"I think I understand this. J. Peterman is real. His biography is not. Now, you Kramer are real. But your life is Peterman's. Now the bus tour, which is real, takes to places that, while they are real, they are not real in sense that they did not *really* happen to the *real* Peterman which is you."
Modern fictional superheroes are Superman, Spiderman, Batman and Robin, etc. Is it possible that the fictional superheroes back then were characters like Abraham and Moses? I just often wonder how much of this was taken seriously by people back then, as opposed to expressing a longing for someone to put things right. Also, many stories read like fables, so I wonder if they were treated like fables back then.
There is an old tradition of oral storytelling in that geographical area. Also with the arabs. They knew all about how to tell stories to make them fun and suspense and with a sense for wonder and awe. And for sure they took them with a shovel of salt. At least the ones with some brain.
Useful Charts did a great video on the historicity of early Israelite figures and broke them into three categories. Myth, Legend, and Historical. I like that because it doesn't draw the line at they existed or didn't but rather gives a grey area where the person probably existed but the legends about them are greatly exaggerated. I think David and Solomon are great examples of this. We have historical records of David but in reality he probably only controlled a small area in the southern Levant and wasn't the king of a united monarchy.
@@Personincrowdwe have a stele that seems to be referring to a "house of David". With that it is a rather minor thing to grant that there was a historical king called David that started a little dynasty. This doesn't prove, really, any individual story about him (and in fact there is data in the bible itself that point to his legend having grown over time)
Curious how most (if not all) believers, for thousands of years, mistook those characters as literal. Otherwise, there'd have been no PREMISE available for bitter rivalries, crusades, heresy trials, witch hunts, religious sects/denominations, or even anything for the Jesus character to argue with the Pharisees about. There wouldn't have even been a meaningful use of the term "gentiles". It's not as if only the local Jews understood the concept of allegories; nor would they be the sole people able to understand the specific ideas conveyed in allegories. And there would have been no controversy about whether or not "gentiles" should be "preached" to. Those people inarguably thought their own religion's religious stories were claims about a literal deity doing literal religious magics.
With a few likely (and irrelevant) exceptions, exactly! My wonderful grandma was an AG treasurer for NY state. I worked for a Unitarian pastor. I know other good protestant folks too. But American protestants feed their kids this bizarre "literal interpretation" heresy, and thereby set them up for ridicule, disappointment and disaffection. WHY????? It's disgusting. It's not Christianity. Orthodox and Catholics make up 70-75% of global Christians? Something like that? Well, George Lemaitre of Big Bang fame was a Catholic priest! Catholics aren't victimizing their kids at Eden Dinosaur museums. Americans are so bizarre! Why???? St. Augustine (he's a saint) wrote allegorical interpretations of scripture. WTF is wrong with Americans? Why did they do this? I sometimes think our CIA promulgates these bizarre American heresies to ruin American Christianity in retaliation for *Reverend* MLK's winning campaign against USA racist apartheid. Who knows? Americans are wise to join Orthodox and Catholic churches, or protestant alternatives to "literal interpretation." Blech! :(
when my faith is in question a little rocky,I find video's like this, I listen to this amazing information,it makes my faith strong in Christ again, Expert Dr. Joel Baden you help me so much I want to really thank you for restoring my faith in the Lord Thank you
Excellent show with good points being made about the difference between someone existing and their mythical version (which is what most fundamentalist’s believe). Good job to both of you.
Baden's last point, that someone is described with a borrowed description does not necessarily mean that that someone did not exist, is worth pondering.
It also doesn't mean that someone really existed In the end you have to acknowledge that there is no actual evidence and simply say "I don't know". But what you can tell is that the fictional character from the book is not the same being as the one it might be based on, or at least losely inspired by. A character from a book can also be the amalgamation of multiple people, or even other characters from fiction. And on top of that the authors will add some extra stuff they like to spice things up. An author who never met the person the character is based on will not really know how that person truly was like. The author will take some liberties. He might know that the character has a good heart. So he'll write what he thinks a person of good heart would do. He might have an uncle who is good hearted and use him as basis to write about that characteristic. Or he might have read about such a person in another book and use that shape his own character. If it was a certain person, the author could have used that persons real name, or he gave his character a new name. The real name was perhaps unknown to him. If there were multiple people, then one of them might have had that name, or again, he might have invented a name which he thought was fitting. We don't know. His job? Could habe been made up as well. The person he might be based on could have lived a long time before him. The character could be based on the story of a story of a story of a story of someone long ago. Things change over time. A game of Chinese whispers quickly changes the original story. Whether a single real person existed, or whether mutlitple people and things were used as inspiration, or whether is is a completely fictional character invented from all the characteristics the author wanted his character to have doesn't really matter. In the end, the character from the book is still fictional. That character never existed. The real answer is that we'll most likely never know what made the first author write what he wrote.
It is called cultural memory when the characters and events are representative of similar type events in the distant past that have grown over time to fulfill needs of national unity. This is achieved via stories of a theological and political nature in dramatological form.
Raised in a "high control religion," you did not have the "time" for this type of objective thinking. That is why they keep their "rank and file" so busy "saving the world." Once you get "outside the box," you realize their are many perspectives to consider.
Also, Egypt was basically a few days' hike away from ancient Israel, and there was travel and trade. It wouldn't have been too hard for some ancient scribe (in the Bronze Age, or even post-Exile) to have gathered enough Egyptian language to name their character "Son of" (or perhaps "Favored Son") in order to give verisimilitude to the idea that their national hero was almost a Pharaoh, no really! So that by itself doesn't offer much evidence of a "kernel of truth" to the Exodus story. But who knows, maybe some refugee or group of refugees from Akhenaten's court fled to Canaan to hide out in the provinces and ended up joining an Israelite tribe. Then over time garbled versions of their stories ended up being merged into the Israelite national myth. The name "Moses" could be an edited version of an Egyptian name, changed to remove the name of an Egyptian god, perhaps the Aten ("Atenmoses") as Team JEDP and the Redactor cleaned up the stories to fit the Yahweh-only policies in place after King Josiah. We'll probably never know, unless there's some new archaeological find.
@@kevincrady2831 Akenaton's "monolatry" has been linked to the development of monotheism, ever since Freud... I THINK most scholars reject this association but I see your point
Actually, someone wrote a biography of Washington that didn’t have anything to do with the historical Washington: Parson Weems. The book sold so well that a number of equally spurious hagiographies of Washington were published.
Good discussion. I guess I would lean more toward "historical fiction" with these characters. I do not think the Bible stories are necessarily true at all, any more than our fake news is true today. But stories like these have a reason for why they got started. They probably did not invent them as wholesale fairy tales. Now, certainly there was a lot of borrowing going on, which is why we see so many similarities in the various myths among different nations. Israel was no different. They borrowed other people's stories, gave them Hebraic names and details, twisted them for their own propaganda, and eventually wrote them down. Were there heroic figures 4-6000 years ago? Absolutely! Did they do exactly what the Bible says about them? Nope. But Israel seems to be the first nation to master propaganda!
I agree 100% with the George Washington analogy. Take the Nimrod narrative of the Bible for instance. If you know anything about Ancient Egyptian history you will see a strong parallel between Nimrod (nmrd) and Namer (nmr). Both were of Kushite descent (Sudanese) and mighty kings that founded and expanded their kingdom/colonies from Africa towards the so called middle east.
Curious if you might be able to contact and maybe get on Ben Stanhope. I've mentioned him a few times in comments. He's a younger OT-scholar with expertise in Hebrew-seals and this year published a book critiquing Young Earth Creationism. He could become the next Michael Heiser-type scholar in the future.
The same is true of Jesus of Nazareth. The Jesus of the gospel stories is pure myth and legend, of course, blended with Paul's "god-man", but there's a strong possibility that a person (or more likely several persons - a composite character) of that name (or some other name) with similar qualities and experiences actually existed approximately 2,000 years ago in the middle-east.
@@trustedliving8131 "that is what the scriptures show from the beginning"... 1001 Arabian Nights shows that there was Aladdin too... do you believe it... the Mahabharata shows that there was Hanuman too... do you believe it??
@@suelingsusu1339 That's a cute reply. I know how to translate the ancient scripture. You base your assumptions on corrupted language translations. I go back to the source. You know, before Babylon confusion of the language. Your problem is that you just want to disprove what the religious people hold dear. I prefer to figure out the reality of the ancient writings. Maybe you would be happier knowing The God of the bibles right hand man was and still is The Satan.
What about Balaam in the Deir Alla inscription? What about "son of Tsafan" seal found in the wall of Jerusalem? A "son of Saphan" found in Kings, Jeremiah, and even Ezekiel! The seal of Baruch? IT seems the minor characters had to be included because they were so well known.
Recently found this Channel. I like it because at least all involved are trying to make sense of corrupted language translations that have been around since the time of the Masorites dictating how to understand the Hebrew language. A giant hurdle to overcome. There was no vowel pointers in original writings. We know this because the Dead Sea Scrolls demonstrate such. By the corruption of adding vowel pointers the original meanings of the scriptures was supplanted. Not all, but the most important meanings. So much so even brilliant people are left not understanding why there is so many conflicting statements in the scriptures. Differing accounts of people with the same name is that the names denoted groups not just individuals. Where the suffix "ites" was added in the names denotes slaves of the group. And no doubt "ites" was an addition in scripture by the Hellenists.
