this felt literally like a fever dream.. I've been a long time fans of Alex and Magnify!! And I never thought they'd have a conversation together as I see magnify's channel as focused more on the education of language... I'm so happy that they have a collaboration together!!
It's a democratic republic, iirc, so i doubt it would have things like that. Not to mention, as the founder is American by birth, he's less likely to use titles of nobility in general.
Great episode! I like how Chris is like the anti-youtuber. No screaming. No yelling. No bullshit. Calm, intelligent, thoughtful... everything we need on the internet right now.
As someone who almost never watches shorts, thank you for having him on. Hearing what he had to say is useful in understanding the text and language in general as well as fascinating.
Helicopter is a good example, Alex. Most people would assume the word is made up of “heli” and “copter” but it’s actually “helico” for spiral and “pter” for wing, both of Greek origin.
Clapping is also more anonymous than shouting because everybody's claps make the same sound. If you're shouting it might be distracting when somebody turns their head with an impulse to listen to a voice they recognize or investigate a voice that they don't.
Interesting point on shouting being a vocal distraction...a bit like a dissonant version of solo (e.g. baritone) and harmonic components of a choir. Not sure about clapping making the same sound apart from it being recognised as such. For example, one could differentiate between 3 main types of clapping with specific sound profiles. 1. Standard - both palms matchingly clapped together. 2. " Hollow" - for want of a better description, this year of clap involves clapping perpendicular cupped palms together. It's quite loud and "deeper" sounding, useful for amplifying a group clapping effect. 3. Fingers slapping Palm clap - 3 or 4 fingers or fingertips clapped against open palm. Useful for prolonged and/or fast clapping.
Agreed. When you clap, you're contributing to the build-up of a communal noise. By comparison, yelling or screaming can be interpreted as personal attention-seeking.
I loved the section on etymology. I'm a native English speaker and it wasn't until I started learning a foreign language that I realised the etymology of some of the words that we use. Someone once told me this, and it's really stuck with me..... " words don't have meaning! They have usage" It's so true, you can't rely on the meaning of words you have to understand the way in which the community that uses that word employee it.
Well, the way words are being used in one language IS what we call "meaning". But in a similar spirit, I'll add that, when it comes to learning languages, one of the most important things to understand is that words don't have translation (a very common misconception), but *equivalents in the context*. So you don't "translate" the Spanish "espero" into English as "I wait", because depending on the context, it can mean "I hope" - you need the correct *equivalent* for what you want to say. Also, you should try as much as possible to learn not separate words, but phrases. There is no point in learning that "thirsty" is "sediento" in Spanish, because "I am thirsty" (as in: I need to drink water) is not "Estoy sediento" (very formal or figurative, as in "thirsty of knowledge"), but "Tengo sed" (lit. "I have thirst"), so learning the whole phrase only makes sense.
@@Anyox17 That is very accurate. This is what linguists discuss in pragmatics. What a word means to a community of speakers, and what meaning a speaker tries to impart while crafting a sentence with them can create a big difference. The most common example for English speakers: when you say "Can you pass the salt?" you are using "can" which means able or whatever to request a favor.
It was good. But Alex is unfortunately wrong about "genius" and "ingenious" having separate etymologies. It is true that "genius" means a "guardian deity or spirit that follows the gens" in Latin, while "ingenium" means "intellect, ability" something like that. But that's not the end of the story. Both words come from the same root, *gene-, which means to "give birth" and in that sense have the same etymology. It's also not a coincidence that they both came to mean the same in English, because the thought behind "ingenium" is "that which is inborn" which is also the idea behind "genius", that you have an inborn exceptional ability.
That’s literally the crux of the philosophy of mereological nihilism. Objects, whether they are “chairs” or “books” or “words” have no inherent self existence; they have uses. The air vibrations, used thusly, signify “meaning”. Used only slightly differently, they mean the water in the tea kettle is boiling.
This is a really interesting conversation. As a Jew that is not intently familiar with the bible but can read it, you got me to go over Genesis in Hebrew again. I've yet to watch the entire video, but to the parts I did watch, I can try and add my view. For starters about the period at the end of “sentences”, while they don't exist, the common way the bible is presented and segmented in Hebrew is by numbers, but not actual Arabic numerals. Instead Hebrew uses its own ABC as numbers. So it is kind of like: Chapter A [A] In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth [B] the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters [C] Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light [D] And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. [E] God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day. Additionally, about the way translation can change the way you read things, I could translate the exact same verse in a very different way that is still correct per how you could interpret the original texts: Chapter A [A] To begin with God brought into being the land and the sky [B] And the land was in disarray and the darkness over the depths and the spirit of god hovered over the water [C] And God said let there be light and light there was (no quotation marks because they were not used originally) [D] And God saw-the-light as-good and God distinguished the light from the darkness (the - exist in a way in the original text and connect words of similar meaning to the ones I used here) [E] And God will call the light day and the darkness night and there will be evening and there will be morning, first day EDIT: I use the words Land and Sky instead of Heaven and Earth for a few reasons. First is that it is a valid translation and I want to show that. And second is that the words used can have multiple meanings that do not match the multiple meaning that "Heaven" or "Earth" posses. Erets ארץ which is the word for Earth or Land is very similar to "earth" as in it being the ground we stand upon literally and figuratively. In modern Hebrew we call The Earth Kadur A Erets, which is roughly "The Ball of Earth/Land". About the Heavens, it just has so many matching and not matching correlations that it is troubling to try and truly translate. I feel as if the original meaning is close to how we use Sky now a day but that is just my opinion.
1:09:40 The hebrew term "עזר כנגדו" literally means "help like his opposite". The term for rib "צלע" actually just means "side" here and Adam obviously just means "human". So one side of the human is the man and the other side is the women -> they are as the opposite of each other and helping each other. The hebrew in this passage is actually very much egalitarian.
Robert Alter would be an incredible interview, his translation of the HB is probably one of the best ones to get if you want something specifically for the HB. Sadly it is quite pricy, but I believe it comes with a lot of notes and such
As a metal vocalist, I have to agree. Much easier to clap than spend 4 years learning proper safe screaming techniques just so you can call out to people with a nasty BLEGH!
Tell that to drunk football fans in English bars after their team has just clinched the EPL championship. It may be more efficient, but clapping isn't more satisfying than yelling or whistling.
@@Baronnax I'm gonna back that, live and big sporting events aren't half of what they are without screaming fans. Maybe clapping was more of a formal way of agreement or appreciation.
That might seem to be the case but it isn't. Vocalising, even very loudly uses much less energy than moving your limbs. This is why almost every excersize routine involves moving your limbs and hardly any of them involve shouting. Vocalising uses a similar amount of energy to breathing, and since you're going to breathe anyway it's really very efficient. It probably feels like more effort than it is because you're going to be short of breathe and because shouting causes strain and pain on your vocal chords if you don't practice it, or raise your voice beyond a certain level. Clapping isn't difficult or painful but it uses more energy.
i will be having a podcast in which ill be talking about the mis translation as well as how much we misunderstand the scriptures. as we are in such a dangerous time
The closing thoughts of both are spot on in my view. Read multiple translations, seek the common idea over the specific wording, consider the original speaker and audience, understand that we are getting the tip of the iceberg. As a Christian, I genuinely love this conversation.
Small correction: In modern Hebrew, the word את (et) is used as a direct object marker when referring to a thing that is preceded by a definite article. So you would say אני אוכל את הבננה (Ani okhel *et* habanana) [I am eating *the* banana], but not אני אוכל את בננה (Ani okhel et banana) [I am eating a banana]. In this case the et is not only unnecessary but grammatically wrong. And I think much of the confusion around את as used in the Bible really just revolves around the fact that most people who are interested in the meaning of this word don't speak Hebrew. I can almost guarantee you that the usage of את is not as interesting and mystical as English-speaking Bible scholars would like it to be. This is not a very interesting concept to any single Hebrew speaker, it's just the way we mark direct objects.
