown reason excludes Dan, while adding Manasseh.
Matt - FABULOUS presentation. I have heard the blble described as more of a history book than a religious document. Many thanks for the references, particularly the two books. I just may have to pick those up & read them. Just out of curiosity, how much flak - if not worse - have you caught from the "purists" & others of that ilk whose stories your own presentation does not support? Keep up the great work.
joeinbuenosaires 😎
I read a study that said the Samaritan Levites are Egyptian based - Y DNA E, while the levites in Judah have the Cohen Y DNA which is J (this is from memory so may not have it exact), which also matches the Ethiopian Levites. It is interesting that you said the Levites could be egyptian priests, but it appears that perhaps jewish priests took over that role during the second d temple period.
Levi Judah Joseph.
You are doing a good job proving that Judah and Israel fought with each other.
But the Bible already says that.
Your main topic, "Where did the 12 Tribes come from?"
Can't disagree with the Bible that "well it looks like they were the sons of Jacob"
The name, Benjamin does not mean, son of the south. The name Benjamin means son of the right ( as opposed to left).
The Hebrew word for , South is, "DorRome". Now this puts everything else I've heard in this video to question.
You are correct. However, in ancient times, the land of Israel was thought of as being oriented with the Mediterranean Sea at the bottom. This meant that the south was on the right. Thus, ימין also often meant "towards the south".
@@UsefulCharts the ancient hebrew word for south is teyman תימן which is also the name for the kingdom which was in modern day yemen today also called teyman so no they definitely considered south as south not as "on the right" or "towards the sea"
@@UsefulCharts !!
Another excellent video from Mr Baker!
What surprises me as a scientist and a researcher is the facts that there are people who takes the bible as true history book and source of information. but yet fails to identifies who wrote the bible.
I would not read or rely on any book i dont know who is the author not to mention the hundreds of contradictions that covers the bible from cover to cover.
This and many other of your videos should be mandatory viewing for all 7+ billion humans.
Wow, fascinating!! Thanks so much for the breakdown!
Question: You said initially that the "not really 12 tribes" hypothesis is a newly put forward theory, but my impression from your presentation was that it is actually the accurate truth of the matter. Is that your conviction or was I not paying attention enough?
Regardless of the answer, I highly recommend implementing persistent visual indicators of when you are not presenting established fact, like when delving into thought experiments or exploring a hypothesis. Think of someone skipping through your video to see whether your content is worthwhile and just sees the part on the Americans becoming Canadians, or just someone who didn't pay attention for a moment exactly when you qualified the following part as exploration of a hypothesis.
To be conctete, I'd put the clichee vignette-blur for thought experiments and I'd use the chapter-function from youtube, as well as maybe dedicate some part of the screen (which can shift around if necessary) for some sort of title of each part, like "what we know so far", "The not-12-tribes-hypothesis". Just a suggestion.
Anyways, I love your content! Can't wait for the next video!
His point is that from the historical POV, there likely weren't 12 original tribes as many of them had outside origin and their mythos were mostly made up to seem that they were always there.
So you disagree with the general scholarly belief that the Samaritans are the descendants of the Israelites from the northern kingdom that were left behind after the destruction of Samaria? Any specific reason why? Any chance you'll make a video about it?
In the Talmud, the "Samaritans" are known as Kutim, implying they are descendants of Cutheans who moved to Samaria after the Assyrian conquest. Its likely that their descendants later converted to a branch of Judaism down the road.
Yes, I'll be doing a video on this.
@@UsefulCharts great, i'm looking forward to it
@@valman1199 in the talmud, written/heavily edited by the Judeans after the fact to cement their authority, so there's a very clear motive/bias. and i'm not saying that it can't be true, just that it can be false, and there are other things to consider.
@@Danny.._the Talmud was written by Judeans! Your comment is incredibly disrespectful and a pathetic attempt at historical inversion.
1:07, sir, that is Ukrainian
Do a chart on the history Aztec empire.
Never Trust Anyone NOT following the Laws & Commandments....God's People are destine to rule this world representing The Most High and Yahawashi as our King
@@Giantcrabz Yahawah The Most High is the creator of all that is and All that will ever be:) The Father of Yahawashi’s, who was sent un to the Lost Sheep of the 12 Tribes of Israel (the people, not the place)
I always thought that it was kind of odd that a loose tribal group named themselves after their god El, but finding out that Asher and Gad did it too is mind-blowing b/c maybe it was a thing people did in Canaan at that time. And given that even in other places, people traced their ancestry back to a god, it now makes sense that these might be deified legendary patriarchs that were un-deified when monotheism took hold.