Not only are vowels missing in the earliest Hebrew ‘scriptures’ before c. 970 CE in the so call’d Leningrad Codex but the Hebrew consonantal Dead Sea Scrolls exists in several versions (with actual CONSONANTS differing between different copies of the same text, e.g. 1QIs-a and 1QIs-b in the two recensions of the book of the prophet Yishia’qu (= Isaiah) and in the Samaritan Pentateuch - What adds more confusion is by ‘reverse engineering/backward translating’ the Greek Septuaginta LXX back into Hebrew consonants often presuppose different CONSONANTAL TEXT UNDERLAY as the great Immanuel Tov brought out in many of his detail’d studies of the Scrolls… In fact we have found long stretches of the same textual underlay from different manuscript families from which & upon which the Greek Septuagint & Theodotion’s Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures were built… It is a very sad & concerning fact that this kind of hard factual information about the transmission of the mangl’d texts of the Hebrew Scriptures ‘that defile the hands’ (i.e. holy writ) is supress’d by various clergies and kept from the attention of the more than gullible masses of both Jewish & Christian congregations … despite the Internet offering a wide variety of scholarly studies on this very subject …
@@theophilos0910 Great post ! I have to check out Immanuel Tov. I have also deciphered Greek words into Hebrew consonants giving some clarity to what I think the scriptures were actually trying to convey
@@trustedliving8131 - there are a number of modern studies branching off from where Immanuel Tov has uncover’d after decades of painstaking letter by letter counting - bear in mind the Hebrew Aleph-bet chang’d form c. 420 BCE under Ezra into the now-familiar ‘square form Hebrew Aleph-bet’ but that prior to c. 400 Hebrew was typically written using the older ‘horn’d Phoenecian Aleph-bet’ and there were a number of copyist errors in antiquity reflecting this change in script (e.g. ‘King Asa’ in 1 Kings chapter 22:43) & compare it with 2 Chronicles 20) in PaleoHebrew horn’d lettering) was transcrib’d in a parallel passage in ‘Chronicles’ as ‘David’ - the paleo Aleph and paleo Daled look almost the same in PaleoHebrew horn’d script and even the paleo SAMEK can sometimes look a little like a Paleo VAV- and this kind of confusion keeps literary scholars like Dr Tov up very late at night but is crucial to an understanding of any possible ‘original readings’ such as the small example cited above … Good luck in your quest for historical & literary accuracy !!
Professor Baden is so laid back here compared to the Yale Divinity lectures he has online. Also I wonder what he thinks of Balaam since a Balaam is mentioned in a Moabite stele.
It is meant to give the stories some kind legitimacy or the implication of equal standing with a well known and historical nation. It's kind of sad and desperate.
They dont just try to. They are a direct connection to Egypt. Who do you think EL was ? Look at the pictures where those 2 letters came from. Cattle head with horns and Sheperds staff. Then look at Egyptian art work of characters wearing cattle horns and holding crooks. It's no coincidence.
I really want to hear scholars explore abram/Abraham’s claimed origin of the city of Ur. While claiming heritage to an older civilization is common it’s curious that Mesopotamian myths overlaps with biblical so often and they share that connection in the literary tradition
Robert Price's Clark Kent analogy comes to mind. If we agree there was no such thing as Superman, then who cares whether there was a real Clark Kent? Even assuming Clark did exist, why should we hope to find any true stories about him, when our histories are comic books? If there was a David, all that's left of the real him is his name.
That doesn't necessarily follow. For example, there are lots of crazy theories about the JFK assassination, the moon landing, 9/11, ect. However, it doesn't mean there is nothing historical told in these crazy tall tales. There definitely is, and we can see that by comparing the crazy stories with the actual evidence and the actual evidence shows there are true things in these stories with obviously false things in thrown in them. The fact that there are stories that are completely made up, like Clark Kent and Superman, has no relevance to the fact that there are stories that are some made up and some true.
@@johns3927 I think you may be missing the point: maybe the stories did have roots in reality, or not; but if they did, there's no way to tease out what (little) might be true, or to tell any kind of true story about it. If there had been a real Clark Kent, what of the truth could we glean from DC scripture? On top of which: if God didn't miraculously part the Red Sea, then who cares whether the undiscovered truth is that really some people swam, or took a boat?
@@bozo5632 I think some things, for example, Jesus being an apocalyptic prophet (I am assuming Jesus is historical here. If you think he was mythical, then the people who imagined him imagined him as an apocalyptic celestial being. But if Jesus was historical, it would be pretty safe to assume he was an apocalyptic prophet.) So there are certain ways you can determine what they probably were. Not completely certain, of course.
@@johns3927 Okay, and if you assume Clark Kent was a journalist, then he probably worked for a major newspaper, even if it couldn't have been one in Metropolis. Probably. Based on comic books. If there was a historical Jesus it's also possible he was not an apocalyptic prophet. (Theories abound.) His name might not have been Jesus. He might have lived decades before or after the timeline of the stories. He may or may not have been crucified. Et cetera. Maybe. Based on religious teachings.
@@bozo5632 Well I base the existence of Jesus on other evidence, Paul mentioning his brother being the main one. I know mythicists have arguments against that, but I don't find them convincing. But I'm not here to debate the veracity of the evidence for a historical Jesus. The point being, I base my conclusion that Jesus existed from one piece of evidence, then judge what he probably was from different pieces of evidence. So it's a bit different from what you are implying. Obviously none of this is certain and is based on probabilities.
I love your channel. I really respect Prof. Baden's knowledge and enthusiasm. BUT! if I hear the word "like" one more time, I am going to kill something!
We have written historical documentation on George Washington, so we know he existed. But, when you write a fictional book about George Washington we can compare it to the historical documented version and know that it's fiction. The problem with a biblical character like Abraham, and others, is there is no historical contemporaneous documentation outside the bible, torah, to judge whether if it's a work of fiction.
“Spin implies reality… you don’t spin fiction”…. I really think that all these bible “scholars” ought to be made to take a whole year’s course in creative writing and literature before they are allowed to start any biblical seminary classes.
The Harry Potter corpus hides, then spins the fact that Dumbledore worked closely with, and perhaps was a lover of, the Dark Lord Grindlewald. Kernel of truth! Also, we can't forget that real places (e.g. King's Cross Station) and people (Nicholas Flamel) are referenced, and of course the Embarrassment Criterion comes into play every time Harry or Ron do something stupid.
Abraham Lincoln: was actually a Vampire Hunter A young Abraham Lincoln who learned to hunt vampires to avenge his mother's death. Lincoln's mission to eliminate vampires who are planning to take over the United States. which was the reason for the civil war Lincoln's mother being killed by a vampire, Jack Barts, when he was 9 years old. Lincoln used his battle ax to fight the Confederate Army, which has made a deal with the vampires.
"what do you mean I can't sleep with my daughters? Uh I thought god destroyed everyone else, no I was drunk, yeah that's it it's not my fault they took advantage of me in my stupor! "
Moses,was Akenaten..an Egyptian pharaoh ,who tried to change Egyptian polytheism to monotheism ...and as i researched ..was kicked out of Egypt with his followers ..to wander the desert for 40 yres ,so they say ,and ended up about 40 miles from where he started. ..
Bollocks. Akhenaten remain in rule for 17 years, died as a Pharaoh and was buried in the Royal Wadi, which was a cemetary similar to the Valley of the Kings, created in Armana by the 18th Dynasty. Moreover, his religion of Atenism was basically sun worship; the Egyptians had worshipped the sun multiple times, but Akhenaten (who changed his pharaohonic name from Amenhoten IV to reflect his worship of the Aten) wanted his people to worship the Aten exclusively. He certainly lead a campaign to ban the other gods, espescially Amun. However, given that even in his new city, people openly wore amulets and the like of other gods, he met with little success, and after his reign the Aten was mostly forgotten as the old religions regained their power. Nothing to do with "Moses" who is a fictional character.
Have you read the Bible? There’s no proof in believing in a book or books outside the Bible that can be proven without proof. Most often it’s a myth. Just because it’s wrote don’t make it the truth.
It amazes me that there are still so many idiots out there believing in that bullshit book. So many years have passed and people are still wasting their time with it.
We should not discount folklore. Did King Arthur exist? Not as we popularly imagine him but...there may have been a Romano-Celtic chieftain around whom all those later legends were built.
Question for Dr. Baden. Professor Snape, I know that he was a deatheater... but he is working with Dumledore, and I know you'll say that Snape killed Dumbledore, but that was to save Malfoy from having to do it.... So, we have the apologetics for Professor Snape! Now I understand, therefore Professor Snape must be a real historical figure b/c otherwise why would you need apologetics.
In the end it doesn't really matter what is true or not; it's about "What is Truth" in✡️getting✝️others☪️to believe "IT" collectively of one's origins of belief back to the Promised🇮🇱Land of Paradise🍄Gland🌅at🧠Our🗣️Command❤️🔥 🎺🎶!
PULLING THREADS PODCAST (Find us on Spotify, Apple, or wherever you listen to your favorite Podcasts.) Questioning our beliefs can be a scary process. I know it was for me. But the process can bring great healing and freedom. Join the PULLING THREADS podcast team every Sunday to listen to the stories of those who have gone through faith deconstruction and pulling of their own threads. We long to create a safe place where people can feel comfortable and unashamed in asking questions and perhaps, pulling on the threads of their own ‘sweater.’ Hope to have you join us!
Amon-sé opened the Nilo River to find his fiancé's ring in the Egyptian legend. So the Jews got his legebd and changed saying that he opened the red sea to them go away.
I doubt there was a recognizable historical Abraham. But the funny name doesn't prove he's fictional. His birth name could have been Larry, and Abram could have been an honorary title, perhaps posthumously. Larry Abram, the Exalted Father. And at some point the Larry part got left off. Christ isn't a last name... Maybe it's just a coincidence that the Jesus part never got left off.