את משמש להראות על משהו ספציפי אני יכול להגיד: "אני אוכל בננה" וזאת לא בננה מסוימת זאת סתם בננה, אבל אם אני מוסיף את לפני הבננה אני מדבר על בננה ספציפית. כשאתה מספר לחבר שאחלת בננה אתמול וזאת סתם עוד בננה אתה לא תוסיף "את" אבל אם אכלת בננה מסוימת אתה תגיד: "אכלתי את הבננה". אני חושב שבאנגלית ה- "the" משמש גם כ- את וגם כ ה' הידע כי אם זה לא בננה ספציפית אתה יכול להגיד a במקום the לדוגמא "I ate a banna" או "in the beginning god created a universe and a erth" ה "the" פשוט גם כ את וגם כ ה' הידיעה
@@itamarmaxsagi9437 "את", כפי שהראשון אמר, משמש לציון מושא ישיר, ליידוע הרי משתמשים בתחילית "ה־". אפשר לומר "נורית אכלה התפוח, הפרח זרקה בחצר", ואתה יודע שמדובר בתפוח ופרח מסויימים גם בלי המילית "את" (ואכן, המשפט כשר גם בלי צורך ב"את"), ועדיין יישמע לך הרבה יותר נכון אם היו אומרים "נורית אכלה 'את' התפוח, 'ואת' הפרח זרקה בחצר"...
@@elijahwise4588we very well know the usage 3000 years ago is the same as today (with small differences as for any long-lived language). The language has been continuously used, so there hasn’t been a time when e(y)t’s meaning was temporarily out of use.
14:40 the mysterious word is two word: "tohu va-vohu" which directly translates to "silence and mess" but in every day hebrew its just chaos. Youd walk into a messy room and you would describe it that the room is tohu vavohu. Hoped this helped🌸
While this is true that "tohu-va-vohu" means complete mess in modern Hebrew. Sadly we don't really know what it meant in ancient Hebrew, since in Genesis is the earliest mention of the term can be found.
@yoav_tc true, thanks for the correction. I read in a couple of places that tohu refers to empty or silence. It either comes from arabic or a name for an ancient goddess of abyss. Vohu comes from an ancient goddess of night. (but i think this is all speculation and not the translation for the sentence)
@@niresplural2007 actually, we know it means “formless and void” from the rest of the chapter. In the following verses, God forms the formless (sky, land, seas) and fills the void (luminaries, plants, animals). So the rest of the chapter actually defines the words in context.
As a Hebrew speaker myself I would just mention that when talking about Rabi Akiva the tradition say he would interpret not only every letter, but every coma, in the text. So the opening remarks about the periods were very interesting in that sense:)
10:02 in Judaism, especially in more orthodox communities, this is very much the case. Hebrew letters are often accompanied by diacritics to denote vowels, but in the case of the Bible they are also accompanied by cantillation marks (“flavors” in Hebrew) to denote how to “sing” each syllable. Very analogous to how a Muslim might “sing” or “recite” the Quran.
Very interesting, the Old Church Slavonic bible also has these diacritics that are interpreted by scholars as saving ink through shortening words into single or two letters but they don't really try to interpret why it's the case. Also the same way Hebrew has the letter ET that means infinite cycle of beginning and end, Old Church Slavonic has the letter YAT at the end of the Alphabet to denote this unending loop. In the glagolitic script it's a pyramid divided in three parts for trinity while in Cyrilic script its an upsidedown Ankh. I think Greeks used the letter alpha with omega to get this across in the translation of the bible but the English did not. I also find similarity to the Vedic mantra AUM (commonly known as OM) where each vowel represents a stage and part of the holy Trinity: A-Creation (Brahma), U Preservation (Vishnu), M Change/Destruction (Shiva). AUM is used at the beginning and throughout all Rigvedic hymns which are sung.
@tartarus1322 Alex has genuine concern and criticism against Christianity. Specifically, the core doctrine of mainstream Christianity, which is found in the very European Bible.
YES! So glad that you've readen Stephen Mitchell's translation of the Book of Job. It's what got me into biblical studies and Hebrew recitation! My ultimate goal is to produce a stage musical of the book.
@@91YEHNAHnot religious, just get embarrassed for Christians constantly being dogshit at defending their religion. Anyway, ask Job This is kind of a dogshit argument against Christianity, it’s pretty clear biblically that life is a test of faith, if there were 1. Proof of god and 2. No hardships/bad/evil things Then there would be no test of faith. Also, if we’re talking about morality of god, why would an eternal being feel bad about the cancer death of a child, especially if that eternal being knew that the child would soon experience eternal bliss? It would be even less than ripping a band aid off of a child from his perspective. We joke that “god works in mysterious ways” is a horrible explanation for anything, but be honest and logical, that WOULD be true. Take god out of it, imagine you have an AI that is aware of EVERYTHING that is, has been, or will ever be, do you really think you would be able to logically understand its actions or motives? Don’t quote me on this but I’m pretty sure we have chess computers so advanced that sometimes make moves GMs can’t understand because the computer is able to think so many more moves ahead than humans can, an eternal god would be that times literal infinity. We’re basically talking about a lovecraftian eldritch being here, why would ever expect shit to be normal?
Huge oversight in this podcast that as a Jew completely sticks out to me like a sore thumb. The Torah is lyrically, it is literally sung when read. Any Jew would know that, cantillation completely shapes the reading of the text. Literally the first thing any bar or bat mitzvah would know. I have a great deal of respect for your work, but this was a very simple oversight which you easily could have rectified with the barest amount of research or a single Jewish voice on this issue of translating *our* holy texts
@@scottm85It's not the same thing to whisper to you to be quiet, than to shout at you to be quiet To give you a fairly simple example that avoids all the complexity of language, But it has even more implications
@@scottm85 The cantillation marks indicate phrasing/punctuation...it goes back to Babylonian vocalization in the 6th century (CE). The Septuagint received some punctuation at roughly the same time. Of course, the Hebrew Bible is much older than that.... so the overall thrust of the podcast is correct.
@@kanadakid147 Yeah, why does singing it matter? If God were all-powerful and all-knowing, then he would have created a language and a holy book that worked perfectly together, kind of like Arabic and the Quran.
I LOVED THIS! Loved seeing the next generation of thinkers having an "ingenious" chat. In a way, i could see you both figuring "et" out as you went along. Perhaps older people should learn to be more flexible and open. Chris and Alex are both handsome in their own ways. Thanks guys!
interesting conversation. I appreciate Alex's willingness to not just discuss this but also admit his lack of understanding of hebrew. I personally dont know much either, but know those who have taken courses on it. Its a pretty difficult language to grasp. But what I also know is that any pastor of church worth his salt has a degree in biblical study called a Master of Divinity. Most MDiv grads today must take courses in Greek (NT) and Hebrew (OT). Certainly it doesnt mean they will know all the nuance of it compared to someone who studies it for years, but its good to note versus many of us who read it at face value from the English.
I think one hard thing about all of this is that there are so many ideas and that at least I have found that finding the full truth is lost because there are millions of ideas that could be correct and also have support. I find myself feel dumber each day as I learn more about all the different thoughts and perspectives.
I'm surprised that you guys mentioned the 'musical notation' up the Quran completely ignoring the fact that the Jewish Torah was orally transmitted with 'musical' as a part of the text, and considered as important as the letters themselves.
@@urijahkaplan1855 there's a very good chance that that's how they were orally transmitted, in a song format since that's way easier to remember words that are put to music, obviously that can't be proved though
@urijahkaplan1855 evidence to by the many sources such as the mishnah and other early rabbinic texts the idea of musical notation with the text predates the Quran, that's why I mentioned it
Hey Alex; I think you should the read "Sefer Yetzirah". I believe it might shed some light on the questions surrounding the first few lines of Genesis. The "Sefer Yetzirah "is generally considered to be a Kabbalistic text, but is much much older. In Hebrew tradition it's the first thing God reveals to Abraham about the universe. If it were canon, it would be the Genesis before Genesis.
When I saw the title, I was like: "Oh, interesting", but didn't watch it right away. Later, when I saw the Magnify's short talking about it, I ran back to Alex and played it. I love you guys.
I'm a rabbi and recently I was leading a Torah study during which we discussed "et", the alef-tav word. A congregant offered an excellent American English comparison in the Southern American English phrase "that there", as in "that there book" indicating, with complete certainty, that specific book to which I am referring.
That’s a really interesting connection. Some would say that Southern American phrases like “that there” and “might could” are needlessly redundant, but if you live here you kind of catch on to their unique connotations and rules for usage.
a weird consequence of mereological nihilism is that you then concede that the world we live in is essentially minecraft, where at base, the minecraft world is a single 3d model made of many units that may be textured or empty (air), and when you mine or build, you're just changing the texture state of one of those units.