Great video. However, I have one question. If the two kingdoms were never united, how did they end up having a similar religious tradition?
Because Judah took on Israelite traditions after Israel was destroyed. Before this, they may have had different beliefs.
@@UsefulChartsit's also possible that the northerners had to assimilate into the southern culture. And it's pretty easy to read this clash of cultures into things like the 10 commandments and Deuteronomy. The latter is an entire book that was written pretending to be older than it was reminding people what their national religion is.
It's all a bit speculative though.
Judah was not 2 tribes, that is Christian ideology. In Judea there was Judah, Benjamin, Simeon and the Levites assigned to those tribes as well as the spouses and merchants that lived in the Southern Kingdom of Judea from the Northern kingdom of Israel.
@@mrjdgibbs - yes, Northerners had to assimilate somewhat into Southern culture. But Jerusalem was growing so fast after 722BC, it seems they were a majority within and around Jerusalem.
. . . Deuteronomy is so full of reminders to be kind to strangers and to accept strangers in your midst, I always thought it was based on the experience of the refugees from Israel in Judah.
@@shainazion4073 - who says Judah was two tribes and where?
. . . And Benjamin was the tribe between Judah and the northern Kingdom of Israel, seen by the latter as its most southern tribe.
Really well done video! I'd like to toss out that Benjamin has a couple of meanings, not just son of south but also right hand and joy. I do wish you had left in the bit about when the scepter would depart.
Both ‘right (hand) and ‘south’ are correct in the biblical context.
Nomadic tribes (and presumably the mythical Exodus hordes), would pitch their tents or camps with the setting sun behind them. So the rising sun would be directly ahead (East), making the South, right. Right?
Old hypothesis which might be spurious though.
"Sea Peoples" always makes me think of the Mediterranean equivalent of Vikings -- smash-and-grab attackers that show up out of nowhere on coasts, burn and steal things, and then leave. And they keep coming back.
I would also consider how various tribes mingled with the other tribes in the area. I would not assume that that means a tribe didn’t exist originally as sons of Israel.
There’s a lot of stuff I feel l gotta fact check, so I’m just gonna thread some comments in one at a time:
Firstly, talking about the secular version as the “real” version seems… odd since the secular story is always changing. I haven’t seen the end yet, so I’m interested in if you expand on that later.
Secondly, the version of the “biblical” account of events seems to be the Young Earth one. Though it is the traditionally held belief, it ignores the Hebrew gematria used across the Bible, so I’m unsure why you dated it that way.
I do not take this video personally, but so far it seems a bit concerning. I love a lot of your work, so this seems to run counter to everything else.
If you bring up any good points, I’ll definitely make note of those.
Thirdly, Egyptian rule of Canaan was nothing like medieval/modern rule of colonies. The Egyptians took canaanite city-states as their vassals. They were easy to avoid.
There are also documentaries that showcase how the story of the exodus has no anachronisms to it, and perfectly fits within the timeframe of the early Ramesside Period.
That is a lot to demand out of a story told generations later. And yet it tells it, with details such as Egyptian birthing stools and tube-shaped baskets, things that weren’t prominent in Iron Age Israel.
4th, I’m unsure how the same scribes have to be the definitive authors of both Deuteronomy and it’s succeeding books.
The only evidence for this is that they share the same grammatical style. Is there anything else proving that?
There’s also evidence that tribal people have accurate cultural memories lasting for many centuries. I know we’re only focusing on archeology today, and that is respectable.
But ignoring linguistics and cultural memory then saying this is all the “real” history of the people? I do not understand this claim.
A P source that’s separate from J makes sense. I understand post-exilic ideas are used in some of the passages. But why is D also separate from J? A lot of the “D” ideas could’ve easily existed in the Bronze Age.
Edit 8/6/24: I’ve just come to learn that pre-exilic prophets like Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Amos, and Hosea all quoted from the “JEDP” sources. Meaning no later editor made it up the fact they were all connected to begin with. They just “were” connected, at least orally. And the repeating lines in each book indicate they were memorized musically for many centuries.
20:02 it’s a little odd that the criteria for this division isn’t given.
I read a couple books on what’s consider pre-exilic vs post-exilic, and some of it seems to be just an accusation of anachronisms? If that’s true then how’s that fair?