@@bozo5632 "Jesus" is Greek for Joshua, the archetypal Jewish conquering warrior and savior. It means "Yahweh saves." The Greek spelling adds up to 888 (Greek and Hebrew letters are also numbers). .888 is the Pythagorean ratio of the whole tone in music, and 888 also represents the Triple Ogdoad (a mystical number important to creation in ancient cosmology, and symbolic of the Logos). See David Fideler's _Jesus Christ: Sun of God_ for details. "Jesus" is/was a very good choice for a "Name/Word of Power" in the mystical beliefs of the time, a "name that is above every name," to be used in exorcism and other magical operations.
@@kevincrady2831 Supposedly every third guy in Galilee was named Josh. Sure it's a fitting name, but half the other available names had fitting meanings too. If Jesus is fiction, then that was a good name for him. If he wasn't fictional, then maybe he was given that name posthumously. Or maybe it was just his name. IDK what to make of 888. It seems to me that just about any number could have significance if you were looking for it. Imagine the theories if it was 42 instead, or 420, or 666, or 1.
To frame the entire discussion, I always start with this: Every character ever written was based on real people. Saint Nicholas existed ... as a normal mortal person. Saint Nicholas did NOT exist as Santa Clause. Vlad the impaler existed ... as a bloodthirsty psychopath. Vlad did NOT exist ... as a literal supernatural vampire. Superman existed ... as various character traits seen (and heard about) in real people. Superman did not exist .. as what the comic and movies portray. So if you're going to ask me if ANY character was based "at least in part" on someone who really existed, ... don't even bother to name them. No matter who you name, my answer will be "yes". Next, if you're going to ask me about various characters ever written about ... to ask me if each was 100% accurate to the real person(s) they were based on ... my answers are going to range from "very unlikely" to "certainly not". To that, I'll add: The more fantastic the claims, the less likely those claims are to be true. And: the further back in history we go, the less the mundane elements of those stories should be considered reliable; especially before we started taking photographs, preserving tax records, etc.. Although, we can afford/extend some extra credibility to mundane claims made by independent sources from the time of the stories; which is rarely the case with anything from the Hebrew or Christian biblical eras.
I'm pretty sure his answer would be yes (I'm an Atheist). What I personally don't understand, is that it is seldom/never mentioned that though there are extremely few (and poor references) outside the bible mentioning Jesus, _something_ happened _very_ shortly after his supposed death in the area of Judea/Galilee, and it spread like wildfire, and reached Rome within a few decades. It was a monotheistic belief, about salvation, forgiveness, about Christus and Jesus. This was _before_ the gospels was written. When said - _many_ gospels was written, lots in fact, and they came in many versions. So what the bible contains today, does not resemble what early Christianity (and the different versions of Christianity) believed in, but I take for granted that the baseline was the same. Now... You don't make such a movement out of thin air, or various versions out of a purely fictional character. How amazing and crazy spectacular and magical you want the story to be, to get peoples attention though, is for another chapter. John for example is the latest of the four Gospels. And that's also where Jesus is most amazing and is doing all his magic stuff. Maybe the very earliest wasn't that spectacular? Maybe they was just honest, bringing the message, no magic, no fancy extras? But the more the scripts, the more they needed to top eachother to get the extra attention. _- Just a thought._
@@ingebygstad9667 There may have been a character like Jesus in first century Palestine. Just as there was likely a character like King Arthur in sixth century Britain. But, in both cases, the real character was buried under legendary deeds and words for which there is no substantive basis. Regarding Jesus, it is remarkable that no contemporary Roman or Greek historian had anything to say about him. Christians who doubt this should examine John Remsburg's work: "The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidence of His Existence." In his first chapter, Remsburg writes, "The Jesus of Bethlehem, the Christ of Christianity, is an impossible character and does not exist." Remsburg's second chapter is titled "Silence of Contemporary Writers" concerning the dearth of real time recording of Jesus' authenticity.
@@brianhill5009 I'm fully aware of the problems at hand. The very fact that there was many minor prophets walking around in Judea within Jesus time that _are_ well recorded, while Jesus is zilch, zero nic, nothing, zip, should make anyone wonder and question, and rightfully so. So is he a culmination of several characters? _Was_ his name Jesus? After all, there's _absolutely no_ records of him, _anywhere_ from his time? And yes, that is pretty damn strange from someone who is not exactly the New Kid on the Block, but literally the Elvis of Galilee. - the man people from everywhere came to see, the man people called king of Israel, whom they laid down palm leaves in front of as he entered the city on his donkey. Yet. Nothing. It's *all and only* in the Bible. That's why I narrowed him severely down in my post above. From whom he might originally was, to what he turned into when Christianity became a state religion. A monotheistic belief, about salvation, forgiveness, about Christus and Jesus. How simple can you make that belief be, and keep it plausible? Or from a different angle. The words in the bible about salvation and forgiveness, there's tons of original material there, and it changed Europe forever. - in the book of Mark. Mark itself is a fictional name, and he claims these are the words of Jesus, not his own. So if there was no Jesus, then who was it that said these words? Because someone said them, these was _someone's_ ideas. The words are *there.* I don't care too much if it is the work of one or many people, or if his name was Jesus. I have however no problem to give favour of doubt and proclaim it all on one person named Jesus, despite the lack of evidence. But the walking on water and feeding five thousand and making the blind see, and those stories? *No.*
@@ingebygstad9667 It is interesting and revealing how often Jesus is supposed to have said or done something that is counter to his popular image. For example, at Luke 14:26, he says that those who do not hate their father, mother, brother, and sister are not worthy of being his follower. Say what? Elsewhere, Jesus advises his disciples to avoid Gentiles, who he likens to dogs. It is apparent that, unless he was a schizophrenic, the Jesus of the Bible is a composition of several authors who used him to express their sometimes sick notions. Jesus also has plenty of earlier antecedents in other cultures that bear a striking similarity to him and his supposed actions.
@@brianhill5009 Agreed. Mat 10.34 _“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword"._ ...come again? There are things that is head scratching, and enough reasons for me to be Atheist in there ...."enough" fold. _(I don't have the specific number, but I'm an Atheist for a shitload of biblical reasons alone)._ I understand the bible, and much of what I understand, I just... don't. I find things that are beautiful and memorisable indeed, but hehe... also enough too to say this book _I repeat_ is NOT for children, and extremely ill advised for bedtime stories. I also find the so called experts pretty much biased. They apparently all agree that the line in Josephus naming Jesus in the phrase _"He also had a brother named Jesus, also known as Christ"_ is legitimate. _Really?_ So while Josephus is speaking about _you_ Brian, and about who _you_ are, and about you becoming the next big shot in Galilee, he want's to for no apparent reason ...put a longer line in there about _me_ - telling that you have a big brother named Inge, (and just to make the reader certain about that it's _The_ Inge who is your brother) - "also known as Mr.Trilby". And then he starts talking about something else. Josephus doesn't go back on you. In fact, he spent almost more words on me, than on you. How does that makes sense? Unless this is his style, and he does this elsewhere, then neu, this isn't Jospehus! But experts neeeds _something,_ and when this is ...pretty much he best they have, they want it. So we both agree on things here Brian. I can deny Jesus on a whim, but I also have no problem accepting him as a probable historical figure if narrowed down to an intellectual human commoner level. It is Constantine who literally messed up the entire original view and ...well everything.
A question that may resonate with this dialogue...Where are the graves (actual locations) of all prophets that lived before Jesus (except Elijah/Elisha and Enoch)?🤔
Most if not all cultures including ours has superheroes, fictional characters that we wish we could be like, the ideal people we aspire to be like. So why would ancient civilisations be exempt? Why wouldnt they have superheroes? Neighbours in Mesopotamia did, so why not ancient Israel?
As an observer of the fairhful and the non-believers debating the veracity of the bible, what strikes me odd is that the non-believers/atheists whom say these are all fictional characters resort to calling critics of modern day Jews as anti-semitic. Head-scrarching to say the least.
It depends on who and what part of the country your from. Potato- Patatoe. I could understand your criticism if no one know one knew what he was saying. Should we all come to you from now on for the correct pronunciation of words? From the contents of this video, this is what you got out of it? No wonder no one can agree on anything.
I think the authors may have noticed basic differences between groups of people, and maybe they made Cain as the ancestor of the farmers, and Abel as the ancestor of the pastoralists (the authors themselves glorifying shepherds).
The bible says Moses/Moshe received his name because pharoah's daughter "drew him out of the water." However, it does not say that that is the meaning of his name. The meaning of his name is Egyptian, meaning "born of" or "son of" (i.e. Ra-moses/Ramses/Ramoshe, born of Ra, and Tutmose, Ahmose, Kamose, etc) Since his name name just means "born of," it may have been a name given to bastards or people who did not know their parents. Or, it may mean that he was not associated with any god, like the Egyptian pharoah names. Or, it may also mean that the name of his god was not to be spoken, similar to how jews do not speak the name of god, YHWH, although this might be a later tradition.
Since Jesus lived at the time when modern civilization was being birthed by Ancient Rome and Greece, my guess is that the characters in the NT actually did exist or were at least based upon real persons. The Old Testament, however, contains myth and fable that was based upon and/or inspired by even more ancient myth and fable. Story telling was common in the old world. It was, in fact, one way to earn a living. Some things don't change much, do they? Although, Moses probably was a real person. He was the leader of a Jewish tribe trying to garner for himself the authority to govern his people. "I'm not telling you how to live, I'm just telling you what God wants!" Again, some things don't change much, do they?
I like the idea that Moses just means "son of..." and then doesn't name the deity, because it's their thing to NOT say the deity's name. But it still makes you wonder why they'd use an Egyptian protocol to express that. I keep thinking monotheism had to come from Ahkenaten's reign in Egypt. Perhaps followers of Aten fled Egypt following Ahkenaten's death, and meet up with or become nomadic tribes that, during the bronze age collapse, meet with another monotheistic group fleeing from the coast into in the mountains of the Levant, and they syncretize their monotheism (which leaves us with two Biblical traditions). Also could explain where the term Hebrew came from, as this combined group gets conflated with the inherited label hibiru, via the nomadic lineage.