@@TheGiantMidget Not sure that's exactly true. It is possible, under extreme conditions and given enough luck, for the vacuum quantum fields to randomly oscillate into the requisite quarks for a proton, with the oscillations being close enough to each other to bond. And then that proton catches an electron, becoming a hydrogen atom, eventually covalently bonds with an oxygen and another hydrogen to make a water molecule, and eventually finds its way inside you. Now, sure, the proton wasn't created out of *nothing* , it's a reordering of the energy of the quantum fields, but what matters for the purpose of mereological nihilism is that it wasn't made by just rearranging simples. So it's probably more accurate to say "You are just an arrangement of atoms that have existed for billions of years"
@@tudornaconecinii3609 okay billions of years then. The point is that all the components of your body are made of stuff that was here way before anyone you know existed. That's a weird thought
Whoever is the French-speaking guy behind the scenes, so AWESOME he was there. It's just so cool how he comes into the discourse here SO organically. One of my favorite episodes as it developed, despite the initial confusion of why this particular guy was the right guest for the topic. Thank you!
Your whole discussion of mereological nihilism reminded me so much of Buddhism philosophy. Specifically about Tian Tai and their 3 Truths. It’d be cool if you did a video about that.
25:30 This is what ANE/OT scholar John Walton argues, namely that ברא is about assigning functions rather than creation from nothing. If you look at the objects of ברא in the OT this makes sense.
45:09 Devastation comes from Latin's "devastare" meaning to lay waste to. Coming from the prefix "de-" and the latin word "vastare" to lay waste to. "Vastare" comes from Latin's "vastus" meaning empty or desolate.
My mother was a very religious woman, and late in her life she began to learn Hebrew and ancient Greek for exactly this reason. Her insights were very illuminating.
@@milesgrooms7343 My favorite was how many words and phrases were translated from Hebrew into "thou shall not" when the original meanings ranged from "this is bad for you" to "this is forbidden".
@@danielvest9602 I can't imagine having my deconstruction journey so late in life. On one hand, your mom got to experience the bliss that religious ignorance gives you for a lot longer. On the other hand, kind of a bitter pill to swallow that late in life... I'm guessing she stayed a Christian despite all of her "revelations"?
@JD-wu5pf She became a Christian after these revelations and because of them. Before that she was an agnostic searching for meaning in all the world's religions.
Rabbi Tovia Singer is very good at deconstructing a Christian reading of the "Old Testament", but not as good at applying this scepticism to the truth claims resulting from his own reading of Torah.
@@alexisfonjallaz7237 Fair enough. Totally agree. I didn't assume that he's making a good case for the truth of Torah/Tanakh. His reading is that of a believer, no doubt about that. But I think that his knowledge on the topic and especially that of the Hebrew language would make an informative podcast.
@@swq293 Definitely an interesting guest. I'm just not sure how open he would be for a real conversation, since he mostly debates fundamentalist nutcases and afaik has never been properly challenged on his own beliefs.
Sorry. Tovia Singer is simply not in Alex’s class. He carefully chooses those he debates or what topics he addresses. By no means am I a fundamentalist but Singer is no intellectual. He gives religion, any religion, a bad name. Yuck.
As a native speaker of another gendered language (Russian) I'd say my perception of objects differs only in relation to nature. I don't particularly care that my bed is feminine and my sofa is masculine, they are equally comfortable and soft. However, the fact that an oak tree is masculine and a birch tree is feminine affects my perception in some subtle way. Or the sun that is neutral vs the moon that is feminine. I have a hard time capturing this in words, but there's something in there. Earth is feminine, water is feminine, a lot of nature related words are. I think it does subconsciously make you perceive nature as a woman more than a man. Wouldn't the same be true for English with its "Mother Earth" though? So, maybe folktales and cultural archetypes have more to do with this phenomenon than grammar. And then, what about gender neutral words? The sky is neutral, for example. So yeah, I don't know. At the same time, I was blown away to have discovered that the sun is feminine in German, whilst the moon is masculine. It made me feel uneasy at first, which was so hilarious to observe in myself. It became apparent to me that my brain is preprogrammed by my first language in ways that cause visceral reactions when a different point of view arises. That being said, it seems to me it's quite easy to either underestimate or overestimate the importance of gendered words in a language, especially when trying to make a point in support of your pre-existing beliefs about the state of the world and how things should be handled. This topic in its entirety is fascinating.
One reason to clap is that it only makes a really loud sound of a lot of people clap together. It is thunderous only if there is support for it, unlike screaming.
29:00 from the Jewish perspective, and the word I think Alex is missing here, which he accidentally replaces with "recognize" is the word intention. From the Jewish perspective that which is the force of creation is intention. In Hebrew the word intention has a shared root with the words "to aim" and "to give a direction". hence, when you use the power of intention on matter you give it an aim, a direction, that is giving it a purpose, which it didn't have previously. You do not "recognize an arrangement of matter" you SET an arrangement using intention, in order to direct this unfulfilled potential towards a designated aim, giving it purpose. The material used to build the car was their, with no purpose, no direction, no aim, their was no car, only the potential for one... a theoretically possibility, which intention can transform into reality. 32:01 - the thing that distinguishes the chair as an object in not in the material plane, rather it is in the fact that intention was applied to make it. The thing setting the chair apart from its surroundings, even by different objects, is the type of intention that was applied to it.
32:54 - what the chairs have in common is intention. They both are created with the same intention. What unites them is not necessarily to be found in their factual description of parts or their form.
Alex things literally do pop into existence. If we take a quark pair, they always exist in pairs, and we separate them enough to break them free of the strong force holding them together, immediately 2 more quarks pop into existence to pair up with the ones we pulled apart.
Studies have found that, in the majority of cases, even though languages differ in efficiency, information rate is similar across languages. This is possible because, as languages decrease in efficiency, the speed at which they are spoken increases. It is believed that the guiding factor is how quickly our brain can process the information contained in the speech, not how quickly we can theoretically utter the words.
*“It would be a pity if, in a desire (rightly) to treat the Bible as more than a book, we ended up treating it as less than a book by not permitting it the range and use of language, order, and figures of speech that are (or ought to be) familiar to us from our ordinary experience of conversation and reading"* ----John Lennox
@@pyros4333 John Lennox adds the concept that interpretation is the message not the words? Aren't there many interpretations of the Bible? And isn't that a flaw, not a feature?
@@paulthompson9668 how many ways is there to interpret a book? Now multiply that by translations. Now add the fact that it's a compilation. The beauty of history is that we will never know for sure and can only interpret but those interpretations are wondrous for our minds.
"Can there be a more fitting pursuit in youth or a more valuable possession in old age than a knowledge of Holy Scripture? In the midst of storms it will preserve you from the dangers of shipwreck and guide you to the shore of an enchanting paradise and the ever-lasting bliss of the angels." - St. Boniface
For the formless and void part 16:21 The Hebrew tohu va-bohu doesn’t convey strict, conceptual formlessness as much as it evokes a world that is raw, undefined, and almost whimsical in its chaotic energy.
Peterson linked these words (as well as "tehowm" used later to describe "the deep") with Tiamat, which is the great mother of Summerian tradition from Enuma Elish that gets asociated with pre-cosmogonic chaos the world gets to be made out of.
@@DarkHound9999tehom is the deep, it is cognate to the name tiamat for the godess tiamatin the enuma Elish. As far as I know Tohu is a different thing
One of the issues I have with religions, and the written texts in particular, is the thought that over the centuries, the words have been translated and transcribed by countless people. And because of that, there is room for error. I said this to my Dad once, who is a devout Christian. His answer was along the lines of, "The word of God cannot be corrupted. The scholars and priests over time have worked faithful to the lord to ensure the text we have is as it was intended." I personally find that a dangeously blind belief, but I choose not to attempt to disrupt his faith. Aside from the fact I very much doubt I could, my dad is one of the most amazimg people I know. He has such goodness in his heart that if this is what his faith makes of him, I am glad he has the beliefs that he does.
"The word of God cannot be corrupted" is more of a Muslim sentiment than Christian (excluding the more fundamentalist, "Answers In Genesis" type Christians). A more nuanced take is that the Bible has a built-in fractal nature, which means that even if 90% of the books had been lost or corrupted, the basic gist could still be gleaned from what was left. This also explains why there are four gospels, each with subtle differences in order or emphasis. Taken together, they function like a stereoscopic snapshot of Jesus' ministry. But if we had only ever had access to - say - the Book of Luke, we still would have gotten the overall picture. Yes there are differences between the earliest manuscripts we still have (and yes they are copies of copies), but the vast majority of these differences are insignificant grammatical variations or slightly different spellings of the same word. Same goes for comparing the Dead Sea Scrolls, in which partial or complete copies of the Old Testament can be cross-checked against the handed-down texts. Completely mistake-free? No. But the amount of similarity is remarkable, and more than enough to provide a high degree of confidence that scholars can recover much of what the original authors intended to convey.
The hebrew for "formless and void" is actually two words. The first of which, "tohu", appears 20 times in the Bible, usually translated as words like "emtpy", "without", "nothing", and "waste". The second word rhymes with the first, and only appears 3 times, always in conjunction with "tohu". My understanding is that the first seven hebrew words (note the importance of the number 7), is like a summary of the whole chapter. Like, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, and this is how he did it. First, the earth was formless and void... etc."
Clapping might come from a simple outlet for/lack of control over one’s excitement. Babies, kids, and some animals do it when they get excited it’s sort of like stimming. That’s a possibility of the origins of clapping. Clapping is less precise and more energy intensive than shouting so in my opinion that seems most plausible. This is far from a consensus, it’s just what I think based on what I’ve read about the subject!
About a half hour in, and while I’m really enjoying the conversation, what are the guest’s credentials? (Not accusatory-he could have two PhDs in relevant fields for all I know. But my impression is that he’s some sort of apologist who just makes shorts.)
Do they ever list the credentials? I haven't watched yet, but I recall (kindly) criticizing some of Magnify's academic takes on the Hebrew Bible (although I can't for the life of me remember what about!). To his credit, he did remove the videos, and he has seemed much more familiar with scholarship than the average Joe. I enjoy him.
@@AurorXZ Not always specifically, but if Alex doesn’t mention specifically where the guest’s expertise is, you can usually get a sense of it early on.
Great vid and discussion. I will be buying Alters translation! I love history and scholars like John Walton and NT wright to understand the context and literary devises which are missed in our modern context. Really enjoyed this. God bless you Alex.......'if he existed' 😂 One thing I thought hilarious. 'do you eat ribs over here?' Alex replies 'I think...no that's more an American thing' 😂😂😂 Alex clearly needs to spend time outside the village! 😂 Ribs are very popular in UK.
3:22 "I think, in Ancient Hebrew, there is like little markings on a scroll to let you know when you've reached the end of a line." Wouldn't the fact that you're _at the end of a line_ tell you that you've reached the end of that line?
@@jimktrains0 , my understanding, which is very limited, is that, as late as the first and second centuries A.D., the Hebrew of the Old Testament was written with no punctuation at all, not even any diacritical marks to indicate vowel-sounds, not even spaces between words and between sentences-but with space between chapters. soitwouldbelikethisfromthebeginningofachapterallthewaytotheendofthechapterandthentherewouldbeaspace andthenthenextchapterwouldbegin
Native Hebrew speaker here-Biblical Hebrew is marked with, well, marks, that signify how to read the words tonally to form a sort of song out of them. It isn’t punctuation, but rather a primitive form of it. That’s why at orthodox Jewish prayer times you’ll hear the rabbi changing tones constantly in a somewhat similar manner to how mandarin does, except the tone doesn’t determine the word itself it determines how the sentence flows.
Gen I and Gen 2 are different creation stories. In Gen 2, God names Adam and Adam is allowed to name all the animals and then Adam is the one that names Eve, implying that she is his 'special pet'. It's lear all throughout the Bible, but especially the OT, that women are viewed as man's property. Our wedding vows still reflect that when a father 'gives away' his daughter.
So Alex believes the universe is a single substance but the mind is a distinct substance.. When is he going to realize the Trinity is God the Father emanating the math structure of reality, and the flesh (Jesus Christ) facilitates the mind and serves as a bridge to the mind (Holy Spirit) connecting back to that higher reality. Its why you can even comprehend things like mathematics to begin with despite having faculties aimed at survival. The mind is not the body, and its not the infinite creator but they are all the same 1 substance of God. That is the meaning of the Trinity.
So is like universe is expand infinitely and flesh finite? But mind is infinite and can relink with universe through the flesh. Sorry I am not fully understand English.
@@MrReasonabubble Well he says in the very video that it is suspicious to him that it seems everything is matter shaped in different forms that we use to call different objects. But then posits that it seems like the mind is something else that can cognize matter itself. He is just saying the same thing in a indirect way.
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
"Why do we clap" boy do i have a vsauce video for you.
people clap.
OR DO WE?
🤦🏽♂️🤦🏽♂️ instantly searched it up and watched it before getting into this video hahaha
Hey Vsauce, Michael here... Why do humans clap? 😸
@@tristan6773[Classic vsauce Rhodes C note plays]
I remember.
this felt literally like a fever dream.. I've been a long time fans of Alex and Magnify!! And I never thought they'd have a conversation together as I see magnify's channel as focused more on the education of language...
I'm so happy that they have a collaboration together!!
I know right! Epic crossover
Do you know if either one of them are support of the genocide or have commented on it at All even? thanks
Happy that you are happy. After that: anything factual you got from that conversation?
@@erikred8217wut?
Is that the Lord of Ironland? My man!
He should be the Duke of the Duchy of Ironland just because
It's a democratic republic, iirc, so i doubt it would have things like that. Not to mention, as the founder is American by birth, he's less likely to use titles of nobility in general.
My lord bequeath’d upon me and my lineage one square nanometer
Great episode! I like how Chris is like the anti-youtuber. No screaming. No yelling. No bullshit. Calm, intelligent, thoughtful... everything we need on the internet right now.
I also haven’t noticed a lick of political propaganda either. Rare.
I had to rub my eyes 2 times..
"IS THAT THE RUclips SHORTS GUY?!?!?!" I said
I followed the shorts guy here 😂
lol same
As someone who almost never watches shorts, thank you for having him on. Hearing what he had to say is useful in understanding the text and language in general as well as fascinating.
"Before God got to work, the Earth was a bit loosey-goosey"
Wooo, fire translation. Just put their names back in.
When Iao started fuqn w/ Ges, she was a hot mess, bio. Wooo!!!
“when god started making stuff, the earth was all willy nilly”
A bit humbo jumbo
Bars
Chaos.
Helicopter is a good example, Alex. Most people would assume the word is made up of “heli” and “copter” but it’s actually “helico” for spiral and “pter” for wing, both of Greek origin.
An assumption which is compounded by the coining of terms like gyrocopter and quadcopter!
@@TAP7a To be fair, "quadpter" is too painful to pronounce.
@@TAP7aand pterodactyl
Best intro in the channel’s history
I like your taste. If a Gnostic Christian, how do you describe God? Natural or supernatural?
That escalated quickly
Tea is just a rearrengement of matter. So when you are making tea, it never begins to exist.
If i am therefore I exist. Then I dont
Second that
Clapping is also more anonymous than shouting because everybody's claps make the same sound. If you're shouting it might be distracting when somebody turns their head with an impulse to listen to a voice they recognize or investigate a voice that they don't.
Interesting point on shouting being a vocal distraction...a bit like a dissonant version of solo (e.g. baritone) and harmonic components of a choir.
Not sure about clapping making the same sound apart from it being recognised as such. For example, one could differentiate between 3 main types of clapping with specific sound profiles.
1. Standard - both palms matchingly clapped together.
2. " Hollow" - for want of a better description, this year of clap involves clapping perpendicular cupped palms together. It's quite loud and "deeper" sounding, useful for amplifying a group clapping effect.
3. Fingers slapping Palm clap - 3 or 4 fingers or fingertips clapped against open palm.
Useful for prolonged and/or fast clapping.
Agreed. When you clap, you're contributing to the build-up of a communal noise. By comparison, yelling or screaming can be interpreted as personal attention-seeking.
Bro the intro is the best. Alex is really growing
So is his moustache
@@--Snowy-- Low hanging fruit that I am here for.
NOW THIS was a collab I never expected but I am here for it
I loved the section on etymology. I'm a native English speaker and it wasn't until I started learning a foreign language that I realised the etymology of some of the words that we use.
Someone once told me this, and it's really stuck with me.....
" words don't have meaning! They have usage"
It's so true, you can't rely on the meaning of words you have to understand the way in which the community that uses that word employee it.
Well, the way words are being used in one language IS what we call "meaning". But in a similar spirit, I'll add that, when it comes to learning languages, one of the most important things to understand is that words don't have translation (a very common misconception), but *equivalents in the context*. So you don't "translate" the Spanish "espero" into English as "I wait", because depending on the context, it can mean "I hope" - you need the correct *equivalent* for what you want to say. Also, you should try as much as possible to learn not separate words, but phrases. There is no point in learning that "thirsty" is "sediento" in Spanish, because "I am thirsty" (as in: I need to drink water) is not "Estoy sediento" (very formal or figurative, as in "thirsty of knowledge"), but "Tengo sed" (lit. "I have thirst"), so learning the whole phrase only makes sense.
Can't words have both meaning and usage? Both of which vary across linguistic populations?