Good subject, but it was so distracting the number of times he says 'like'. I would like to see this disappear from speech, it adds nothing and irritates.
I have thought of the George Washington chopping down the cherry tree myth as a modern mythologizing of a 200 year old story. Humans like to tell stories so imagine what they can come up with in 2,000 years! In first and second grades in the 1960's we were taught the cherry tree myth in public school. February was partly themed upon cherry trees/pies/fruit, etc. and George Washington who could not tell a lie. It was a quick moral story for little kids that encouraged honesty. (In the wider world then, and probably still today, stores and restaurants push cherry pies in February because of the old story.) As Dr. Baden stated, none of this means George Washington did not exist. In those first couple grades we learned a number of mythological versions of history. Meanwhile, President Kennedy had announced the space race and John Glenn was sent into orbit. On a more personal level, a number of years ago I made the acquaintance of a middle aged woman from Massachusetts. She and her husband were travelling across the U.S. when he battered her and dumped her in a small western town. She was able to stay in a shelter run by my friends. All she talked of was getting back to Massachusetts where the Kennedy family would take care of her. I asked, "You mean they would PERSONALLY help you?" "Oh, yes!" she said. Eventually she returned to that state and I have no idea what happened. I did research Kennedy family charities and there appear to be efforts that could be perceived as personal aid to those in need. 2000 years hence, will there be colorful myths about a King John who personally took a couple loaves and half a dozen fish which he miraculously turned into tuna fish sandwiches that saved his kingdom from starvation? People love short, dramatic inventions of history. LOL!
The name JOSEPH , being so highly attested among seemingly unconnected sources , most assuredly represents a historical figure . JOSEPH/ GUISEPPE/ YUSEF/ HOTEP/ AESOP/ ETHIOP all from Prakrit BOSAT just as Hebrew JOSAPHAT is a perfect rendering of Sanskrit BODHISATTVA
@@rdorleans6522 from all around the ancient world : ETHIOP/ KASHYAPA/ GUISEPPE . Manetho uses the Sanskrit rendering and calls him PETI-SET ( BODHISATTVA)
@@maythesciencebewithyou the truth is usually mocked at first . Tobemofosho, Asaraseph is called " Peti- set" - yet another rendering of Sanskrit BODHISATTVA
@@danielhopkins296 So by your reasoning Solomon, Moses and Aaron were probably fictional as they not highly attested in unconnected sources? What's your source for the claim that Josaphat is a 'perfect' rendering of Sanskrit Bodhisattva? It seems improbable given the temporal displacement of the emergence of the two.
Telling about this stuff and have real facts and proving it definitely is not in this video! To me just more or less sounds like speculation and belief. Do you have any documentation on this whole discussion?
Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin recently posted a video explaining how the Exodus really happened I would love to see a scholar or someone go into why he’s wrong
I haven't seen the video yet, but if he's claiming that it happened as described in the Bible, then it's pretty easy to refute. Where are the mass graves in Egypt from the Plagues, or the evidence that the Egyptian Empire was suddenly and devastatingly weakened by a Hebrew wizard? In _Magic in Ancient Egypt_ by Geraldine Pinch, she mentions that the Egyptians built temples specifically for the purpose of warding off magical attacks from Ethiopia and Libya (because the Egyptians believed that magic presented a genuine threat). If Egypt had ever been devastated by a Hebrew magician, why didn't they build similar temples (and perhaps more and larger ones) in hopes of defending against the most potent magical threat they faced? Why is there no evidence that other surrounding countries (e.g. the Hittites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks, etc.) knew of the amazing superpowers of Hebrew wizards? If one guy could wreck the most powerful nation of his day with magic, all the other countries that had contact with Egypt at the time would have needed to respond to the threat somehow. They would have no way to know that this wizard and his army (6 million strong!) would get lost for 40 years in a very tiny patch of land between Egypt and Canaan, or that he would not train successor wizards to have equal power. For perspective, the Israelites could have joined hands and made a chain from Egypt to Canaan, if there were really 6 million of them. Basically, it's the same way you make the case that Tokyo was not destroyed by Godzilla in the 1950's. No evidence of mass destruction, and no evidence of reaction to the threat.
What about etymology in not just people but terminology and God himself, or timeline analysis next to Egyptian (Kemet) records of Hyksos or Hibiru, or connection to Akhenaten. As for God's name terminology, Yah was a common name for leaders or kings according the author of "the invention of God". How about the Babylonian Talmud and the captivity, Paleo Hebrew and square script transition? How about the merging of the Canaanite EL with Yah into YHWH.....and the destruction of his consort Asherah? The copper scrolls?
If it's in the Bible, it is true. There is nothing anyone call tell me that will disprove the Bible. The Bible was written by 40 different authors over 1500 years and there is no inconsistency in the underlying theme, which is God's character. No amount of academia can disprove the Bible.
If biblical scholars dig more into the origin and meaning of proper nouns in the biblical narrative they would come to different conclusions than what is commonly accepted. A lot of those names have South Arabian, mostly Sabaean origin. My question to Dr. Baden does he believe that Hebrews, Israelites and Jews are one and the same group of people, as the biblical narrative would like us to accept. One thing I find strange is why would YHWH give Jacob a new name after his rival El. Could’ve called him Yisrayhwh, and the new lot would be called Israhwhites.
When people rewrite history for there Masses and natural disasters Destroy the past and people destroy and hide documentation and we will never know superman . Yet i have seen and felt divine thing's Still leaves me in wander and why Ying yang politics are whole life .
Expert Dr. Joel Baden what makes you a expert,really, your intellect,your degree's,what makes a expert,all knowing wisdom,so you know everything?do you? Expert answer are you an expert all knowing?
"Did Adam exist?"
"No."
"And you would like fully...."
"No, stop, end of conversation."
THE GOAT LADIES AND GENTS.
I do not understand what you are saying please explain in more detail
To breakdown the good Doctor's caveat; just because Abraham Lincoln; Vampire Hunter, is fiction, doesn't mean Abraham Lincoln himself didn't exist
"I think I understand this. J. Peterman is real. His biography is not. Now, you Kramer are real. But your life is Peterman's. Now the bus tour, which is real, takes to places that, while they are real, they are not real in sense that they did not *really* happen to the *real* Peterman which is you."
Modern fictional superheroes are Superman, Spiderman, Batman and Robin, etc. Is it possible that the fictional superheroes back then were characters like Abraham and Moses? I just often wonder how much of this was taken seriously by people back then, as opposed to expressing a longing for someone to put things right. Also, many stories read like fables, so I wonder if they were treated like fables back then.
I believe they did recognise them as myths. Then, generations later, they become true.
There is an old tradition of oral storytelling in that geographical area. Also with the arabs. They knew all about how to tell stories to make them fun and suspense and with a sense for wonder and awe. And for sure they took them with a shovel of salt. At least the ones with some brain.
I think you're comparison would make more sense if you were talking about the Greek gods
Useful Charts did a great video on the historicity of early Israelite figures and broke them into three categories. Myth, Legend, and Historical. I like that because it doesn't draw the line at they existed or didn't but rather gives a grey area where the person probably existed but the legends about them are greatly exaggerated. I think David and Solomon are great examples of this. We have historical records of David but in reality he probably only controlled a small area in the southern Levant and wasn't the king of a united monarchy.
They didn't exist
@@PersonincrowdWe have steles written by other peoples who say he did.
@@Personincrowdwe have a stele that seems to be referring to a "house of David". With that it is a rather minor thing to grant that there was a historical king called David that started a little dynasty. This doesn't prove, really, any individual story about him (and in fact there is data in the bible itself that point to his legend having grown over time)
Professor Baden is just a delight. Thanks Derek!
All of the Biblical figures from Adam to Moses are allegorical characters.
You say. Your words. Your opinion. That's what you think.
... and Jesus.
Curious
how most (if not all) believers, for thousands of years,
mistook those characters as literal.
Otherwise, there'd have been no PREMISE available
for bitter rivalries, crusades, heresy trials, witch hunts, religious sects/denominations, or even anything for the Jesus character to argue with the Pharisees about.
There wouldn't have even been a meaningful use of the term "gentiles".
It's not as if only the local Jews understood the concept of allegories; nor would they be the sole people able to understand the specific ideas conveyed in allegories.
And there would have been no controversy about whether or not "gentiles" should be "preached" to.
Those people
inarguably
thought their own religion's religious stories
were claims about a literal deity
doing literal religious magics.
Neville Goddard taught this truth back in 1955.
With a few likely (and irrelevant) exceptions, exactly! My wonderful grandma was an AG treasurer for NY state. I worked for a Unitarian pastor. I know other good protestant folks too. But American protestants feed their kids this bizarre "literal interpretation" heresy, and thereby set them up for ridicule, disappointment and disaffection. WHY????? It's disgusting. It's not Christianity. Orthodox and Catholics make up 70-75% of global Christians? Something like that? Well, George Lemaitre of Big Bang fame was a Catholic priest! Catholics aren't victimizing their kids at Eden Dinosaur museums. Americans are so bizarre! Why???? St. Augustine (he's a saint) wrote allegorical interpretations of scripture. WTF is wrong with Americans? Why did they do this? I sometimes think our CIA promulgates these bizarre American heresies to ruin American Christianity in retaliation for *Reverend* MLK's winning campaign against USA racist apartheid. Who knows? Americans are wise to join Orthodox and Catholic churches, or protestant alternatives to "literal interpretation." Blech! :(
when my faith is in question a little rocky,I find video's like this, I listen to this amazing information,it makes my faith strong in Christ again, Expert Dr. Joel Baden you help me so much I want to really thank you for restoring my faith in the Lord Thank you
23:00 ff. "You don't spin fiction." I love that.