@@Anyox17 That is very accurate. This is what linguists discuss in pragmatics. What a word means to a community of speakers, and what meaning a speaker tries to impart while crafting a sentence with them can create a big difference. The most common example for English speakers: when you say "Can you pass the salt?" you are using "can" which means able or whatever to request a favor.
It was good. But Alex is unfortunately wrong about "genius" and "ingenious" having separate etymologies.
It is true that "genius" means a "guardian deity or spirit that follows the gens" in Latin, while "ingenium" means "intellect, ability" something like that. But that's not the end of the story. Both words come from the same root, *gene-, which means to "give birth" and in that sense have the same etymology.
It's also not a coincidence that they both came to mean the same in English, because the thought behind "ingenium" is "that which is inborn" which is also the idea behind "genius", that you have an inborn exceptional ability.
That’s literally the crux of the philosophy of mereological nihilism. Objects, whether they are “chairs” or “books” or “words” have no inherent self existence; they have uses. The air vibrations, used thusly, signify “meaning”. Used only slightly differently, they mean the water in the tea kettle is boiling.
This is a really interesting conversation. As a Jew that is not intently familiar with the bible but can read it, you got me to go over Genesis in Hebrew again. I've yet to watch the entire video, but to the parts I did watch, I can try and add my view.
For starters about the period at the end of “sentences”, while they don't exist, the common way the bible is presented and segmented in Hebrew is by numbers, but not actual Arabic numerals. Instead Hebrew uses its own ABC as numbers. So it is kind of like:
Chapter A
[A] In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth
[B] the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters
[C] Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light
[D] And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
[E] God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.
Additionally, about the way translation can change the way you read things, I could translate the exact same verse in a very different way that is still correct per how you could interpret the original texts:
Chapter A
[A] To begin with God brought into being the land and the sky
[B] And the land was in disarray and the darkness over the depths and the spirit of god hovered over the water
[C] And God said let there be light and light there was (no quotation marks because they were not used originally)
[D] And God saw-the-light as-good and God distinguished the light from the darkness (the - exist in a way in the original text and connect words of similar meaning to the ones I used here)
[E] And God will call the light day and the darkness night and there will be evening and there will be morning, first day
EDIT: I use the words Land and Sky instead of Heaven and Earth for a few reasons. First is that it is a valid translation and I want to show that. And second is that the words used can have multiple meanings that do not match the multiple meaning that "Heaven" or "Earth" posses. Erets ארץ which is the word for Earth or Land is very similar to "earth" as in it being the ground we stand upon literally and figuratively. In modern Hebrew we call The Earth Kadur A Erets, which is roughly "The Ball of Earth/Land".
About the Heavens, it just has so many matching and not matching correlations that it is troubling to try and truly translate. I feel as if the original meaning is close to how we use Sky now a day but that is just my opinion.
I hope magnify does more long form content
Hh ... Ect
@@bankafouf huh
Is it me or did he seem more nervous in this format though? His voice sounded shaky at times and I just wanted to give him a big old hug.
@@CosmicTeapot he was extremely nervous. It was also his first time doing a podcast as far as I'm aware.
Lol that’s why he always puts the magnifying glass to his eye;)
1:09:40 The hebrew term "עזר כנגדו" literally means "help like his opposite". The term for rib "צלע" actually just means "side" here and Adam obviously just means "human". So one side of the human is the man and the other side is the women -> they are as the opposite of each other and helping each other. The hebrew in this passage is actually very much egalitarian.
i mean we would call it egalitarian.
@@romanmay2867what are you even trying to specify? Is that not egalitarian?
You should 100000% interview Robert Alter. It would be an Earth shattering eye opening episode
That's some devastating hyperbole there.
Why
Whoa. You sure we want to be shattering the earth?
who even is that
Robert Alter would be an incredible interview, his translation of the HB is probably one of the best ones to get if you want something specifically for the HB. Sadly it is quite pricy, but I believe it comes with a lot of notes and such
This autoplayed while I was brushing my teeth, and when I realized it wasn't the Destiny episode, I actually felt a wave of joy and relief.
Screaming or shouting is in no way more efficient than clapping, not to mention the consistent sound it makes compared to shouting
As a metal vocalist, I have to agree. Much easier to clap than spend 4 years learning proper safe screaming techniques just so you can call out to people with a nasty BLEGH!
Maybe clapping is something you do with a group of people compared to shouting/screaming
Tell that to drunk football fans in English bars after their team has just clinched the EPL championship. It may be more efficient, but clapping isn't more satisfying than yelling or whistling.
@@Baronnax I'm gonna back that, live and big sporting events aren't half of what they are without screaming fans. Maybe clapping was more of a formal way of agreement or appreciation.
That might seem to be the case but it isn't. Vocalising, even very loudly uses much less energy than moving your limbs.
This is why almost every excersize routine involves moving your limbs and hardly any of them involve shouting.
Vocalising uses a similar amount of energy to breathing, and since you're going to breathe anyway it's really very efficient.
It probably feels like more effort than it is because you're going to be short of breathe and because shouting causes strain and pain on your vocal chords if you don't practice it, or raise your voice beyond a certain level.
Clapping isn't difficult or painful but it uses more energy.
I've been watching magnify for maybe a year now and I did not see this coming! Thank you both!
Love that you got my favourite shorts youtuber, Alex! I am really looking forward to watching this🙃
I think this was one of my favorite chats! It seemed so relaxed and interesting
This is the most interesting podcast i've had the good fortune of clicking on this year (having only watched the first ~24 mins).
i will be having a podcast in which ill be talking about the mis translation as well as how much we misunderstand the scriptures. as we are in such a dangerous time
It was really nice of Magnify to interview Alex.
It's a weird episode. Not bad, but very unusual
Now this is a really unexpected yet amazing podcast by these two
The closing thoughts of both are spot on in my view. Read multiple translations, seek the common idea over the specific wording, consider the original speaker and audience, understand that we are getting the tip of the iceberg. As a Christian, I genuinely love this conversation.
This episode was FASCINATING
I was stunned when I saw magnify and I listened as quickly as possible. So cool
Small correction: In modern Hebrew, the word את (et) is used as a direct object marker when referring to a thing that is preceded by a definite article. So you would say אני אוכל את הבננה (Ani okhel *et* habanana) [I am eating *the* banana], but not אני אוכל את בננה (Ani okhel et banana) [I am eating a banana]. In this case the et is not only unnecessary but grammatically wrong. And I think much of the confusion around את as used in the Bible really just revolves around the fact that most people who are interested in the meaning of this word don't speak Hebrew. I can almost guarantee you that the usage of את is not as interesting and mystical as English-speaking Bible scholars would like it to be. This is not a very interesting concept to any single Hebrew speaker, it's just the way we mark direct objects.
But his point was that it might have a different context in which it's used 3000 years vs how it's used today
את משמש להראות על משהו ספציפי אני יכול להגיד: "אני אוכל בננה" וזאת לא בננה מסוימת זאת סתם בננה, אבל אם אני מוסיף את לפני הבננה אני מדבר על בננה ספציפית. כשאתה מספר לחבר שאחלת בננה אתמול וזאת סתם עוד בננה אתה לא תוסיף "את" אבל אם אכלת בננה מסוימת אתה תגיד: "אכלתי את הבננה".
אני חושב שבאנגלית ה- "the" משמש גם כ- את וגם כ ה' הידע כי אם זה לא בננה ספציפית אתה יכול להגיד a במקום the לדוגמא "I ate a banna" או "in the beginning god created a universe and a erth" ה "the" פשוט גם כ את וגם כ ה' הידיעה
@@itamarmaxsagi9437 "את", כפי שהראשון אמר, משמש לציון מושא ישיר, ליידוע הרי משתמשים בתחילית "ה־". אפשר לומר "נורית אכלה התפוח, הפרח זרקה בחצר", ואתה יודע שמדובר בתפוח ופרח מסויימים גם בלי המילית "את" (ואכן, המשפט כשר גם בלי צורך ב"את"), ועדיין יישמע לך הרבה יותר נכון אם היו אומרים "נורית אכלה 'את' התפוח, 'ואת' הפרח זרקה בחצר"...
@@elijahwise4588we very well know the usage 3000 years ago is the same as today (with small differences as for any long-lived language). The language has been continuously used, so there hasn’t been a time when e(y)t’s meaning was temporarily out of use.
Modern Hebrew isnt Ancient Hebrew. Keep up.
14:40 the mysterious word is two word: "tohu va-vohu" which directly translates to "silence and mess" but in every day hebrew its just chaos. Youd walk into a messy room and you would describe it that the room is tohu vavohu. Hoped this helped🌸
While this is true that "tohu-va-vohu" means complete mess in modern Hebrew.
Sadly we don't really know what it meant in ancient Hebrew, since in Genesis is the earliest mention of the term can be found.
@yoav_tc true, thanks for the correction. I read in a couple of places that tohu refers to empty or silence. It either comes from arabic or a name for an ancient goddess of abyss. Vohu comes from an ancient goddess of night.
(but i think this is all speculation and not the translation for the sentence)
@@niresplural2007 actually, we know it means “formless and void” from the rest of the chapter. In the following verses, God forms the formless (sky, land, seas) and fills the void (luminaries, plants, animals). So the rest of the chapter actually defines the words in context.
@@kliniac3564 is that in the bible or in the tanach? (tora)
@@niresplural2007 it’s in Genesis chapter 1. First chapter of the Bible/Tanakh/Torah.
As a Hebrew speaker myself I would just mention that when talking about Rabi Akiva the tradition say he would interpret not only every letter, but every coma, in the text. So the opening remarks about the periods were very interesting in that sense:)
I’ve always heard that he would interpret every crown in the script
@@Pullithard I'm translating directly from Hebrew.. the word פסיק translates to "comma" .. maybe as the saying migrated some of the words have changed
Very fun episode, the free flowing conversation was great.
10:02 in Judaism, especially in more orthodox communities, this is very much the case. Hebrew letters are often accompanied by diacritics to denote vowels, but in the case of the Bible they are also accompanied by cantillation marks (“flavors” in Hebrew) to denote how to “sing” each syllable. Very analogous to how a Muslim might “sing” or “recite” the Quran.
Very interesting, the Old Church Slavonic bible also has these diacritics that are interpreted by scholars as saving ink through shortening words into single or two letters but they don't really try to interpret why it's the case. Also the same way Hebrew has the letter ET that means infinite cycle of beginning and end, Old Church Slavonic has the letter YAT at the end of the Alphabet to denote this unending loop. In the glagolitic script it's a pyramid divided in three parts for trinity while in Cyrilic script its an upsidedown Ankh. I think Greeks used the letter alpha with omega to get this across in the translation of the bible but the English did not. I also find similarity to the Vedic mantra AUM (commonly known as OM) where each vowel represents a stage and part of the holy Trinity: A-Creation (Brahma), U Preservation (Vishnu), M Change/Destruction (Shiva). AUM is used at the beginning and throughout all Rigvedic hymns which are sung.
Exactly analogous, I’m shocked by how little Alex knows about Judaism.
@@EliSofferhe should stop talking to Christians about the Hebrew Bible and start talking to hebrews 😣
Relevancy being that that’s how we know the ending and beginnings or the “crescendo” as the other guy called it.
@tartarus1322 Alex has genuine concern and criticism against Christianity. Specifically, the core doctrine of mainstream Christianity, which is found in the very European Bible.
A guest that i firmly underestimated and a way more exciting episode than anticipated
YES! So glad that you've readen Stephen Mitchell's translation of the Book of Job. It's what got me into biblical studies and Hebrew recitation! My ultimate goal is to produce a stage musical of the book.
Idk if im alone in this but i genuinely found this episode funny. There are so many little points/pauses/noises/expressions that just make me laugh
59:34
Someone should edit this episode to only include those
That's what you got out of this
This was one of the best podcasts yet.
I started watching Alex years ago as an atheist, and continue to watch as a born again Christian. Always fascinating discussions.
Interesting. How come you kept watching him even though you are now a Christian?
Cancer in children... Why do thank your god for that?
@@91YEHNAHnot religious, just get embarrassed for Christians constantly being dogshit at defending their religion. Anyway, ask Job
This is kind of a dogshit argument against Christianity, it’s pretty clear biblically that life is a test of faith, if there were 1. Proof of god and 2. No hardships/bad/evil things
Then there would be no test of faith.
Also, if we’re talking about morality of god, why would an eternal being feel bad about the cancer death of a child, especially if that eternal being knew that the child would soon experience eternal bliss? It would be even less than ripping a band aid off of a child from his perspective.
We joke that “god works in mysterious ways” is a horrible explanation for anything, but be honest and logical, that WOULD be true. Take god out of it, imagine you have an AI that is aware of EVERYTHING that is, has been, or will ever be, do you really think you would be able to logically understand its actions or motives? Don’t quote me on this but I’m pretty sure we have chess computers so advanced that sometimes make moves GMs can’t understand because the computer is able to think so many more moves ahead than humans can, an eternal god would be that times literal infinity.
We’re basically talking about a lovecraftian eldritch being here, why would ever expect shit to be normal?
@@tunzlunz it actually helps in affirming your faith cause when you think about the reasons Alex does not believe in God and try to answer that
@@91YEHNAH We don't thank God for cancer. We thank God for not having it ourselves, and we pray that those children may get cured.
Huge oversight in this podcast that as a Jew completely sticks out to me like a sore thumb. The Torah is lyrically, it is literally sung when read. Any Jew would know that, cantillation completely shapes the reading of the text. Literally the first thing any bar or bat mitzvah would know. I have a great deal of respect for your work, but this was a very simple oversight which you easily could have rectified with the barest amount of research or a single Jewish voice on this issue of translating *our* holy texts
That's such a great point, which is lost in the Christian bible!
Why does singing it matter?
@@scottm85It's not the same thing to whisper to you to be quiet, than to shout at you to be quiet
To give you a fairly simple example that avoids all the complexity of language, But it has even more implications
@@scottm85 The cantillation marks indicate phrasing/punctuation...it goes back to Babylonian vocalization in the 6th century (CE). The Septuagint received some punctuation at roughly the same time. Of course, the Hebrew Bible is much older than that.... so the overall thrust of the podcast is correct.
@@kanadakid147 Yeah, why does singing it matter? If God were all-powerful and all-knowing, then he would have created a language and a holy book that worked perfectly together, kind of like Arabic and the Quran.
@_magnify is just such a great channel. Been subscribed forever. For ironland! Great episode, one of my very favorites
Clapping has to be deeply rooted with us, maybe even a reflex. A lot of mammals clap as well, dolphins, apes, monkeys, and cows.
How do cows clap? :)
You left out the ones that are best known for it. Seals.
Haven't we just taught different animals to clap? Do they clap in the wild
@@martinjnagy I didn't, but maybe somebody else did. ;-)
@@dvanaestcestica1135 With their hooves obviously 🙂
I LOVED THIS! Loved seeing the next generation of thinkers having an "ingenious" chat. In a way, i could see you both figuring "et" out as you went along. Perhaps older people should learn to be more flexible and open. Chris and Alex are both handsome in their own ways. Thanks guys!
2:17 spot on. I recognized his face and voice but didn't remember the channel name 😂
Why would you? ...
This is the most amazing Collab I've seen in years
Great guest Alex!
Yeah, right... !
I really enjoyed listening to you guys talk and I've also learned a few new interesting things. I hope this wasn't your last conversation!!!
Loved this discussion so much! Y’all have to talk more often!!
Yes, I need more! I loved every second of it!
That's a crossover I didn't expect, great episode
interesting conversation. I appreciate Alex's willingness to not just discuss this but also admit his lack of understanding of hebrew. I personally dont know much either, but know those who have taken courses on it. Its a pretty difficult language to grasp. But what I also know is that any pastor of church worth his salt has a degree in biblical study called a Master of Divinity. Most MDiv grads today must take courses in Greek (NT) and Hebrew (OT). Certainly it doesnt mean they will know all the nuance of it compared to someone who studies it for years, but its good to note versus many of us who read it at face value from the English.
I think one hard thing about all of this is that there are so many ideas and that at least I have found that finding the full truth is lost because there are millions of ideas that could be correct and also have support. I find myself feel dumber each day as I learn more about all the different thoughts and perspectives.
Christopher was amazing. That was very interesting! Deep, thoughtful.
I'm surprised that you guys mentioned the 'musical notation' up the Quran completely ignoring the fact that the Jewish Torah was orally transmitted with 'musical' as a part of the text, and considered as important as the letters themselves.
Those were added many centuries later.
@@urijahkaplan1855 there's a very good chance that that's how they were orally transmitted, in a song format since that's way easier to remember words that are put to music, obviously that can't be proved though
@urijahkaplan1855 evidence to by the many sources such as the mishnah and other early rabbinic texts the idea of musical notation with the text predates the Quran, that's why I mentioned it
@@MindGap-2020 There is no evidence that "Jewish Torah was written with 'musical' as a part of the text".