Spin occurs when there are.... multiple versions, or multiple sources. That is a contradictory argument, the bible is spinned from start to finish
I read this comment right as he said it that’s wild
Excellent show with good points being made about the difference between someone existing and their mythical version (which is what most fundamentalist’s believe). Good job to both of you.
First thing that I thought of when he made that distinction is Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter.
What good points? His answers are basically the equivalent of, "No...just because I said so".
Awesome talk - one of your best recently.
Is there a version of him speaking without 10000000x "like"?
This is interesting.
Baden's last point, that someone is described with a borrowed description does not necessarily mean that that someone did not exist, is worth pondering.
Why all the "likes" count them! ; it's amazing- it's difficult to keep up.
It also doesn't mean that someone really existed
In the end you have to acknowledge that there is no actual evidence and simply say "I don't know".
But what you can tell is that the fictional character from the book is not the same being as the one it might be based on, or at least losely inspired by.
A character from a book can also be the amalgamation of multiple people, or even other characters from fiction. And on top of that the authors will add some extra stuff they like to spice things up. An author who never met the person the character is based on will not really know how that person truly was like. The author will take some liberties. He might know that the character has a good heart. So he'll write what he thinks a person of good heart would do. He might have an uncle who is good hearted and use him as basis to write about that characteristic. Or he might have read about such a person in another book and use that shape his own character. If it was a certain person, the author could have used that persons real name, or he gave his character a new name. The real name was perhaps unknown to him. If there were multiple people, then one of them might have had that name, or again, he might have invented a name which he thought was fitting. We don't know. His job? Could habe been made up as well. The person he might be based on could have lived a long time before him. The character could be based on the story of a story of a story of a story of someone long ago. Things change over time. A game of Chinese whispers quickly changes the original story.
Whether a single real person existed, or whether mutlitple people and things were used as inspiration, or whether is is a completely fictional character invented from all the characteristics the author wanted his character to have doesn't really matter. In the end, the character from the book is still fictional. That character never existed.
The real answer is that we'll most likely never know what made the first author write what he wrote.
How utterly refreshing to hear this! About time some commonsense and anthropology was included in OT Bible study.
It is called cultural memory when the characters and events are representative of similar type events in the distant past that have grown over time to fulfill needs of national unity. This is achieved via stories of a theological and political nature in dramatological form.
Raised in a "high control religion," you did not have the "time" for this type of objective thinking. That is why they keep their "rank and file" so busy "saving the world."
Once you get "outside the box," you realize their are many perspectives to consider.
Good point, of course they know what they are doing and why they are doing it and all the time it's let us do the thinking for you
@@historicalbiblicalresearch8440 yes
C'mon, Egyptians lived in Caanan up until the late bronze age and who knows how many kids they had there
As well as ruled it too...
Also, Egypt was basically a few days' hike away from ancient Israel, and there was travel and trade. It wouldn't have been too hard for some ancient scribe (in the Bronze Age, or even post-Exile) to have gathered enough Egyptian language to name their character "Son of" (or perhaps "Favored Son") in order to give verisimilitude to the idea that their national hero was almost a Pharaoh, no really! So that by itself doesn't offer much evidence of a "kernel of truth" to the Exodus story.
But who knows, maybe some refugee or group of refugees from Akhenaten's court fled to Canaan to hide out in the provinces and ended up joining an Israelite tribe. Then over time garbled versions of their stories ended up being merged into the Israelite national myth. The name "Moses" could be an edited version of an Egyptian name, changed to remove the name of an Egyptian god, perhaps the Aten ("Atenmoses") as Team JEDP and the Redactor cleaned up the stories to fit the Yahweh-only policies in place after King Josiah. We'll probably never know, unless there's some new archaeological find.
@@kevincrady2831 ... Exactly!!!
@@kevincrady2831 Akenaton's "monolatry" has been linked to the development of monotheism, ever since Freud... I THINK most scholars reject this association but I see your point
@@kevincrady2831 Egypt literally ruled those lands. Those lands were part of Egypt.
excellent interview. clearly spoken questions and answers. Thank you.
Jakob receives Esau's crown
David receives Saul's crown
Twin story repeated over and over
Two people god hated. One for literally no reason, the other because he didn’t slaughter enough
@Warren Ward hahahaha who didn't slaughter enough?
Actually, someone wrote a biography of Washington that didn’t have anything to do with the historical Washington: Parson Weems. The book sold so well that a number of equally spurious hagiographies of Washington were published.
You gotta get Joel Baden on more often. His sense of humour is so up my street 🤣 That’s if you can find him at those cops chased him down.
Must have more Prof. Joel Baden videos!!!!
Good discussion. I guess I would lean more toward "historical fiction" with these characters. I do not think the Bible stories are necessarily true at all, any more than our fake news is true today. But stories like these have a reason for why they got started. They probably did not invent them as wholesale fairy tales.
Now, certainly there was a lot of borrowing going on, which is why we see so many similarities in the various myths among different nations. Israel was no different. They borrowed other people's stories, gave them Hebraic names and details, twisted them for their own propaganda, and eventually wrote them down.
Were there heroic figures 4-6000 years ago? Absolutely! Did they do exactly what the Bible says about them? Nope. But Israel seems to be the first nation to master propaganda!
Hope you invite The Inquisitive Bible Reader on some day! His blog is amazing and his RUclips channel is just starting.
Great guest, Derek.
I agree 100% with the George Washington analogy. Take the Nimrod narrative of the Bible for instance. If you know anything about Ancient Egyptian history you will see a strong parallel between Nimrod (nmrd) and Namer (nmr). Both were of Kushite descent (Sudanese) and mighty kings that founded and expanded their kingdom/colonies from Africa towards the so called middle east.
Love it keep it coming
Curious if you might be able to contact and maybe get on Ben Stanhope. I've mentioned him a few times in comments. He's a younger OT-scholar with expertise in Hebrew-seals and this year published a book critiquing Young Earth Creationism. He could become the next Michael Heiser-type scholar in the future.
Does he do a lot of popular level work anywhere similar to Heiser's scale?
Is he a bit christian or anything like that?
The same is true of Jesus of Nazareth. The Jesus of the gospel stories is pure myth and legend, of course, blended with Paul's "god-man", but there's a strong possibility that a person (or more likely several persons - a composite character) of that name (or some other name) with similar qualities and experiences actually existed approximately 2,000 years ago in the middle-east.
"With similar qualities and experience".... therein lies your problem...
Of course there was a group with the title of Yeshua. That's what the scriptures show from the beginning.
@@trustedliving8131 "that is what the scriptures show from the beginning"... 1001 Arabian Nights shows that there was Aladdin too... do you believe it... the Mahabharata shows that there was Hanuman too... do you believe it??
@@suelingsusu1339 That's a cute reply. I know how to translate the ancient scripture. You base your assumptions on corrupted language translations. I go back to the source. You know, before Babylon confusion of the language. Your problem is that you just want to disprove what the religious people hold dear. I prefer to figure out the reality of the ancient writings. Maybe you would be happier knowing The God of the bibles right hand man was and still is The Satan.
@@trustedliving8131 ….hahahaha…HAHAHAHAHA🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️
What about Balaam in the Deir Alla inscription? What about "son of Tsafan" seal found in the wall of Jerusalem? A "son of Saphan" found in Kings, Jeremiah, and even Ezekiel! The seal of Baruch? IT seems the minor characters had to be included because they were so well known.
Yet none of it proves a god, bizzare right?
@@randomepic6204 what's weird is the minor characters seem to be real.
@@StorytimeJesus what's weird is there's no proof of god
I appreciate certainty in unconfirmable assertions.
Recently found this Channel. I like it because at least all involved are trying to make sense of corrupted language translations that have been around since the time of the Masorites dictating how to understand the Hebrew language. A giant hurdle to overcome. There was no vowel pointers in original writings. We know this because the Dead Sea Scrolls demonstrate such. By the corruption of adding vowel pointers the original meanings of the scriptures was supplanted. Not all, but the most important meanings. So much so even brilliant people are left not understanding why there is so many conflicting statements in the scriptures. Differing accounts of people with the same name is that the names denoted groups not just individuals. Where the suffix "ites" was added in the names denotes slaves of the group. And no doubt "ites" was an addition in scripture by the Hellenists.
Not only are vowels missing in the earliest Hebrew ‘scriptures’ before c. 970 CE in the so call’d Leningrad Codex but the Hebrew consonantal Dead Sea Scrolls exists in several versions (with actual CONSONANTS differing between different copies of the same text, e.g. 1QIs-a and 1QIs-b in the two recensions of the book of the prophet Yishia’qu (= Isaiah) and in the Samaritan Pentateuch -
What adds more confusion is by ‘reverse engineering/backward translating’ the Greek Septuaginta LXX back into Hebrew consonants often presuppose different CONSONANTAL TEXT UNDERLAY as the great Immanuel Tov brought out in many of his detail’d studies of the Scrolls…
In fact we have found long stretches of the same textual underlay from different manuscript families from which & upon which the Greek Septuagint & Theodotion’s Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures were built…
It is a very sad & concerning fact that this kind of hard factual information about the transmission of the mangl’d texts of the Hebrew Scriptures ‘that defile the hands’ (i.e. holy writ) is supress’d by various clergies and kept from the attention of the more than gullible masses of both Jewish & Christian congregations … despite the Internet offering a wide variety of scholarly studies on this very subject …
@@theophilos0910 Great post ! I have to check out Immanuel Tov. I have also deciphered Greek words into Hebrew consonants giving some clarity to what I think the scriptures were actually trying to convey
@@trustedliving8131 - there are a number of modern studies branching off from where Immanuel Tov has uncover’d after decades of painstaking letter by letter counting - bear in mind the Hebrew Aleph-bet chang’d form c. 420 BCE under Ezra into the now-familiar ‘square form Hebrew Aleph-bet’ but that prior to c. 400 Hebrew was typically written using the older ‘horn’d Phoenecian Aleph-bet’ and there were a number of copyist errors in antiquity reflecting this change in script (e.g. ‘King Asa’ in 1 Kings chapter 22:43)
& compare it with 2 Chronicles 20) in PaleoHebrew horn’d lettering) was transcrib’d in a parallel passage in ‘Chronicles’ as ‘David’ - the paleo Aleph and paleo Daled look almost the same in PaleoHebrew horn’d script and even the paleo SAMEK can sometimes look a little like a Paleo VAV- and this kind of confusion keeps literary scholars like Dr Tov up very late at night but is crucial to an understanding of any possible ‘original readings’ such as the small example cited above …
Good luck in your quest for historical & literary accuracy !!