Correct, edited
Hey Alex; I think you should the read "Sefer Yetzirah". I believe it might shed some light on the questions surrounding the first few lines of Genesis. The "Sefer Yetzirah "is generally considered to be a Kabbalistic text, but is much much older. In Hebrew tradition it's the first thing God reveals to Abraham about the universe. If it were canon, it would be the Genesis before Genesis.
Fantastic video! Please bring him on again if possible 🙏
This was, surprisingly, given the supposed subject, one of the most fascinating conversations I've seen Alex do ❤
This is not a crossover I thought would happen, but I absolutely love it
Loved this so much. Love both of your channels and it was amazing to see you together.
Wait... this is the duo I never knew I needed
When I saw the title, I was like: "Oh, interesting", but didn't watch it right away. Later, when I saw the Magnify's short talking about it, I ran back to Alex and played it. I love you guys.
I'm a rabbi and recently I was leading a Torah study during which we discussed "et", the alef-tav word. A congregant offered an excellent American English comparison in the Southern American English phrase "that there", as in "that there book" indicating, with complete certainty, that specific book to which I am referring.
That’s a really interesting connection. Some would say that Southern American phrases like “that there” and “might could” are needlessly redundant, but if you live here you kind of catch on to their unique connotations and rules for usage.
Are you from Tennessee? Because people here say “that there” all the time 😂
I really enjoyed this crossover and discussion. Please do more!
Best crossover ever.
This was great. I loved the etymology tangents. I hope to see magnify as a recurring guest like Dr. Justin Sledge.
Magnify’s longer videos are great too! There’s only a couple but I hope he makes more
a weird consequence of mereological nihilism is that you then concede that the world we live in is essentially minecraft, where at base, the minecraft world is a single 3d model made of many units that may be textured or empty (air), and when you mine or build, you're just changing the texture state of one of those units.
What's even more crazy is that this includes you. You are just an arrangement of atoms that have always existed
lots of the stuff that go into the "you"-construct was previously used by a sun and, more tantalizing, possibly by a pterodactyl.
@@TheGiantMidget Not sure that's exactly true. It is possible, under extreme conditions and given enough luck, for the vacuum quantum fields to randomly oscillate into the requisite quarks for a proton, with the oscillations being close enough to each other to bond. And then that proton catches an electron, becoming a hydrogen atom, eventually covalently bonds with an oxygen and another hydrogen to make a water molecule, and eventually finds its way inside you. Now, sure, the proton wasn't created out of *nothing* , it's a reordering of the energy of the quantum fields, but what matters for the purpose of mereological nihilism is that it wasn't made by just rearranging simples.
So it's probably more accurate to say "You are just an arrangement of atoms that have existed for billions of years"
@@tudornaconecinii3609 okay billions of years then. The point is that all the components of your body are made of stuff that was here way before anyone you know existed. That's a weird thought
@@TheGiantMidgetand yet you are more than the materialistic sum of your parts 🤔
Whoever is the French-speaking guy behind the scenes, so AWESOME he was there. It's just so cool how he comes into the discourse here SO organically. One of my favorite episodes as it developed, despite the initial confusion of why this particular guy was the right guest for the topic. Thank you!
Your whole discussion of mereological nihilism reminded me so much of Buddhism philosophy. Specifically about Tian Tai and their 3 Truths. It’d be cool if you did a video about that.
Also see Nagarjuna
25:30 This is what ANE/OT scholar John Walton argues, namely that ברא is about assigning functions rather than creation from nothing. If you look at the objects of ברא in the OT this makes sense.
It’s pretty amazing the production value and how it really feels like they’re in the same room together
We were in the same studio in London!
@@_magnifythe British electrical sockets behind you were the give away for that one!
45:09 Devastation comes from Latin's "devastare" meaning to lay waste to. Coming from the prefix "de-" and the latin word "vastare" to lay waste to. "Vastare" comes from Latin's "vastus" meaning empty or desolate.
Nice, two of my favorite RUclipsrs. Love it
Oh the dude from the moses painting video no way, i like him for his videos on writing systems. This is so cool
These episodes that explore the history of the bible and biblical figures etc are the little treatz I live for
My mother was a very religious woman, and late in her life she began to learn Hebrew and ancient Greek for exactly this reason. Her insights were very illuminating.
What illuminations did she have?
@@milesgrooms7343 My favorite was how many words and phrases were translated from Hebrew into "thou shall not" when the original meanings ranged from "this is bad for you" to "this is forbidden".
@@danielvest9602 I can't imagine having my deconstruction journey so late in life. On one hand, your mom got to experience the bliss that religious ignorance gives you for a lot longer. On the other hand, kind of a bitter pill to swallow that late in life... I'm guessing she stayed a Christian despite all of her "revelations"?
@@danielvest9602 did this ultimately cause her to leave the faith?
@JD-wu5pf She became a Christian after these revelations and because of them. Before that she was an agnostic searching for meaning in all the world's religions.
It's so cool to see secular intellectuals take such pleasure and interest in looking at biblical text.
Alex, please consider having Rabbi Tovia Singer on your podcast! He is exactly what you are looking for. I promise.
Rabbi Tovia Singer is very good at deconstructing a Christian reading of the "Old Testament", but not as good at applying this scepticism to the truth claims resulting from his own reading of Torah.
@@alexisfonjallaz7237 Fair enough. Totally agree. I didn't assume that he's making a good case for the truth of Torah/Tanakh. His reading is that of a believer, no doubt about that. But I think that his knowledge on the topic and especially that of the Hebrew language would make an informative podcast.
@@swq293 Definitely an interesting guest. I'm just not sure how open he would be for a real conversation, since he mostly debates fundamentalist nutcases and afaik has never been properly challenged on his own beliefs.
Sorry. Tovia Singer is simply not in Alex’s class. He carefully chooses those he debates or what topics he addresses. By no means am I a fundamentalist but Singer is no intellectual. He gives religion, any religion, a bad name. Yuck.
Super glad to see you two talk and id love to hear it again!
As a native speaker of another gendered language (Russian) I'd say my perception of objects differs only in relation to nature. I don't particularly care that my bed is feminine and my sofa is masculine, they are equally comfortable and soft. However, the fact that an oak tree is masculine and a birch tree is feminine affects my perception in some subtle way. Or the sun that is neutral vs the moon that is feminine. I have a hard time capturing this in words, but there's something in there. Earth is feminine, water is feminine, a lot of nature related words are. I think it does subconsciously make you perceive nature as a woman more than a man. Wouldn't the same be true for English with its "Mother Earth" though? So, maybe folktales and cultural archetypes have more to do with this phenomenon than grammar. And then, what about gender neutral words? The sky is neutral, for example. So yeah, I don't know. At the same time, I was blown away to have discovered that the sun is feminine in German, whilst the moon is masculine. It made me feel uneasy at first, which was so hilarious to observe in myself. It became apparent to me that my brain is preprogrammed by my first language in ways that cause visceral reactions when a different point of view arises. That being said, it seems to me it's quite easy to either underestimate or overestimate the importance of gendered words in a language, especially when trying to make a point in support of your pre-existing beliefs about the state of the world and how things should be handled. This topic in its entirety is fascinating.
One reason to clap is that it only makes a really loud sound of a lot of people clap together. It is thunderous only if there is support for it, unlike screaming.
29:00 from the Jewish perspective, and the word I think Alex is missing here, which he accidentally replaces with "recognize" is the word intention.
From the Jewish perspective that which is the force of creation is intention. In Hebrew the word intention has a shared root with the words "to aim" and "to give a direction". hence, when you use the power of intention on matter you give it an aim, a direction, that is giving it a purpose, which it didn't have previously. You do not "recognize an arrangement of matter" you SET an arrangement using intention, in order to direct this unfulfilled potential towards a designated aim, giving it purpose. The material used to build the car was their, with no purpose, no direction, no aim, their was no car, only the potential for one... a theoretically possibility, which intention can transform into reality.
32:01 - the thing that distinguishes the chair as an object in not in the material plane, rather it is in the fact that intention was applied to make it. The thing setting the chair apart from its surroundings, even by different objects, is the type of intention that was applied to it.
32:54 - what the chairs have in common is intention. They both are created with the same intention. What unites them is not necessarily to be found in their factual description of parts or their form.
Very cool to see a long format conversation on this one
Video starts at 0:01
Video *started* at 0:01
Alex things literally do pop into existence. If we take a quark pair, they always exist in pairs, and we separate them enough to break them free of the strong force holding them together, immediately 2 more quarks pop into existence to pair up with the ones we pulled apart.