Professor Baden is so laid back here compared to the Yale Divinity lectures he has online.
Also I wonder what he thinks of Balaam since a Balaam is mentioned in a Moabite stele.
Who knew Seth Green was such a bible expert.
Lol
Some people believe Moses was based on Akhenaten father of Tutankhamun
Some people believe homosexuality it's ok
The Old Testament Bible stories seem to try to connect themselves with Egypt, in anyway it can!
It is meant to give the stories some kind legitimacy or the implication of equal standing with a well known and historical nation. It's kind of sad and desperate.
They dont just try to. They are a direct connection to Egypt. Who do you think EL was ? Look at the pictures where those 2 letters came from. Cattle head with horns and Sheperds staff. Then look at Egyptian art work of characters wearing cattle horns and holding crooks. It's no coincidence.
I really want to hear scholars explore abram/Abraham’s claimed origin of the city of Ur. While claiming heritage to an older civilization is common it’s curious that Mesopotamian myths overlaps with biblical so often and they share that connection in the literary tradition
@@ethanstiles948 It's called plagiarism.
@@ethanstiles948
Funny how Abraham had an Egyptian maid, named Hagar!!!
Robert Price's Clark Kent analogy comes to mind. If we agree there was no such thing as Superman, then who cares whether there was a real Clark Kent?
Even assuming Clark did exist, why should we hope to find any true stories about him, when our histories are comic books?
If there was a David, all that's left of the real him is his name.
That doesn't necessarily follow. For example, there are lots of crazy theories about the JFK assassination, the moon landing, 9/11, ect. However, it doesn't mean there is nothing historical told in these crazy tall tales. There definitely is, and we can see that by comparing the crazy stories with the actual evidence and the actual evidence shows there are true things in these stories with obviously false things in thrown in them. The fact that there are stories that are completely made up, like Clark Kent and Superman, has no relevance to the fact that there are stories that are some made up and some true.
@@johns3927 I think you may be missing the point: maybe the stories did have roots in reality, or not; but if they did, there's no way to tease out what (little) might be true, or to tell any kind of true story about it. If there had been a real Clark Kent, what of the truth could we glean from DC scripture?
On top of which: if God didn't miraculously part the Red Sea, then who cares whether the undiscovered truth is that really some people swam, or took a boat?
@@bozo5632 I think some things, for example, Jesus being an apocalyptic prophet (I am assuming Jesus is historical here. If you think he was mythical, then the people who imagined him imagined him as an apocalyptic celestial being. But if Jesus was historical, it would be pretty safe to assume he was an apocalyptic prophet.) So there are certain ways you can determine what they probably were. Not completely certain, of course.
@@johns3927 Okay, and if you assume Clark Kent was a journalist, then he probably worked for a major newspaper, even if it couldn't have been one in Metropolis.
Probably. Based on comic books.
If there was a historical Jesus it's also possible he was not an apocalyptic prophet. (Theories abound.) His name might not have been Jesus. He might have lived decades before or after the timeline of the stories. He may or may not have been crucified. Et cetera.
Maybe. Based on religious teachings.
@@bozo5632 Well I base the existence of Jesus on other evidence, Paul mentioning his brother being the main one. I know mythicists have arguments against that, but I don't find them convincing. But I'm not here to debate the veracity of the evidence for a historical Jesus. The point being, I base my conclusion that Jesus existed from one piece of evidence, then judge what he probably was from different pieces of evidence. So it's a bit different from what you are implying. Obviously none of this is certain and is based on probabilities.
I would say the stories are based on historical figures but the writers focused on the meaning behind their actions
I love your channel. I really respect Prof. Baden's knowledge and enthusiasm. BUT! if I hear the word "like" one more time, I am going to kill something!
Good video.
René Descartes: Do I exist?
Also Descartes: Cogito, ergo sum.
The Bible Unearthed is another good source for historicity
We have written historical documentation on George Washington, so we know he existed. But, when you write a fictional book about George Washington we can compare it to the historical documented version and know that it's fiction. The problem with a biblical character like Abraham, and others, is there is no historical contemporaneous documentation outside the bible, torah, to judge whether if it's a work of fiction.
“Spin implies reality… you don’t spin fiction”…. I really think that all these bible “scholars” ought to be made to take a whole year’s course in creative writing and literature before they are allowed to start any biblical seminary classes.
The Moses and Aaron stories are spinned so hard they almost create a singularity:)
The Harry Potter corpus hides, then spins the fact that Dumbledore worked closely with, and perhaps was a lover of, the Dark Lord Grindlewald. Kernel of truth! Also, we can't forget that real places (e.g. King's Cross Station) and people (Nicholas Flamel) are referenced, and of course the Embarrassment Criterion comes into play every time Harry or Ron do something stupid.
@@kevincrady2831 ... Exactly!!!
The all need to understand how authors write books and that authors of the past did the same as authors today.
Abraham Lincoln: was actually a Vampire Hunter A young Abraham Lincoln who learned to hunt vampires to avenge his mother's death.
Lincoln's mission to eliminate vampires who are planning to take over the United States. which was the reason for the civil war
Lincoln's mother being killed by a vampire, Jack Barts, when he was 9 years old.
Lincoln used his battle ax to fight the Confederate Army, which has made a deal with the vampires.
So Abraham is to 'The Bible'
As
Abraham Lincoln is to 'Abraham Lincoln - Vampire Hunter'.
Adam and Eve… got it. Cane and Abel… got it. Noah… pffft, got it. Abraham, right, go it. But… what about Lot and his two hottie daughters? 😉
"what do you mean I can't sleep with my daughters? Uh I thought god destroyed everyone else, no I was drunk, yeah that's it it's not my fault they took advantage of me in my stupor! "
They definitely got boned in a cave by their daddy.
Not to mention his salty wife.
The word “like” is used so often I can barely watch this.
Moses,was Akenaten..an Egyptian pharaoh ,who tried to change Egyptian polytheism to monotheism ...and as i researched ..was kicked out of Egypt with his followers ..to wander the desert for 40 yres ,so they say ,and ended up about 40 miles from where he started. ..
Bollocks. Akhenaten remain in rule for 17 years, died as a Pharaoh and was buried in the Royal Wadi, which was a cemetary similar to the Valley of the Kings, created in Armana by the 18th Dynasty. Moreover, his religion of Atenism was basically sun worship; the Egyptians had worshipped the sun multiple times, but Akhenaten (who changed his pharaohonic name from Amenhoten IV to reflect his worship of the Aten) wanted his people to worship the Aten exclusively. He certainly lead a campaign to ban the other gods, espescially Amun. However, given that even in his new city, people openly wore amulets and the like of other gods, he met with little success, and after his reign the Aten was mostly forgotten as the old religions regained their power. Nothing to do with "Moses" who is a fictional character.
Excellent
It amazes me how this guy makes a living by not believing the Bible and other men make a living by teaching the Bible is true.
Have you read the Bible? There’s no proof in believing in a book or books outside the Bible that can be proven without proof. Most often it’s a myth. Just because it’s wrote don’t make it the truth.
It amazes me that there are still so many idiots out there believing in that bullshit book. So many years have passed and people are still wasting their time with it.
He doesn’t make a living by “not believing the Bible.” You don’t seem to have even listened to what he says here.
We should not discount folklore. Did King Arthur exist? Not as we popularly imagine him but...there may have been a Romano-Celtic chieftain around whom all those later legends were built.
Question for Dr. Baden. Professor Snape, I know that he was a deatheater... but he is working with Dumledore, and I know you'll say that Snape killed Dumbledore, but that was to save Malfoy from having to do it.... So, we have the apologetics for Professor Snape! Now I understand, therefore Professor Snape must be a real historical figure b/c otherwise why would you need apologetics.
In the end it doesn't really matter what is true or not; it's about "What is Truth" in✡️getting✝️others☪️to believe "IT" collectively of one's origins of belief back to the Promised🇮🇱Land of Paradise🍄Gland🌅at🧠Our🗣️Command❤️🔥 🎺🎶!
PULLING THREADS PODCAST
(Find us on Spotify, Apple, or wherever you listen to your favorite Podcasts.)
Questioning our beliefs can be a scary process. I know it was for me. But the process can bring great healing and freedom.
Join the PULLING THREADS podcast team every Sunday to listen to the stories of those who have gone through faith deconstruction and pulling of their own threads.
We long to create a safe place where people can feel comfortable and unashamed in asking questions and perhaps, pulling on the threads of their own ‘sweater.’
Hope to have you join us!
Amon-sé opened the Nilo River to find his fiancé's ring in the Egyptian legend. So the Jews got his legebd and changed saying that he opened the red sea to them go away.
C'mon, Abram literary means Exalted Father. No one names a child "exalted father".
Did you learn that in a recent Reddit thread?
@@SaintFort from Rabi Adam Chalon
I doubt there was a recognizable historical Abraham.
But the funny name doesn't prove he's fictional. His birth name could have been Larry, and Abram could have been an honorary title, perhaps posthumously. Larry Abram, the Exalted Father. And at some point the Larry part got left off.
Christ isn't a last name... Maybe it's just a coincidence that the Jesus part never got left off.
@@bozo5632 "Jesus" is Greek for Joshua, the archetypal Jewish conquering warrior and savior. It means "Yahweh saves." The Greek spelling adds up to 888 (Greek and Hebrew letters are also numbers). .888 is the Pythagorean ratio of the whole tone in music, and 888 also represents the Triple Ogdoad (a mystical number important to creation in ancient cosmology, and symbolic of the Logos). See David Fideler's _Jesus Christ: Sun of God_ for details. "Jesus" is/was a very good choice for a "Name/Word of Power" in the mystical beliefs of the time, a "name that is above every name," to be used in exorcism and other magical operations.
@@kevincrady2831 Supposedly every third guy in Galilee was named Josh. Sure it's a fitting name, but half the other available names had fitting meanings too.
If Jesus is fiction, then that was a good name for him. If he wasn't fictional, then maybe he was given that name posthumously. Or maybe it was just his name.
IDK what to make of 888. It seems to me that just about any number could have significance if you were looking for it. Imagine the theories if it was 42 instead, or 420, or 666, or 1.
To frame the entire discussion, I always start with this:
Every character
ever written
was based on real people.
Saint Nicholas existed ... as a normal mortal person.
Saint Nicholas did NOT exist as Santa Clause.
Vlad the impaler existed ... as a bloodthirsty psychopath.
Vlad did NOT exist ... as a literal supernatural vampire.
Superman existed ... as various character traits seen (and heard about) in real people.
Superman did not exist .. as what the comic and movies portray.
So if you're going to ask me if ANY character was based "at least in part" on someone who really existed, ...
don't even bother to name them.
No matter who you name, my answer will be "yes".
Next,
if you're going to ask me about various characters ever written about ...
to ask me if each was 100% accurate to the real person(s) they were based on ... my answers are going to range from "very unlikely" to "certainly not".
To that, I'll add:
The more fantastic the claims, the less likely those claims are to be true.
And:
the further back in history we go,
the less the mundane elements of those stories should be considered reliable;
especially before we started taking photographs, preserving tax records, etc..
Although, we can afford/extend some extra credibility to mundane claims made by independent sources from the time of the stories; which is rarely the case with anything from the Hebrew or Christian biblical eras.
Take a shot every time Joel says "like".
The hanging unspoken question at the end of the video is "Did Jesus exist?"
I'm pretty sure his answer would be yes (I'm an Atheist). What I personally don't understand, is that it is seldom/never mentioned that though there are extremely few (and poor references) outside the bible mentioning Jesus, _something_ happened _very_ shortly after his supposed death in the area of Judea/Galilee, and it spread like wildfire, and reached Rome within a few decades. It was a monotheistic belief, about salvation, forgiveness, about Christus and Jesus. This was _before_ the gospels was written. When said - _many_ gospels was written, lots in fact, and they came in many versions. So what the bible contains today, does not resemble what early Christianity (and the different versions of Christianity) believed in, but I take for granted that the baseline was the same. Now... You don't make such a movement out of thin air, or various versions out of a purely fictional character. How amazing and crazy spectacular and magical you want the story to be, to get peoples attention though, is for another chapter. John for example is the latest of the four Gospels. And that's also where Jesus is most amazing and is doing all his magic stuff. Maybe the very earliest wasn't that spectacular? Maybe they was just honest, bringing the message, no magic, no fancy extras? But the more the scripts, the more they needed to top eachother to get the extra attention.
_- Just a thought._
@@ingebygstad9667 There may have been a character like Jesus in first century Palestine. Just as there was likely a character like King Arthur in sixth century Britain. But, in both cases, the real character was buried under legendary deeds and words for which there is no substantive basis. Regarding Jesus, it is remarkable that no contemporary Roman or Greek historian had anything to say about him. Christians who doubt this should examine John Remsburg's work: "The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidence of His Existence." In his first chapter, Remsburg writes, "The Jesus of Bethlehem, the Christ of Christianity, is an impossible character and does not exist." Remsburg's second chapter is titled "Silence of Contemporary Writers" concerning the dearth of real time recording of Jesus' authenticity.
@@brianhill5009 I'm fully aware of the problems at hand. The very fact that there was many minor prophets walking around in Judea within Jesus time that _are_ well recorded, while Jesus is zilch, zero nic, nothing, zip, should make anyone wonder and question, and rightfully so. So is he a culmination of several characters? _Was_ his name Jesus? After all, there's _absolutely no_ records of him, _anywhere_ from his time? And yes, that is pretty damn strange from someone who is not exactly the New Kid on the Block, but literally the Elvis of Galilee. - the man people from everywhere came to see, the man people called king of Israel, whom they laid down palm leaves in front of as he entered the city on his donkey. Yet. Nothing. It's *all and only* in the Bible.
That's why I narrowed him severely down in my post above. From whom he might originally was, to what he turned into when Christianity became a state religion.
A monotheistic belief, about salvation, forgiveness, about Christus and Jesus. How simple can you make that belief be, and keep it plausible?
Or from a different angle. The words in the bible about salvation and forgiveness, there's tons of original material there, and it changed Europe forever. - in the book of Mark. Mark itself is a fictional name, and he claims these are the words of Jesus, not his own.
So if there was no Jesus, then who was it that said these words? Because someone said them, these was _someone's_ ideas. The words are *there.*
I don't care too much if it is the work of one or many people, or if his name was Jesus. I have however no problem to give favour of doubt and proclaim it all on one person named Jesus, despite the lack of evidence.
But the walking on water and feeding five thousand and making the blind see, and those stories? *No.*
@@ingebygstad9667 It is interesting and revealing how often Jesus is supposed to have said or done something that is counter to his popular image. For example, at Luke 14:26, he says that those who do not hate their father, mother, brother, and sister are not worthy of being his follower. Say what? Elsewhere, Jesus advises his disciples to avoid Gentiles, who he likens to dogs. It is apparent that, unless he was a schizophrenic, the Jesus of the Bible is a composition of several authors who used him to express their sometimes sick notions. Jesus also has plenty of earlier antecedents in other cultures that bear a striking similarity to him and his supposed actions.
@@brianhill5009 Agreed. Mat 10.34 _“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword"._ ...come again?
There are things that is head scratching, and enough reasons for me to be Atheist in there ...."enough" fold. _(I don't have the specific number, but I'm an Atheist for a shitload of biblical reasons alone)._
I understand the bible, and much of what I understand, I just... don't. I find things that are beautiful and memorisable indeed, but hehe... also enough too to say this book _I repeat_ is NOT for children, and extremely ill advised for bedtime stories.
I also find the so called experts pretty much biased. They apparently all agree that the line in Josephus naming Jesus in the phrase _"He also had a brother named Jesus, also known as Christ"_ is legitimate. _Really?_
So while Josephus is speaking about _you_ Brian, and about who _you_ are, and about you becoming the next big shot in Galilee, he want's to for no apparent reason ...put a longer line in there about _me_ - telling that you have a big brother named Inge, (and just to make the reader certain about that it's _The_ Inge who is your brother) - "also known as Mr.Trilby". And then he starts talking about something else. Josephus doesn't go back on you. In fact, he spent almost more words on me, than on you. How does that makes sense?
Unless this is his style, and he does this elsewhere, then neu, this isn't Jospehus! But experts neeeds _something,_ and when this is ...pretty much he best they have, they want it.
So we both agree on things here Brian. I can deny Jesus on a whim, but I also have no problem accepting him as a probable historical figure if narrowed down to an intellectual human commoner level. It is Constantine who literally messed up the entire original view and ...well everything.
Kind of like count dracula. we know he existed, Transylvania is a real place, but that sure doesn't mean he could turn into a bat.
A question that may resonate with this dialogue...Where are the graves (actual locations) of all prophets that lived before Jesus (except Elijah/Elisha and Enoch)?🤔
Most if not all cultures including ours has superheroes, fictional characters that we wish we could be like, the ideal people we aspire to be like. So why would ancient civilisations be exempt? Why wouldnt they have superheroes? Neighbours in Mesopotamia did, so why not ancient Israel?
As an observer of the fairhful and the non-believers debating the veracity of the bible, what strikes me odd is that the non-believers/atheists whom say these are all fictional characters resort to calling critics of modern day Jews as anti-semitic. Head-scrarching to say the least.
I like his explanation about 'Abraham'. 'Fact' based on mythological 'history'. I'd love to hear a response from a settler in zionist-izrael.
Pay tree on, NOT PAY TRON
It depends on who and what part of the country your from. Potato- Patatoe. I could understand your criticism if no one know one knew what he was saying. Should we all come to you from now on for the correct pronunciation of words? From the contents of this video, this is what you got out of it? No wonder no one can agree on anything.
Awww, why shouldn't Tron get paid? Fighting battles to the death by throwing glowing frisbees at his enemies is hard and dangerous work! ;)
Dave and Saul . Gilgamesh and enkido? Twins. Good twin, lesser twin.
Stories from past people's lives before other religions are put into biblical stories in the bible
13:00 sounds a lot like John Frum...
Surely Moses name was invented to fit the exodus narrative.
@Kokichi World Order designed for the narrative of coming out of Egypt maybe?
You will have to stand before the Lord Jesus Christ and held accountable for your words.
Our words are none of Jesus’s damn business even if he still existed.