Studies have found that, in the majority of cases, even though languages differ in efficiency, information rate is similar across languages. This is possible because, as languages decrease in efficiency, the speed at which they are spoken increases. It is believed that the guiding factor is how quickly our brain can process the information contained in the speech, not how quickly we can theoretically utter the words.
sounds like this is more about information density per time unit than precision.
It's dignified significant and quietly appreciative.
*“It would be a pity if, in a desire (rightly) to treat the Bible as more than a book, we ended up treating it as less than a book by not permitting it the range and use of language, order, and figures of speech that are (or ought to be) familiar to us from our ordinary experience of conversation and reading"* ----John Lennox
So what does John Lennox add?
The concept that interpretation is the message not the words.
@@pyros4333 John Lennox adds the concept that interpretation is the message not the words? Aren't there many interpretations of the Bible? And isn't that a flaw, not a feature?
@@paulthompson9668 how many ways is there to interpret a book? Now multiply that by translations. Now add the fact that it's a compilation.
The beauty of history is that we will never know for sure and can only interpret but those interpretations are wondrous for our minds.
@@pyros4333 And yet John Lennox wants me to believe the Bible is the word of God, a perfect being.
"Can there be a more fitting pursuit in youth or a more valuable possession in old age than a knowledge of Holy Scripture? In the midst of storms it will preserve you from the dangers of shipwreck and guide you to the shore of an enchanting paradise and the ever-lasting bliss of the angels."
- St. Boniface
For the formless and void part 16:21 The Hebrew tohu va-bohu doesn’t convey strict, conceptual formlessness as much as it evokes a world that is raw, undefined, and almost whimsical in its chaotic energy.
Peterson linked these words (as well as "tehowm" used later to describe "the deep") with Tiamat, which is the great mother of Summerian tradition from Enuma Elish that gets asociated with pre-cosmogonic chaos the world gets to be made out of.
whimsy-pimsy or namby-pamby which means something weak or lacking in substance
@@DarkHound9999tehom is the deep, it is cognate to the name tiamat for the godess tiamatin the enuma Elish. As far as I know Tohu is a different thing
Sounds nice
One of the issues I have with religions, and the written texts in particular, is the thought that over the centuries, the words have been translated and transcribed by countless people. And because of that, there is room for error.
I said this to my Dad once, who is a devout Christian. His answer was along the lines of, "The word of God cannot be corrupted. The scholars and priests over time have worked faithful to the lord to ensure the text we have is as it was intended."
I personally find that a dangeously blind belief, but I choose not to attempt to disrupt his faith. Aside from the fact I very much doubt I could, my dad is one of the most amazimg people I know. He has such goodness in his heart that if this is what his faith makes of him, I am glad he has the beliefs that he does.
"The word of God cannot be corrupted" is more of a Muslim sentiment than Christian (excluding the more fundamentalist, "Answers In Genesis" type Christians). A more nuanced take is that the Bible has a built-in fractal nature, which means that even if 90% of the books had been lost or corrupted, the basic gist could still be gleaned from what was left.
This also explains why there are four gospels, each with subtle differences in order or emphasis. Taken together, they function like a stereoscopic snapshot of Jesus' ministry. But if we had only ever had access to - say - the Book of Luke, we still would have gotten the overall picture.
Yes there are differences between the earliest manuscripts we still have (and yes they are copies of copies), but the vast majority of these differences are insignificant grammatical variations or slightly different spellings of the same word. Same goes for comparing the Dead Sea Scrolls, in which partial or complete copies of the Old Testament can be cross-checked against the handed-down texts. Completely mistake-free? No. But the amount of similarity is remarkable, and more than enough to provide a high degree of confidence that scholars can recover much of what the original authors intended to convey.
Fro Iron Land 😄💯💯💯🏆🏆🏆🎉🎉🎉🎉👿👿👿🥵🥵🥵🥳🥳🥳🥰🥰🥰😤😤😤
Love you too Alex.❤❤❤❤
Omg the collab of the century!!
The hebrew for "formless and void" is actually two words. The first of which, "tohu", appears 20 times in the Bible, usually translated as words like "emtpy", "without", "nothing", and "waste". The second word rhymes with the first, and only appears 3 times, always in conjunction with "tohu".
My understanding is that the first seven hebrew words (note the importance of the number 7), is like a summary of the whole chapter. Like, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, and this is how he did it. First, the earth was formless and void... etc."
Pumped for this dude. Love his vibe.
Clapping might come from a simple outlet for/lack of control over one’s excitement. Babies, kids, and some animals do it when they get excited it’s sort of like stimming. That’s a possibility of the origins of clapping.
Clapping is less precise and more energy intensive than shouting so in my opinion that seems most plausible.
This is far from a consensus, it’s just what I think based on what I’ve read about the subject!
That explanation I really like a lot, especially having seen it in babies as a stimming response when they haven't seen others clap before.
What a great guest!
About a half hour in, and while I’m really enjoying the conversation, what are the guest’s credentials? (Not accusatory-he could have two PhDs in relevant fields for all I know. But my impression is that he’s some sort of apologist who just makes shorts.)
Do they ever list the credentials? I haven't watched yet, but I recall (kindly) criticizing some of Magnify's academic takes on the Hebrew Bible (although I can't for the life of me remember what about!). To his credit, he did remove the videos, and he has seemed much more familiar with scholarship than the average Joe. I enjoy him.
@@AurorXZ Not always specifically, but if Alex doesn’t mention specifically where the guest’s expertise is, you can usually get a sense of it early on.
I just tried to look up both of their credentials on their own websites, but they are not listed there.
@@josiedurruty6457Alex has previously pursued studies in philosophy and theology, which he completed with a bachelor's degree if I'm not mistaken.
Great vid and discussion. I will be buying Alters translation! I love history and scholars like John Walton and NT wright to understand the context and literary devises which are missed in our modern context. Really enjoyed this. God bless you Alex.......'if he existed' 😂
One thing I thought hilarious.
'do you eat ribs over here?'
Alex replies 'I think...no that's more an American thing' 😂😂😂
Alex clearly needs to spend time outside the village! 😂 Ribs are very popular in UK.
3:22 "I think, in Ancient Hebrew, there is like little markings on a scroll to let you know when you've reached the end of a line." Wouldn't the fact that you're _at the end of a line_ tell you that you've reached the end of that line?
Perhaps he means poetic line and not textual line?
@@jimktrains0 , my understanding, which is very limited, is that, as late as the first and second centuries A.D., the Hebrew of the Old Testament was written with no punctuation at all, not even any diacritical marks to indicate vowel-sounds, not even spaces between words and between sentences-but with space between chapters. soitwouldbelikethisfromthebeginningofachapterallthewaytotheendofthechapterandthentherewouldbeaspace andthenthenextchapterwouldbegin
Native Hebrew speaker here-Biblical Hebrew is marked with, well, marks, that signify how to read the words tonally to form a sort of song out of them. It isn’t punctuation, but rather a primitive form of it. That’s why at orthodox Jewish prayer times you’ll hear the rabbi changing tones constantly in a somewhat similar manner to how mandarin does, except the tone doesn’t determine the word itself it determines how the sentence flows.
@@ItsMikeylol , but aren't those marks relatively new? Were they used in Biblical times?
There are no punctuation markings on a Torah scroll.
I've read it many times, can confirm. (There are rare exceptions to this.)
Gen I and Gen 2 are different creation stories. In Gen 2, God names Adam and Adam is allowed to name all the animals and then Adam is the one that names Eve, implying that she is his 'special pet'. It's lear all throughout the Bible, but especially the OT, that women are viewed as man's property. Our wedding vows still reflect that when a father 'gives away' his daughter.
So Alex believes the universe is a single substance but the mind is a distinct substance.. When is he going to realize the Trinity is God the Father emanating the math structure of reality, and the flesh (Jesus Christ) facilitates the mind and serves as a bridge to the mind (Holy Spirit) connecting back to that higher reality. Its why you can even comprehend things like mathematics to begin with despite having faculties aimed at survival.
The mind is not the body, and its not the infinite creator but they are all the same 1 substance of God. That is the meaning of the Trinity.
So is like universe is expand infinitely and flesh finite? But mind is infinite and can relink with universe through the flesh. Sorry I am not fully understand English.
I think for him to "realize" that might need some evidence that it is objectively true, rather than just stuff you're saying.
@@MrReasonabubble Well he says in the very video that it is suspicious to him that it seems everything is matter shaped in different forms that we use to call different objects. But then posits that it seems like the mind is something else that can cognize matter itself.
He is just saying the same thing in a indirect way.
Best collab of my life holy shit thank you