I think the authors may have noticed basic differences between groups of people, and maybe they made Cain as the ancestor of the farmers, and Abel as the ancestor of the pastoralists (the authors themselves glorifying shepherds).
The bible says Moses/Moshe received his name because pharoah's daughter "drew him out of the water."
However, it does not say that that is the meaning of his name.
The meaning of his name is Egyptian, meaning "born of" or "son of" (i.e. Ra-moses/Ramses/Ramoshe, born of Ra, and Tutmose, Ahmose, Kamose, etc)
Since his name name just means "born of," it may have been a name given to bastards or people who did not know their parents. Or, it may mean that he was not associated with any god, like the Egyptian pharoah names. Or, it may also mean that the name of his god was not to be spoken, similar to how jews do not speak the name of god, YHWH, although this might be a later tradition.
Since Jesus lived at the time when modern civilization was being birthed by Ancient Rome and Greece, my guess is that the characters in the NT actually did exist or were at least based upon real persons. The Old Testament, however, contains myth and fable that was based upon and/or inspired by even more ancient myth and fable. Story telling was common in the old world. It was, in fact, one way to earn a living. Some things don't change much, do they? Although, Moses probably was a real person. He was the leader of a Jewish tribe trying to garner for himself the authority to govern his people. "I'm not telling you how to live, I'm just telling you what God wants!" Again, some things don't change much, do they?
Can someone please interview the talking snake?
I like the idea that Moses just means "son of..." and then doesn't name the deity, because it's their thing to NOT say the deity's name. But it still makes you wonder why they'd use an Egyptian protocol to express that.
I keep thinking monotheism had to come from Ahkenaten's reign in Egypt. Perhaps followers of Aten fled Egypt following Ahkenaten's death, and meet up with or become nomadic tribes that, during the bronze age collapse, meet with another monotheistic group fleeing from the coast into in the mountains of the Levant, and they syncretize their monotheism (which leaves us with two Biblical traditions). Also could explain where the term Hebrew came from, as this combined group gets conflated with the inherited label hibiru, via the nomadic lineage.
Dr. Joel Baden, Professor of Hebrew Bible. That's like Dr. Daniel Radcliffe, Professor of Harry Potter.
Well he believes that his religion is nothing more than myths that lay out a type of social construction. So do the ommunists!!
The Cohen modal haplotype does provide some evidence that Aaron, at least in some sense, may have existed.
Does anybody has book recommendations on this subject? Thanks
Anything by Israel Finkelstein.
I want to listen. But I can't sit through a barrage of the word "like" being irritatingly uttered.
Nothing is fictious. They're just looking for answers in the wrong place.
Good subject, but it was so distracting the number of times he says 'like'. I would like to see this disappear from speech, it adds nothing and irritates.
I have thought of the George Washington chopping down the cherry tree myth as a modern mythologizing of a 200 year old story. Humans like to tell stories so imagine what they can come up with in 2,000 years!
In first and second grades in the 1960's we were taught the cherry tree myth in public school. February was partly themed upon cherry trees/pies/fruit, etc. and George Washington who could not tell a lie. It was a quick moral story for little kids that encouraged honesty. (In the wider world then, and probably still today, stores and restaurants push cherry pies in February because of the old story.)
As Dr. Baden stated, none of this means George Washington did not exist.
In those first couple grades we learned a number of mythological versions of history. Meanwhile, President Kennedy had announced the space race and John Glenn was sent into orbit.
On a more personal level, a number of years ago I made the acquaintance of a middle aged woman from Massachusetts. She and her husband were travelling across the U.S. when he battered her and dumped her in a small western town. She was able to stay in a shelter run by my friends. All she talked of was getting back to Massachusetts where the Kennedy family would take care of her.
I asked, "You mean they would PERSONALLY help you?"
"Oh, yes!" she said.
Eventually she returned to that state and I have no idea what happened. I did research Kennedy family charities and there appear to be efforts that could be perceived as personal aid to those in need.
2000 years hence, will there be colorful myths about a King John who personally took a couple loaves and half a dozen fish which he miraculously turned into tuna fish sandwiches that saved his kingdom from starvation? People love short, dramatic inventions of history. LOL!
The name JOSEPH , being so highly attested among seemingly unconnected sources , most assuredly represents a historical figure . JOSEPH/ GUISEPPE/ YUSEF/ HOTEP/ AESOP/ ETHIOP all from Prakrit BOSAT just as Hebrew JOSAPHAT is a perfect rendering of Sanskrit BODHISATTVA
Thousands of Josephs. SO?
@@rdorleans6522 from all around the ancient world : ETHIOP/ KASHYAPA/ GUISEPPE . Manetho uses the Sanskrit rendering and calls him PETI-SET ( BODHISATTVA)
that was so dumb, I hope you were trying to make a joke
@@maythesciencebewithyou the truth is usually mocked at first . Tobemofosho, Asaraseph is called " Peti- set" - yet another rendering of Sanskrit BODHISATTVA
@@danielhopkins296
So by your reasoning Solomon, Moses and Aaron were probably fictional as they not highly attested in unconnected sources?
What's your source for the claim that Josaphat is a 'perfect' rendering of Sanskrit Bodhisattva? It seems improbable given the temporal displacement of the emergence of the two.
How about a discussion between Joel Baden and Rabbi Tovia on the historicity of Torah characters ?
would be epic
Telling about this stuff and have real facts and proving it definitely is not in this video! To me just more or less sounds like speculation and belief. Do you have any documentation on this whole discussion?
Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin recently posted a video explaining how the Exodus really happened
I would love to see a scholar or someone go into why he’s wrong
I haven't seen the video yet, but if he's claiming that it happened as described in the Bible, then it's pretty easy to refute. Where are the mass graves in Egypt from the Plagues, or the evidence that the Egyptian Empire was suddenly and devastatingly weakened by a Hebrew wizard? In _Magic in Ancient Egypt_ by Geraldine Pinch, she mentions that the Egyptians built temples specifically for the purpose of warding off magical attacks from Ethiopia and Libya (because the Egyptians believed that magic presented a genuine threat).
If Egypt had ever been devastated by a Hebrew magician, why didn't they build similar temples (and perhaps more and larger ones) in hopes of defending against the most potent magical threat they faced? Why is there no evidence that other surrounding countries (e.g. the Hittites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks, etc.) knew of the amazing superpowers of Hebrew wizards?
If one guy could wreck the most powerful nation of his day with magic, all the other countries that had contact with Egypt at the time would have needed to respond to the threat somehow. They would have no way to know that this wizard and his army (6 million strong!) would get lost for 40 years in a very tiny patch of land between Egypt and Canaan, or that he would not train successor wizards to have equal power. For perspective, the Israelites could have joined hands and made a chain from Egypt to Canaan, if there were really 6 million of them.
Basically, it's the same way you make the case that Tokyo was not destroyed by Godzilla in the 1950's. No evidence of mass destruction, and no evidence of reaction to the threat.
So many people have already explained why exodus is bulshit. Do we really have to go over it again and again?
What about etymology in not just people but terminology and God himself, or timeline analysis next to Egyptian (Kemet) records of Hyksos or Hibiru, or connection to Akhenaten. As for God's name terminology, Yah was a common name for leaders or kings according the author of "the invention of God". How about the Babylonian Talmud and the captivity, Paleo Hebrew and square script transition?
How about the merging of the Canaanite EL with Yah into YHWH.....and the destruction of his consort Asherah?
The copper scrolls?
Coat of many colors? No! Donny Osmond would be so sad.
So, Baden's calling the Bible (Old & New) FAN FICTION? Is this why I've heard the Biblical 'fan fiction' phrase, in recent times?
I also like to ask christians the question. Did Adam existed?
*A matter of fraction: the fracturing of truth into fiction...*
Kind of like what people do on the facebook. making up stories of their life and posting photos supporting the Story. Fraction I like it.,
If it's in the Bible, it is true. There is nothing anyone call tell me that will disprove the Bible. The Bible was written by 40 different authors over 1500 years and there is no inconsistency in the underlying theme, which is God's character. No amount of academia can disprove the Bible.
Thanks for being upfront that you are completely closed to any evidence against your view. So you can be ignored.
No............Next question?......
Was David's and Solomons kingdom as extensive as depicted
If biblical scholars dig more into the origin and meaning of proper nouns in the biblical narrative they would come to different conclusions than what is commonly accepted. A lot of those names have South Arabian, mostly Sabaean origin. My question to Dr. Baden does he believe that Hebrews, Israelites and Jews are one and the same group of people, as the biblical narrative would like us to accept. One thing I find strange is why would YHWH give Jacob a new name after his rival El. Could’ve called him Yisrayhwh, and the new lot would be called Israhwhites.
When people rewrite history for there
Masses and natural disasters
Destroy the past and people destroy and hide documentation and we will never know superman .
Yet i have seen and felt divine thing's
Still leaves me in wander and why
Ying yang politics are whole life .
Dr. Baden is a rockstar 😎
The overuse of the filler "like" is overwhelming!
Do they exist in history? Of course they exist in history. Whether or not they were actual living human beings at some point is a different question.
No they don't exist in history. They exist in fiction.
@@maythesciencebewithyou How do I know you have never studied the history of fiction?
For example King Ramses was real…we literally have his Mummy lol but there was no splitting of a Red Sea…
There was more than one Ramses, and this name was more of a title as well.
@@jherbranson Ramses was not even the Pharaoh around the time the Israelites were supposedly said to leave Egypt …I study African history…
Expert Dr. Joel Baden what makes you a expert,really, your intellect,your degree's,what makes a expert,all knowing wisdom,so you know everything?do you? Expert answer are you an expert all knowing?
The response of a little child: “You don’t know everything!”